Removal of spoil from Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme

[Oxfordblues]

I notice at Hinksey Sidings, now that the virtual quarry has been removed, part of the site is being used to assemble a set of points or crossover. Does anyone know if this is for installing a new siding and what the purpose of it is? Perhaps it's in connection with the nearby Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme and might be used to deliver materials and/or remove spoil. Can anyone confirm this?

Despite the recent removal of the ballast pile, the expensive noise barrier, built to appease local residents (whose life would be otherwise be "ruined"), has been retained. This is presumably to mitigate against noise from the new activity at the site.

 

[Chonner]

Removing of spoil from the Flood Alleviation Scheme by rail is being considered by the Environment Agency (EA) after it was initially discounted 2 years ago, but placed back on the table following complaints from local residents about the amount of HGV traffic (approximately 15 mud trucks per hour, 07:00 - 19:00, 5 days a week for over a year, in the 10'000s of total vehicle movements). The best summary can be found from the EA update to South Hinksey Parish Council which is available in the village newsletter at https://shinksey.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/echo-june-2019_final-copy.pdf, see Page 3 for the Movement of Material via Rail section.

Informally, from observing a meeting of the Parish Council where the Environment Agency attended, I don't think removal of spoil by rail is likely to happen, and they are going through the exercise to build the evidence base to show that it isn't viable for a variety of reasons (difficulty moving the material over Hinksey Stream to reach the sidings being the major one, but also that there was supposedly only 1 train path per day to a suitable disposal site available, which is not sufficient).

 

[The Ham]

Removing of spoil from the Flood Alleviation Scheme by rail is being considered by the Environment Agency (EA) after it was initially discounted 2 years ago, but placed back on the table following complaints from local residents about the amount of HGV traffic (approximately 15 mud trucks per hour, 07:00 - 19:00, 5 days a week for over a year, in the 10'000s of total vehicle movements). The best summary can be found from the EA update to South Hinksey Parish Council which is available in the village newsletter at https://shinksey.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/echo-june-2019_final-copy.pdf, see Page 3 for the Movement of Material via Rail section.

Informally, from observing a meeting of the Parish Council where the Environment Agency attended, I don't think removal of spoil by rail is likely to happen, and they are going through the exercise to build the evidence base to show that it isn't viable for a variety of reasons (difficulty moving the material over Hinksey Stream to reach the sidings being the major one, but also that there was supposedly only 1 train path per day to a suitable disposal site available, which is not sufficient).

People get excited about figures like 15 lorries an hour, in reality that a lorry every 4 minutes. A 10 minute walk to school may well then see 2 or 3 lorries, which isn't a lot in general traffic flows.

Typically there's 5% of traffic is HGV's, meaning a road with 300 vehicles an hour (a vehicle every 12 seconds) typically see that many lorries. Again they may appear to sound a lot but given you typically need 10 seconds to cross the road, you would be able to cross between every vehicle moment.

To further put it into perspective a road with 100 vehicles an hour doesn't need to have footways whilst over 2,000 vehicles an hour is a near constant stream of traffic and difficult to cross without assistance.

 

[takno]

People get excited about figures like 15 lorries an hour, in reality that a lorry every 4 minutes. A 10 minute walk to school may well then see 2 or 3 lorries, which isn't a lot in general traffic flows.

Typically there's 5% of traffic is HGV's, meaning a road with 300 vehicles an hour (a vehicle every 12 seconds) typically see that many lorries. Again they may appear to sound a lot but given you typically need 10 seconds to cross the road, you would be able to cross between every vehicle moment.

To further put it into perspective a road with 100 vehicles an hour doesn't need to have footways whilst over 2,000 vehicles an hour is a near constant stream of traffic and difficult to cross without assistance.

If the road is currently relatively quiet and typically has zero HGVs because it isn't on the way to anywhere much, then an HGV every 4 minutes may drive you to distraction. If the road isn't quite wide enough for two HGVs to pass each other then the whole process could get very drawn out indeed. You mention that you don't need footways at low vehicle counts, but the roads concerned may well not have footways, and being passed by any HGVs on a narrow road without footways is a bit of an ordeal as a pedestrian or cyclist, so being passed by three of them on a short walk or ride to school can turn a relaxing walk into a stressful start to the day.

Sure, once they are on main roads and motorways they will just blend into the normal traffic, but on residential roads and country lanes this is a huge number of lorries.

 

[Tobbes]

If the road is currently relatively quiet and typically has zero HGVs because it isn't on the way to anywhere much, then an HGV every 4 minutes may drive you to distraction. If the road isn't quite wide enough for two HGVs to pass each other then the whole process could get very drawn out indeed. You mention that you don't need footways at low vehicle counts, but the roads concerned may well not have footways, and being passed by any HGVs on a narrow road without footways is a bit of an ordeal as a pedestrian or cyclist, so being passed by three of them on a short walk or ride to school can turn a relaxing walk into a stressful start to the day.

Sure, once they are on main roads and motorways they will just blend into the normal traffic, but on residential roads and country lanes this is a huge number of lorries.

