Shovel ready?

[Fawkes Cat]

This is in the Speculative subforum, so any resemblance to reality is of course entirely coincidental.

But let's imagine: some natural calamity is threatening to completely crash the economy. It's foreseeable that there will be an end to the natural calamity, and the government will want to get the economy moving as soon as possible. That means finding ways to spend money that will pay companies, who will pay their workers and suppliers, who will spend their money.... and so on. In short, the government will be looking for shovel-ready projects to get going on as soon as possible: they won't be looking for projects that need years (or even months) of preparation before anyone but a few consultants are at work.

What shovel-ready projects does the railway have? If the Transport Secretary turns up with a wheelbarrow full of money to be spent quickly, what would we spend it on?

I don't want to limit this to infrastructure: I can see that (for example) rolling stock might be relevant.

 

[furnessvale]

Strange that some people are wanting to use the current crisis as an excuse to stop HS2.

 

[The Planner]

Define shovel ready. I doubt there is anything that can really be done without a decent lead time.

 

[Eddd]

A bit mundane, but there's a load of renewals and resilience work to be done, and it could be accelerated. Problem might be shortage of skills and engineering access rather than money though.

Maybe electrification and ETCS enhancements too, if only there was a reliable system for rolling them out across the network.

 

[BrianW]

I used to work as an architect- lost count of the number of 'mothballed' projects. Main problem in getting them out of the plan chest, or deeper archive, was that standards, needs and wants, preferences, context have all changed. I'm with the Planner there. Often easier and better to start with a blankish sheet- like here maybe? Resources of all kinds- people, skills, materials, approvals all in short supply. My wish would be for rolling programmes.
So ideas, not it any order of priority-
- HS3, 2, 4, 5 ... starting where the greatest shortages of capacity/ largest opportunities are
- Electrification throughout
- Disabled access everywhere
- London Tube-like networks (and maps!) for all major cities
- Road-rail coordination
- Everyone (95%?) within x minutes of a station (levelling up)
- Presumption in favour of approval (similar to the Ridley Doctrine as was)
- Commitment

 

[squizzler]

Apparently the government are keen to get going on infrastructure projects as soon as possible.

A new taskforce, “Project Speed”, will be led by the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, and is intended to deliver key projects faster. One of the first announcements is a number of new prisons.

There does not seem to be a budget or anything else that might lead the reader to think this a costed announcement or even with a prepared shopping list of what they want. So send your rail schemes to Mr Sunak at No. 11, and - who knows? - maybe it'll be yours that gets drawn from the hat!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

For me shovel ready or close to are the mothballed electrification programme where considerable work had or should have already been done. So Man Vic to Stalybridge. Lostock Junction to Wigan. Oxenholme to Windermere. Filton bank into Temple Meads. GWML via Bath. MML to Market Harborough followed by rolling programme. GWML from Didcot to Oxford. With these started then plan the rest.

 

[squizzler]

Electrification seems a no-brainer, and historically electrification has often been used as a way to stimulate investment in recessions (notably the East Coast USA and Mussolini's 'making the trains run on time' in the 1930's). As you say, almost the definition shovel ready. Or, if you don't have a shovel handy, just use a High Output Electrification Factory Train.

The lack of direction of the current government suggest they will probably sign a check for whatever comes through the door first. So whilst the rail industry is not too busy (at the sharp end, at any rate) I hope they apply for as many things as they can, even if the detail is not all there yet!

 

[edwin_m]

Even with all this talk of wheelbarrows and shovels, there are probably not many projects where design is complete and they can go to construction. If the design was done some time ago there may be a need to confirm all the assumptions, in particular that nothing else has been done since that gets in the way of what was planned. And except for an emergency or small work that can be called off in-house or on an existing framework contract, there will have to be a tendering process, and the long notice period needed for disruptive access.

The current Rail Engineer magazine has an article on how a blockade of Kilsby Tunnel was organized at not much more than a week's notice and all the components, plant and labour brought in to replace a major blocked drain (not online and I no longer have the printed copy so can't quote). This shows how the industry can move quickly when necessary, as do various responses to emergencies in recent years. But the main barrier to doing such things in normal times is the amount of notice needed to get a blockade - not a problem when there were few services and even fewer passengers.

