Road and rail building plans under review after Covid

[Bald Rick]

But the ones who do are more likely to kick up a fuss. I can imagine the "whatever happenned to that new station we were promised" angle could be quite tricky.

Government have been very careful not to promise anything under the Restoring your Railway fund, other than Okehampton, and the principle that more will follow (with the Northumberland line almost a certainty). Though I do agree it will be tricky where things don’t happen, especially where locals think they have been promised something that they haven’t.

Those other things would be useful and popular (particularly the lower fares) but make no mistake, the Beeching issue resonates with a sizable proportion of the voter base.

I disagree. It is popular with many rail enthusiasts, and popular in locations that have a live proposal. For everyone else it is irrelevant. Here in St Albans there is a live Restoring your Railway proposal*, and you’ll be hard pushed to find anyone who knows about it, let alone cares about it or even thinks it’s a good idea.

* Acknowledging that the proposal for St Albans isn’t really a reopening as such. But the same principle will apply to the entire voter base in London for example, and everywhere else where there are no proposals.

 

[quantinghome]

And then you've got the full re-build.

I would divide this further:

Full re-build where the alignment is largely intact (e.g. Borders)
Full re-build where it isn't (EWR Bedford to Cambridge)
Full re-build requiring significant upgrades to existing rail network (Uckfield-Lewes)

 

[Brush 4]

' takes many years to complete (because you can't just skip the planning process,'

No but it is the planning process that is not fit for purpose, if it takes as long as it does. That is the problem. Project Speed indicates that there is awareness of the problem. NR Industry Programme Director for the South West, has said in one of the magazines that, ' it has halved the cost and taken 20 months off how long it will take (to do Okehampton)' 'we're not making a gold plated railway'. That answers the question about the quick progress at Okehampton in another post above. Speed apparently means in this context, Swift Pragmatic and Efficient Enhancement Delivery. Dictionary definition of pragmatic :- concerned with practical consequences, rather than theory. The timing of Oke was just right for this light bulb moment within the industry and Gov. Portishead rail reopeners must be irritated that they are still in the grip of well, Grip. They started first but will open later than Okehampton. Do all the processes but do them more quickly in a well, pragmatic real world way.

 

[Bald Rick]

No but it is the planning process that is not fit for purpose, if it takes as long as it does. That is the problem. Project Speed indicates that there is awareness of the problem. NR Industry Programme Director for the South West, has said in one of the magazines that, ' it has halved the cost and taken 20 months off how long it will take (to do Okehampton)' 'we're not making a gold plated railway'. That answers the question about the quick progress at Okehampton in another post above. Speed apparently means in this context, Swift Pragmatic and Efficient Enhancement Delivery. Dictionary definition of pragmatic :- concerned with practical consequences, rather than theory. The timing of Oke was just right for this light bulb moment within the industry and Gov. Portishead rail reopeners must be irritated that they are still in the grip of well, Grip. They started first but will open later than Okehampton. Do all the processes but do them more quickly in a well, pragmatic real world way.

It’s not quite like that though. Okehampton is a quick win, could be delivered quickly, quick decision from Governement, and away you go. Portishead is not a simple project, and has had several funding issues.

Besides the planning process being referred to is land use planning, not railway planning.

 

[Brush 4]

It’s not quite like that though. Okehampton is a quick win, could be delivered quickly, quick decision from Governement, and away you go. Portishead is not a simple project, and has had several funding issues.

Besides the planning process being referred to is land use planning, not railway planning.

Indeed, the Gov part of the funding took ages and was the final piece of the jigsaw for Portishead before they could proceed. 5/10 G. Overnment must do better. I presume land use planning is outside the railways remit. If that is the slow part, that is the problem that needs to be refined.

 

[Bald Rick]

I presume land use planning is outside the railways remit.

It’s the law - the railways still have to comply!

If that is the slow part, that is the problem that needs to be refined.

Many people think it is slow. However it is actually quite reasonable. And far quicker than in most european countries. Lightspeed compared to Germany, for example.

 

[Philip]

Hopefully the money saved through not building these expensive projects will firstly help to keep existing staff in jobs and also make improvements to what is already there.

 

[Bald Rick]

Hopefully the money saved through not building these expensive projects will firstly help to keep existing staff in jobs and also make improvements to what is already there.

It will do exactly the opposite.

‘Expensive projects’ are expensive because they employ a lot of people. Ultimately, all project costs end up as the cost of employment for someone, somewhere. No project, no jobs.

 

[willgreen]

Many people think it is slow. However it is actually quite reasonable. And far quicker than in most european countries. Lightspeed compared to Germany, for example.

Having said that, how many 'proper' reopenings (i.e. with track relaid on a disused trackbed) have actually happened in England?

 

[Dr Hoo]

Having said that, how many 'proper' reopenings (i.e. with track relaid on a disused trackbed) have actually happened in England?

Quite a few.