Quite right. If there's actual a limit to rail removal (and there may be), then at least running some trains will dramatically reduce the numbers of HGVs; let's not turn up our noses at a hybrid solution.

 

[Ploughman]

Is the use of conveyors out of the question for crossing the stream and getting past the country lane area?

 

[hwl]

Is the use of conveyors out of the question for crossing the stream and getting past the country lane area?

Yes - they expect the removed material to stick to the conveyor belts!

 

[Chonner]

People get excited about figures like 15 lorries an hour, in reality that a lorry every 4 minutes. A 10 minute walk to school may well then see 2 or 3 lorries, which isn't a lot in general traffic flows.

Typically there's 5% of traffic is HGV's, meaning a road with 300 vehicles an hour (a vehicle every 12 seconds) typically see that many lorries. Again they may appear to sound a lot but given you typically need 10 seconds to cross the road, you would be able to cross between every vehicle moment.

To further put it into perspective a road with 100 vehicles an hour doesn't need to have footways whilst over 2,000 vehicles an hour is a near constant stream of traffic and difficult to cross without assistance.

At the risk of straying off topic, I agree that the absolute level of HGVs is not particularly high (although it should be noted when accounting for entries and exits, that is 30 per hour), and the proposed entry route is directly from the A34 at the South Hinksey village junction then into the fields from a new access from the roundabout on the eastern side of the Junction, so avoids travelling directly past any residences, so the impact will not be major.

The major concern expressed by residents is the ease with which those HGVs will be able join the A34. It is a 70mph road at that point, with the slow lane often being fully saturated of 50-60mph traffic, and there is only about 50 yards of slip road to use. My experience in a fairly quickly accelerating car which can jump into small gaps is that you can be waiting for 1 minute+ to join the road, it is conceivable that very slow accelerating 20t mud trucks could be waiting a very long time to join the traffic (if they are being safe in their driving) and could back up. A possible mitigation is a temporary speed restriction covering the junction, likely just extending the 50mph limit southwards from Botley.

In any case rail would be better from an environmental point of view, but I suspect is not likely to happen unfortunately.

 

[kevin_roche]

The major concern expressed by residents is the ease with which those HGVs will be able join the A34. It is a 70mph road at that point, with the slow lane often being fully saturated of 50-60mph traffic, and there is only about 50 yards of slip road to use.

There have been many accidents with people killed in the last few years on the A34. I can understand the concerns in that case. There are a number of slip roads where a longer run up is needed.

 

[JamesT]

There have been many accidents with people killed in the last few years on the A34. I can understand the concerns in that case. There are a number of slip roads where a longer run up is needed.

My understanding is that the A34 has relatively few accidents for a road of its status. Although every accident is a tragedy, objectively there are other roads that need sorting first.
I believe Highways England do have a set of options for upgrades, but are waiting to see what happens with the Oxford to Cambridge Expressway. As if they build that and it takes a bunch of traffic off the A34 there's less need for improvements.

 

[furnessvale]

Yes - they expect the removed material to stick to the conveyor belts!

Scrapers on the belts?

 

[hwl]

Scrapers on the belts?

I was just quoting the EA's rather lame excuse.

Another alternative is to leave the dug out material to drain/dry out for few days before putting it on conveyors.
The local material isn't likely to be conveyor friendly though with a right old mix of sand / gravel /clay / top soil.

 

[hwl]

My understanding is that the A34 has relatively few accidents for a road of its status. Although every accident is a tragedy, objectively there are other roads that need sorting first.
I believe Highways England do have a set of options for upgrades, but are waiting to see what happens with the Oxford to Cambridge Expressway. As if they build that and it takes a bunch of traffic off the A34 there's less need for improvements.

But the A34 accidents when they happen are bad.

 

[furnessvale]

I was just quoting the EA's rather lame excuse.

Another alternative is to leave the dug out material to drain/dry out for few days before putting it on conveyors.
The local material isn't likely to be conveyor friendly though with a right old mix of sand / gravel /clay / top soil.

Yes, I was not having a go at you.

Over the years I have seen every excuse in the book not to use railfreight. I was once told by the MD of a major engineering company that he did not use railfreight because the shipping container would need extra packing inside because it would be grounded at Felixstowe when taken off the train. What he thought the containers taken by road would be doing he couldn't explain.

The containers were going to China with at least two transshipments en route!

 

[Clip]

People get excited about figures like 15 lorries an hour, in reality that a lorry every 4 minutes. A 10 minute walk to school may well then see 2 or 3 lorries, which isn't a lot in general traffic flows.

Typically there's 5% of traffic is HGV's, meaning a road with 300 vehicles an hour (a vehicle every 12 seconds) typically see that many lorries. Again they may appear to sound a lot but given you typically need 10 seconds to cross the road, you would be able to cross between every vehicle moment.

To further put it into perspective a road with 100 vehicles an hour doesn't need to have footways whilst over 2,000 vehicles an hour is a near constant stream of traffic and difficult to cross without assistance.

Doesnt really matter what the figures are when you break them down like you have, the fact is we need to get HGVs off the roads as much as possibe - not stick more on