Ordsall Chord

[WatcherZero]

None of the work being undertaken is specifically related to the area that is under challenge i believe. They are doing everything but that.

Thought they already demolished and rebuilt the viaduct where the line diverges to strengthen it during a possession.

 

[edwin_m]

None of the work being undertaken is specifically related to the area that is under challenge i believe. They are doing everything but that.

That may be true but it is a little disingenuous. If Mr Whitby was ultimately successful and they had to build something different then most of the work done thus far would be wasted. Actually if Mr Whitby was ultimately successful the outcome would be building nothing useful at all, in which case all the work done thus far would be wasted.

 

[SodTheDrummer]

Thought they already demolished and rebuilt the viaduct where the line diverges to strengthen it during a possession.

Are you referring to Middlewood Viaduct? If so, that's not the bit Whitby was objecting to I don't think. although if he was successful, the chord would join MV at a different point, so yeah..

Let's just get it built..

 

[keith1879]

That may be true but it is a little disingenuous. If Mr Whitby was ultimately successful and they had to build something different then most of the work done thus far would be wasted. Actually if Mr Whitby was ultimately successful the outcome would be building nothing useful at all, in which case all the work done thus far would be wasted.

But if they waited for the last decision of the last review of the last possible appeal the whole project would be another 2 years (or more) behind schedule. Seemed reasonable to make a start at some point really.

 

[edwin_m]

But if they waited for the last decision of the last review of the last possible appeal the whole project would be another 2 years (or more) behind schedule. Seemed reasonable to make a start at some point really.

I agree it is the right thing to do. But there is some element of risk in starting work before all legal avenues, crescents and cul-de-sacs have been exhausted.

 

[rebmcr]

I agree it is the right thing to do. But there is some element of risk in starting work before all legal avenues, crescents and cul-de-sacs have been exhausted.

They're hedging the operational wastage risk, and avoiding the legal risk, which does seem the most reasonable course of action.

 

[wadia13]

I agree it is the right thing to do. But there is some element of risk in starting work before all legal avenues, crescents and cul-de-sacs have been exhausted.

Have Whitby's legal avenues now been exhausted? What about the UK Supreme Court?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

They're hedging the operational wastage risk, and avoiding the legal risk, which does seem the most reasonable course of action.

When the last legal matter of appeal was heard, was there any time stated when the judicial considerations on this matter would actually be made public?

 

[duffield]

Have Whitby's legal avenues now been exhausted? What about the UK Supreme Court?

Still potentially ongoing at present, see this post from a few pages back:
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=2535586&postcount=1483

 

[Railway Dave]

I recently had the opportunity to discuss Ordsall Chord with a barrister. He advised that a high court judge would not deny the right to appeal unless he/she was certain of their ruling. Apparently in judge's circles it is bad form to have an appeal court overrule you.

The barrister felt that the reason the Appeal court overruled the judge was probably not about the Ordsall Chord itself but that one of them may wish to test a particular point of law related to this case that interested them.

I'm sure that Network Rail took legal advice before starting work whilst the appeal was pending. Now the appeal has been rejected Network Rail must surely be on firm ground to proceed with the project.

An interesting point is Whitby's costs. As I understand it thus far his costs have been limited to £5,000, a tiny percentage of the costs that he has imposed on others, including us taxpayers. If he wishes to take the issue further he could be liable for massive costs and so may not wish to.

 

[wadia13]

An interesting point is Whitby's costs. As I understand it thus far his costs have been limited to £5,000, a tiny percentage of the costs that he has imposed on others, including us taxpayers. If he wishes to take the issue further he could be liable for massive costs and so may not wish to.

This is interesting. What is the relevant law which caps his legal costs? And this law also states that the cap no longer applies once it goes to the UK Supreme Court?

 

[lejog]

It has been suggested that Whitby is covered by a Protective Costs Order although I've never seen any hard evidence that this is the case.

If a court decides it is in the public interest that a case is heard, such an order may be made to ensure that public bodies do not escape judical review because of the (theoretically) limitless budget of the State.

Once again, whatever the view of members of this forum, in order to be covered by such an Order, Whitby would have to convince a court that hearing his case was in the public interest.

This post suggests that an Order would cover Whitby up to level of the Supreme Court.

As for costs, the costs order includes as many appeals within the UK system as necessary. It doesn't include costs if he wants to go to either of the European courts.

 

[anorack 1]

Network Rail have recently signed a partnership contract with Skanska/Bam, Amey and Siemens, to build the Chord. You have only to see the work in progress to know the Chord is going to be built. If Whitby wants to go further down the legal path and make fool of himself bring it on.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Network Rail have recently signed a partnership contract with Skanska/Bam, Amey and Siemens, to build the Chord. You have only to see the work in progress to know the Chord is going to be built. If Whitby wants to go further down the legal path and make fool of himself bring it on.

I shall repeat my earlier suggestion that the new viaduct be named the Mark Whitby Viaduct in all official documentation...

 

[snowball]

I was under the impresion that the extra platforms at Salford Central were definitely going ahead, coordinated with the Chord works. TfGM obtained funding from the DfT a year or two ago.

However I see the May Modern Railways describes the plan as "being evaluated, with the additional connectivity that this would provide being set against any loss of capacity if more trains are to call there."

This is on page 35 of the supplement on rail in the north, which has its own page numbering.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

However I see the May Modern Railways describes the plan as "being evaluated, with the additional connectivity that this would provide being set against any loss of capacity if more trains are to call there."

The planned diversion of the sole stopper on this route (Liverpool-Victoria) to the Airport brings into question which trains would stop at Salford Central.
The new services through Victoria to the west and to the south all seem to be relatively fast services which would not be stopping at Salford Central.