The Birmingham Snow Hill lines, Thameslink core, Todmorden curve, parts of the 'East London Line', Olive Mount Chord, Dryclough Chord (Halifax) spring to mind as fairly recent examples. Obviously new construction is often more useful in connectivity terms.

 

[Mikey C]

Quite a few.

The Birmingham Snow Hill lines, Thameslink core, Todmorden curve, parts of the 'East London Line', Olive Mount Chord, Dryclough Chord (Halifax) spring to mind as fairly recent examples. Obviously new construction is often more useful in connectivity terms.

The original DLR opened in 1986 reused a lot of disused viaducts. Also HS1 stage 1 reused part of the abandoned line to Gravesend West to connect to the classic network at Fawkham Junctiuon

 

[yorksrob]

Government have been very careful not to promise anything under the Restoring your Railway fund, other than Okehampton, and the principle that more will follow (with the Northumberland line almost a certainty). Though I do agree it will be tricky where things don’t happen, especially where locals think they have been promised something that they haven’t.




I disagree. It is popular with many rail enthusiasts, and popular in locations that have a live proposal. For everyone else it is irrelevant. Here in St Albans there is a live Restoring your Railway proposal*, and you’ll be hard pushed to find anyone who knows about it, let alone cares about it or even thinks it’s a good idea.

* Acknowledging that the proposal for St Albans isn’t really a reopening as such. But the same principle will apply to the entire voter base in London for example, and everywhere else where there are no proposals.

I disagree. Everyone over forty has heard of the Beeching Cuts. There have been numerous documentaries, the sitcom "Oh Dr Beeching", the referral of every line closure from the 1950's onwards in the press as "a Beeching Cut". The PM wouldn't have referred to the name in the policy title if it didn't resonate.

 

[Bald Rick]

Everyone over forty has heard of the Beeching Cuts.

Everyone? No they haven’t. Just by way of one example, I know someone who works in the rail industry, who lives on a road built on the formation of a closed line, called Beeching Close, and she didn’t know who he was, why the road was so named, and that it was on an old line. Until I told her, obviously.

But in any case that’s not what I was saying. Knowing about Beeching is not the same as it being a popular policy. Very different.

And the policy title is ‘Restoring your Railway’.

Quite a few.

The Birmingham Snow Hill lines, Thameslink core, Todmorden curve, parts of the 'East London Line', Olive Mount Chord, Dryclough Chord (Halifax) spring to mind as fairly recent examples. Obviously new construction is often more useful in connectivity terms.

Not forgetting the Robin Hood line (in 3 goes), and of course East - West.

 

[yorksrob]

And the policy title is ‘Restoring your Railway’.

Well it seems to have ended up in the press as "reversing Beeching", so there must be some reservoir of popular knowledge.

 

[A0wen]

The original DLR opened in 1986 reused a lot of disused viaducts. Also HS1 stage 1 reused part of the abandoned line to Gravesend West to connect to the classic network at Fawkham Junctiuon

And in a similar vein to the DLR - some of the extensions on the Manchester Metrolink e.g. Didsbury utilised disused rail formations, the Midland Metro took the GW Birmingham - Wolverhampton route for most of its length, Croydon Tramlink took over part of the closed Selsdon branch in south London, and the Nottingham Express Transit has reused parts of the old GC formation through Nottingham as I understand it.

 

[zwk500]

Well it seems to have ended up in the press as "reversing Beeching", so there must be some reservoir of popular knowledge.

Tbh, what the government and press call it, and how much the name resonates with people, are not really relevant to actually getting anything changed. They could just as easily call it 'policy #2450'. The same people would still apply for funding, the same evaluations would be made by civil servants and the same ministers would be making the decisions. It's not like there's a public phone-in competition for which schemes get taken forward.

Beeching is a name that will gain them a small amount of votes/capital, but importantly doesn't cost them any somewhere else. It's essentially an open goal for the government.

 

[yorksrob]

Beeching is a name that will gain them a small amount of votes/capital, but importantly doesn't cost them any somewhere else. It's essentially an open goal for the government.

Oh, I'm sure mentioning the Dr in a negative light will earn them some black marks amongst some on here !

 

[ashkeba]

Well then the course is clear, no densification is necessary.

Indeed post coronavirus I would expect a desire for more suburbia, not less.

This seems to have passed uncommented but any desire for more suburbia presents an existential threat to government because suburbia does not pay as much property tax per acre as town centers, yet requires more services per acre as roads are longer and distances larger, especially as most new suburban sprawl has no metropolitan line that is cheaper to operate per potential passenger seat than buses. The "Strong Towns" charity in the USA has videos explaining how suburbia bankrupts local government.

This is not quite as dangerous as the health cost crisis but still dangerous. Reviewing road projects and removing the low-benefit-cost ratio ones that enable long distance commuting and sprawl would be a good idea.