So I fear that in practice there are few projects on the live network that would count as shovel ready. Perhaps the bits of HS2 and EWR that don't touch existing infrastructure might be easier to bring forward? But, certainly for HS2, that might get some money into people's pockets sooner but not make the delivery of the project any quicker, as the critical path is governed by things like how quickly one can procure and operate a tunnel boring machine.

 

[Starmill]

One thing I'm not clear on is does this mean that the Department are willing to suspend their normal value for money regime? Will the Treasury really be willing to part with cash for projects where only early value for money assessment has been done? RNEP is there for a reason. As I understand it there's precious little work that's passed through Decision to Design (or equivalent under the GRIP regime) but not through Decision to Deliver (or equivalent)? Unless we're looking at major projects like HS2 2b re-phasing or speeding up Northumberland line for example.

One thing is certain though, there's a pool of literally hundreds of projects floating around within the lower stages or which have received a Decision to Develop (or equivalent). If I were the Chancellor I would look here. How about starting off with £100 million to procure new Outline Business Cases?

The other thing I'd look to quickly is renewals. Kilsby Tunnel has brought the max PS back up to 110 miles/hour (I don't know how long thr TSR has been in force for mind) - anywhere else where temporary restrictions could be lifted?

 

[Bald Rick]

The current Rail Engineer magazine has an article on how a blockade of Kilsby Tunnel was organized at not much more than a week's notice and all the components, plant and labour brought in to replace a major blocked drain (not online and I no longer have the printed copy so can't quote). This shows how the industry can move quickly when necessary, as do various responses to emergencies in recent years. But the main barrier to doing such things in normal times is the amount of notice needed to get a blockade - not a problem when there were few services and even fewer passengers.

Kilsby had been long since planned; what needed to be done was well understood. But finding the access to do it meant it kept getting deferred. What was arranged at short notice was the resource to deliver the plan, not the plan itself. Also, it was about 6 weeks in the resource planning stage.

One thing I'm not clear on is does this mean that the Department are willing to suspend their normal value for money regime? Will the Treasury really be willing to part with cash for projects where only early value for money assessment has been done? RNEP is there for a reason

The value for money ‘regime’, ie assessment, will stay. Indeed it must. However it can be significantly quickened!

 

[squizzler]

They say that in a recession it is worthwhile paying people to dig holes in the street and fill them again. Simply to give people wages that can be spent into the wider economy.

A very modest step up from that - also able to soak up unskilled labour and requiring few specialised tools but this time delivering useful product - would be to get people to carve wider pavements and cycle routes from the existing carriageways as part of the green agenda. Since no land is required for purchase it could be done right away. The railway industry might be able to benefit from this if the new footways and bikeways lead to the stations.

 

[ABB125]

They say that in a recession it is worthwhile paying people to dig holes in the street and fill them again. Simply to give people wages that can be spent into the wider economy.

A very modest step up from that - also able to soak up unskilled labour and requiring few specialised tools but this time delivering useful product - would be to get people to carve wider pavements and cycle routes from the existing carriageways as part of the green agenda. Since no land is required for purchase it could be done right away. The railway industry might be able to benefit from this if the new footways and bikeways lead to the stations.

That only works, however, if there is sufficient space. New build road lanes need to be 3.65m wide*, and most existing roads won't be (they'll be narrower). Therefore, I'm not sure that the highway authorities will be very happy if 50cm or so is removed from the current road width.

*This is from the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. Whilst this is a Highways England document (ie: strategic road network), I'm assuming it applies to all roads, including local authority managed ones.

 

[bluenoxid]

They say that in a recession it is worthwhile paying people to dig holes in the street and fill them again. Simply to give people wages that can be spent into the wider economy.

A very modest step up from that - also able to soak up unskilled labour and requiring few specialised tools but this time delivering useful product - would be to get people to carve wider pavements and cycle routes from the existing carriageways as part of the green agenda. Since no land is required for purchase it could be done right away. The railway industry might be able to benefit from this if the new footways and bikeways lead to the stations.