Salford Central doesn't appear in any of the TSR tables for the new Northern franchise, other than the current routes via Salford Crescent.

 

[notlob.divad]

The planned diversion of the sole stopper on this route (Liverpool-Victoria) to the Airport brings into question which trains would stop at Salford Central.
The new services through Victoria to the west and to the south all seem to be relatively fast services which would not be stopping at Salford Central.

Salford Central doesn't appear in any of the TRS tables for the new Northern franchise, other than the current routes via Salford Crescent.

I would have thought Salford Central would have been a prime candidate to be closed as a station for heavy rail but with a new Metrolink line running underneath it. A continuation from the 2CC branch up Bridge Street. It would give direct access to Piccadilly. To continue beyond in the other direction you would look at running it through Salford so that it could join the Atherton Line and eventually run to Wigan.

 

[WatcherZero]

Why would they close Salford Central? Its the closest station to the Spinningfields district full of affluent accountants and lawyers.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There has been a great upgrading of the land area from Salford Central up to Deansgate in recent years with many new-style modern office blocks hosting well-known commercial organisations. I can see a good number of the young and not-so-young of the professional classes who work in these buildings commuting into that area by rail.

 

[dggar]

I would have thought Salford Central would have been a prime candidate to be closed as a station for heavy rail but with a new Metrolink line running underneath it. A continuation from the 2CC branch up Bridge Street. It would give direct access to Piccadilly. To continue beyond in the other direction you would look at running it through Salford so that it could join the Atherton Line and eventually run to Wigan.

The route you describe would point towards Castlefield/Deansgate. you would need to change to reach Piccadilly

 

[SodTheDrummer]

I would have thought Salford Central would have been a prime candidate to be closed as a station for heavy rail but with a new Metrolink line running underneath it.

No chance of that. Chord traffic will go through SC, three new platforms planned. (the two currently unused ones and another where Chat Moss line runs through I believe) Central is mega busy at commuter times with Spinningfields traffic.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

I would have thought Salford Central would have been a prime candidate to be closed as a station for heavy rail but with a new Metrolink line running underneath it. A continuation from the 2CC branch up Bridge Street. It would give direct access to Piccadilly. To continue beyond in the other direction you would look at running it through Salford so that it could join the Atherton Line and eventually run to Wigan.

No. Just no. For a starter Salford Central is a seriously busy commuter station with passengers arriving from many different places around NW Gtr Mcr and beyond, indeed as many alight there as at Victoria. And an absolute nonsense to convert the Atherton line to Metrolink as it would cut the Lostock Jn to Wigan NW line, a key diversionary route that's being electrified. Not to mention the need to maintain a connection to Southport from Manchester; part of the thinking for the future service pattern on the Atherton line is to route all Southport services that way so as to keep slower diesel trains off the Bolton route as far as possible. If the Southport line ever gets electrified and tram-train technology ever proves workable in this country it then, and only then, might be worth looking at the idea.

 

[CdBrux]

Any Atherton line conversion to Metrolink would be tram/train so that it would not cut the Lostock Jn to Wigan NW line

 

[158756]

I agree with the doubts about the Salford Central platforms.
TPE won't stop there. Northern aren't required to, and all the services through those platforms will be Northern Connect, which I wouldn't have thought Northern would want to stop so close to Victoria.
Even if one or two of those could stop three platforms for one train per hour sounds like a bit of a white elephant.

If the usage estimates are anywhere near accurate the current platforms aren't very busy either.

 

[AntoniC]

Those platforms are incredibly busy in the evenings with commuters going home after work.

I commuted for 3 weeks between Southport and Manchester, last year.

In the mornings I got off at Salford Central, but in the evenings to get a seat on my train home, I walked to Manchester Victoria to catch the train.

When the train then called at Salford Central all the seats were gone and there was a lot of people standing.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Those platforms are incredibly busy in the evenings with commuters going home after work.

But how many would commute west to Liverpool/Warrington, or south to Stockport/Airport or beyond?
That would be the purpose of the new platforms.
Eastbound commuters will get through trains to Stalybridge and the Calder Valley anyway, on P1/2.
If stops prevent longer-distance services running, that's a serious problem.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

A lot will depend on how the timetables eventually work. For instance there are normally no services direct from the Atherton line towards Oxford Road meaning a connection at Salford Crescent. Even now that can sometimes mean a surprisingly long wait. In future it could well work out that such a connection is more easily timetabled at Salford Central. Current plans suggest that the Atherton line will continue to have no through trains to Oxford Road and Piccadilly. Until we have actual timetables who knows?

 

[edwin_m]

If stops prevent longer-distance services running, that's a serious problem.

The capacity of the junctions round the Ordsall Triangle and nearby will most likely limit service frequency anyway, so an extra stop may not make much difference. One possible approach would be to "flight" trains on the same route through the junctions into closely-following pairs, but this could be done for example by having a Northern service stopping at Salford but a Transpennine just behind that doesn't.

 

[Tirov]

For those interested in the full decision from the Court of Appeal see below

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2016/444.html

 

[WatcherZero]

Essentially Whitby seems to have argued that the Secretary of State made a decision that was not to the letter of the law and used heavy interpretation of his decision letter to justify that view. The three judges have decided the Secretary of State was well within his responsibilities as a decision maker to make a balanced judgement taking in to account multiple issues and that a previous legal precedent had already been set that decisions letters are a simple summary intended to be read by parties already thoroughly informed of the issues involved and shouldn't be deliberately misconstrued or over interpreted for technical accuracy.