 

[HSTEd]

This seems to have passed uncommented but any desire for more suburbia presents an existential threat to government because suburbia does not pay as much property tax per acre as town centers, yet requires more services per acre as roads are longer and distances larger, especially as most new suburban sprawl has no metropolitan line that is cheaper to operate per potential passenger seat than buses. The "Strong Towns" charity in the USA has videos explaining how suburbia bankrupts local government.

Except property tax in the UK is an irrelevance, unlike the US?

Also I was not aware the technology required for the Metropolitan line's construction was lost.......

This is not quite as dangerous as the health cost crisis but still dangerous. Reviewing road projects and removing the low-benefit-cost ratio ones that enable long distance commuting and sprawl would be a good idea.

So force people to live in ultra dense cities that they don't really want to live in, because its cheaper for the ruling class?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Government have been very careful not to promise anything under the Restoring your Railway fund, other than Okehampton, and the principle that more will follow (with the Northumberland line almost a certainty). Though I do agree it will be tricky where things don’t happen, especially where locals think they have been promised something that they haven’t.

On that vein, Fleetwood seems to have gone quiet - as I recall that was one that was reported in 2019 that Boris Johnson had explicitly pledged to re-open (although may Boris pledging it isn't the same thing as the DfT confirming it).

 

[ABB125]

(although may Boris pledging it isn't the same thing as the DfT confirming it).

Are you sure? I mean, if the Prime Minister says it'll happen...

 

[ashkeba]

Except property tax in the UK is an irrelevance, unlike the US?

My council tax seems to have a property value element. Do business rates not also?

Also I was not aware the technology required for the Metropolitan line's construction was lost.......

It exists but is rarely used. What proportion of current development outside London has a metro linked?

So force people to live in ultra dense cities that they don't really want to live in, because its cheaper for the ruling class?

I think you have leaped to the other extreme. We need to avoid ruinous sprawl but ultradense cities are not the only other choice.

 

[HSTEd]

My council tax seems to have a property value element. Do business rates not also?

They do, but unlike America local government is not expected to be self-funding.

Property taxes are far less important in the UK than they are in the US.

It exists but is rarely used. What proportion of current development outside London has a metro linked?

Currently a relatively small amount, but surely the better option is to develop metros rather than prevent suburban living?

 

[snowball]

.

I disagree. Everyone over forty has heard of the Beeching Cuts. There have been numerous documentaries, the sitcom "Oh Dr Beeching", the referral of every line closure from the 1950's onwards in the press as "a Beeching Cut". The PM wouldn't have referred to the name in the policy title if it didn't resonate.

Johnson and the government want to create a general impression that they are reversing Beeching among those voters who have no special knowledge or interest. But as Bald Rick says, specific promises have been avoided. The number of actual schemes will be small.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They do, but unlike America local government is not expected to be self-funding.

Though it's headed that way, with the block grant repeatedly being cut.

 

[zwk500]

Johnson and the government want to create a general impression that they are reversing Beeching among those voters who have no special knowledge or interest. But as Bald Rick says, specific promises have been avoided. The number of actual schemes will be small.

Especially as, on the evidence so far, the schemes actually being progressed have little or no link to the Beeching Axe itself.

 

[Bald Rick]

On that vein, Fleetwood seems to have gone quiet - as I recall that was one that was reported in 2019 that Boris Johnson had explicitly pledged to re-open (although may Boris pledging it isn't the same thing as the DfT confirming it).

Fleetwood was/is an ‘advanced* proposal’ in that a business case was already funded and in preparation, therefore it didn’t get any Restoring your railway cash. When the business case is done, then expect some news. Personally, I don’t think it will have a good case, but I haven’t seen it.

* advanced meaning more advanced than, essentially, no formal business case work having been done.

.

Johnson and the government want to create a general impression that they are reversing Beeching among those voters who have no special knowledge or interest. But as Bald Rick says, specific promises have been avoided. The number of actual schemes will be small.

The number of actual schemes can only be small. It’s half a billion quid, and Okehampton / Northumberland line between them will use nearly half of that.

 

[swt_passenger]

Fleetwood was/is an ‘advanced* proposal’ in that a business case was already funded and in preparation, therefore it didn’t get any Restoring your railway cash. When the business case is done, then expect some news. Personally, I don’t think it will have a good case, but I haven’t seen it.

* advanced meaning more advanced than, essentially, no formal business case work having been done.



The number of actual schemes can only be small. It’s half a billion quid, and Okehampton / Northumberland line between them will use nearly half of that.

Isn’t the real benefit of the whole process that DfT/NR can show that some repetitive and high profile reopening proposals just need to be finally ignored?

 

[ashkeba]

Though it's headed that way, with the block grant repeatedly being cut.

Before covid, the block grant was only about a third of local government funding. The majority is property-linked tax.

And to some view, it does not matter whether central government or local government is subsidising suburban sprawl. It is an inefficient use of land and a soulless place to live. We can do much better but must build roads and rails for it.

 

[ABB125]

Isn’t the real benefit of the whole process that DfT/NR can show that some repetitive and high profile reopening proposals just need to be finally ignored?

**cough** BML2? **cough**