It is amazing how many verges there are that could be delivered. I recall reading an article about the lost cycleways of the 30’s, which had disappeared under weeds and parking for properties on those roads.
They could be quick wins. The big issue is underground services and land ownership, which can make a simple and obvious project too difficult.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Although the benefits might be harder to quantify (and smaller), if people literally want to pay unemployed people to do straightforward/'un-skilled' work with shovels and wheelbarrows then the heritage railways may well offer some scope. Few 'access'/possession issues; widely spread across the UK; completion of work not time-critical; no RRBs and diversions to pay for and so forth.

Projects like quickly electrifying Bristol and Leicester could have the 'benefit' of having to be done twice (before and after re-signalling and re-modelling) as well as taking it down again in the interim phase. Not so sure about that idea.

 

[squizzler]

That only works, however, if there is sufficient space.

For many suburban streets the woonerf principles of shared space can be applied. With only 6% of people wishing to go back to how things were before, I think there is a temptation for people on this forum, surrounded by hard bitten transport professionals who have seen various initiatives come and go, to think it will be the same again this time, and be quite wrong. There seems, rather, to be a strong desire to take this opportunity to remake our urban environment in a more humane way than before.

For rail travel, I therefore think the first opportunity is things like making the routes to stations safe and attractive to foot and bike traffic, thereby integrating them into the town fabric. Stuff that can literally be done right away with a few picks, shovels, and a truck load of nice paving blocks, planters and benches from the garden centre. This buys time for the electrification schemes to break ground.

Although the benefits might be harder to quantify (and smaller), if people literally want to pay unemployed people to do straightforward/'un-skilled' work with shovels and wheelbarrows then the heritage railways may well offer some scope.

It won't do any harm, and the workshops will no doubt provide something to occupy engineers waiting for the economy to require their services again. However, discussing as we are various top-down employment initiatives for a world in which capitalism has all but stalled, my preference would be for green growth, things like solar panels and insulation for every house, and community food production, with cycling and public transport being the obvious beneficiaries in the transport sector. Things like the Parry People mover cannot be ruled out for various heritage lines with viable communities en route!

 

[BrianW]

I think the map here shows (in blue) where the 'shovel ready' projects will be found:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50770798

North Wales, NW and NE England ...

 

[Starmill]

The value for money ‘regime’, ie assessment, will stay. Indeed it must. However it can be significantly quickened!

While I don't disagree, I've often thought that the parts of it that I have seen actually do move at reasonable pace. Of course, sometimes a 'showstopper' is identified in one of the five cases which does add to delivery time significantly, or leads it not to be progressed at all, but that is for a very good reason. Whether there is much time to be saved in the 'construction' stage (after Decision to Deliver or equivalent I guess) without huge increases in costs I do not know.

 

[YorksLad12]

Anything involving a steam train would be shovel-ready, I'd have thought...

Slightly more sensibly: even if the plan was "shovel-ready", the supply lines or equipment and people almost certainly wouldn't be. Look how long it's taking to deliver Platform 0 at Leeds (and the cost); until that's done we can't have the relatively simple platform extensions. But, platform extensions and related infrastructure improvements would be quick wins around the country if the materials, money and personpower were there.

 

[Starmill]

Anything involving a steam train would be shovel-ready, I'd have thought...

Slightly more sensibly: even if the plan was "shovel-ready", the supply lines or equipment and people almost certainly wouldn't be. Look how long it's taking to deliver Platform 0 at Leeds (and the cost); until that's done we can't have the relatively simple platform extensions. But, platform extensions and related infrastructure improvements would be quick wins around the country if the materials, money and personpower were there.

To be fair the Leeds project includes quite a change to the signalling and track layout in that part of the station - as well as extensions to platforms, changes to the car park, and the new platform zero. It wasn't just 'bolt another platform on' - it was more a package of improvements so trains spend less time waiting outside the station, and to permit longer trains to work on the Aire Valley or at least, this is my understanding of it. Someone with a greater technical knowledge may wish to comment!

 

[YorksLad12]

No - agree, it's a package of works. It was more that relatively simple things such as platform extensions can sometimes be dependent upon other work taking place - so nothing is ever really as quick to implement as FBJ would have us believe sometimes.