Wisbech-March line reopening cost increase to £200m

[yorksrob]

My understanding is that although the walls and (possibly) the roof might have grandfather rights the interior and the exterior, where relevant, would need to meet modern building standards for safety.

I have recently been involved with a Listed Building, converted to apartments some years ago, which suffered a severe fire. The intention is to rebuild - but it has been made clear that the apartments will need to reach current safety standards, not those which applied pre-fire or at the time of their previous conversion.

I suppose it's what you compare it to. I would compare the level crossing to the wall or the roof. Re-kitting it to modern safety standards should involve upgrading it to a modern level crossing.

 

[trebor79]

....(CCTV or OD full barrier crossings improve safety over AHB crossings)

Unfortunately, they don’t. I have attended several accidents vehicles have gone through closed barriers at CCTV crossings.

And subsequently hit by a train or just a broken barrier because the CCTV or OD kept the signals at danger?

 

[Chester1]

£75m for a guided busway seems like a better deal! 7 miles with stops should be 15-20 minutes. Close non essential crossings and replace the rest with traffic lights that go red when a bus approaches. It works well on the Leigh busway. It could be included as part of plus bus for journeys to or from March.

 

[gaillark]

The problem with today's railway is that everything has to be "gold plated ".
With costs rapidly escalating, the project may never get off the ground.

Some thrift and relaxation of standards to grandfather rights is needed here .
There are some of us that remember British Rail's Network SouthEast division that reopened Oxford to Bicester Town on a shoestring as an experimental service.
Although a few trains a day operated at irregular times it established demand using class 117 units rather than the new turbos and operated on a very low cost basis using existing infrastructure.
The service would have been withdrawn under the Speller Act if the service failed to be a success.
If we insisted on gold plating everything at the time this service would never have started.

Now with Wisbech I cannot see why a similar approach could be adopted here. Fair enough some money would need to be invested but a fraction of what is being costed.
A few Pacers could be used as rolling stock (as they will be very low cost. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that the people of Wisbech don't deserve anything better than pacers - they do but.... The key point I am trying to get across is that is surely better to get a basic service up and running to prove demand and once established the business case is proven for a big upgrade and enhancements otherwise we risk no railway reaching the town which would be worse.
Also new gold standard railways seem to take 10 years+ which is insane. East West is a good example. I can't see no reason why a low cost service can't be up and running in within one calandar year.

 

[158756]

£75m for a guided busway seems like a better deal! 7 miles with stops should be 15-20 minutes. Close non essential crossings and replace the rest with traffic lights that go red when a bus approaches. It works well on the Leigh busway. It could be included as part of plus bus for journeys to or from March.

March is not Manchester though. There isn't likely to be a turn up and go service on any busway. Trains at March are not frequent either. So connections are a big problem. Delay repay is all well and good but if you're routinely an hour late to work compensation isn't really what matters - to get anything really comparable to a through service you would need to guarantee that the train would wait for the bus, and vice versa.

 

[Clarence Yard]

The Bicester service was done on a line that was properly maintained and was in regular use for freight. The Wisbech line is derelict, needing not only track replacement but work to the trackbed as well. I walked it as part of looking at the line as part of the last Greater Anglia bid for my OG and it is, to use a technical term, totally shagged.

The original station site has been redeveloped and access from the town centre to the possible replacement sites isn’t ideal either. I have seen that business case for reinstating the line and the projected traffic forecasts are very, very optimistic. As the person who did the business cases for all the Anglia local service enhancements earlier this century, frankly I found it unbelievable.

Operating the line, once re-instated, is the easy bit.

 

[trebor79]

£75m for a guided busway seems like a better deal! 7 miles with stops should be 15-20 minutes. Close non essential crossings and replace the rest with traffic lights that go red when a bus approaches. It works well on the Leigh busway. It could be included as part of plus bus for journeys to or from March.

I don't understand the vogue for guided busways. Just build an ordinary road with car traps (as can be seen on the Cambridge busway) and save a lot of cost.

 

[Bald Rick]

....(CCTV or OD full barrier crossings improve safety over AHB crossings)

And subsequently hit by a train or just a broken barrier because the CCTV or OD kept the signals at danger?

In some cases hit by trains. In all cases, once the barriers are down and crossing clear given, the signals go clear, and if the train is past them...

 

[Bald Rick]

I can't see no reason why a low cost service can't be up and running in within one calandar year

Perhaps you could explain to us how that would be achievable?

 

[swt_passenger]

Well the promised £500m isnt going to go very far at this rate. Blyth was costed at £191m in 2016 at Grip 2 so thats probably nearer £300m and thats on an existing operational line! Then we have Colne - Skipton which needs a total rebuild so thats going to be £150-200m. Given the billions needed for HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail let alone Midlands Connect and East West Rail there aint going to be much if anything left to fund these reopenings. RDG/RIA should be leading the way here in coming up with appropriate standards with ORR to rebuild branch lines so they are affordable otherwise all thats going to happens is the £500m will be spent on glossy consultants reports.

The £500m isn’t for reopenings, I thought that was made clear earlier when it was announced. It’s for endless consultations...

 

[Bald Rick]

I suppose it's what you compare it to. I would compare the level crossing to the wall or the roof. Re-kitting it to modern safety standards should involve upgrading it to a modern level crossing.

But, in the long run, a bridge is cheaper as well as safer. That’s the point.

 

[yorksrob]

But, in the long run, a bridge is cheaper as well as safer. That’s the point.

There's no point in it being cheaper in the long run if you don't get past the first hurdle of reopening.

 

[tbtc]

IF this is a former rail alignment then why can't we put down a guided busway on it - if passenger numbers are exceptional then consider light rail or even heavy rail - but a busway would allow some services to penetrate other places and extend beyond Wisbech too (rather than a simple shuttle train service)

The real blindness is that for 90%+ of the population cars are the answer, way ahead of any bus, and have been for a couple of generations now.

...but of the non-car market, buses are used more than trains - despite the knee-jerk reaction on here that heavy rail must always be the solution to all problems

I said nothing of the sort. I merely stated that buses tend to be cramped, slow and uncomfortable - nothing about who was using them

Modern trains are never cramped and/or uncomfortable then?

(meanwhile I've had many comfortable journeys on modern buses - e.g. Stagecoach Gold spec)

Not always black and white

One way is by reintroducing the train service. But if you're going to insist it has to be a road vehicle, then a non-stop coach that doesn't divert into every passing village is going to be the absolute minimum needed.

The road goes through every village

Is it that bad if there's a service that serves the intermediate places?

More a case of Stagecoach greed, the timetable as it is, can be run using just two drivers. The service is busy enough to warrant the use of double deckers all day

If it's such a money spinner then you'd expect some competition, in that case

Quite. Not from the area but it appears that there is a fast and frequent bus service from Wisbech to both Peterborough and Kings Lynn which presumably runs on a commercial basis.

But not to March. Why not? Is there simply no demand? If it's debatable, then why not run a trial direct non-stop service every half hour, connecting with train at March, and see what happens. Probably costs the same as the GRIP3 for restoring a passenger rail service.

True - for the cost of yet another "feasibility study" on a heavy rail proposal, we could spend the cash on buses and have the running straight away

Having lived in Kings Lynn , before and after the upgrade and electrification , and boost in services £29 m , if I remember correctly .
I remember traffic rose 3 times , it’s really busy now ( I remember trains in the 80s with no passengers ).

The economic boost to the town is incredible .
I don’t see why a half hourly service to Wisbech can not do as well , and deliver benefits to one on Britain’s poorest communities, connecting it to Cambridge.
Don’t forget railways are for everyone to benefit from economically and socially , they are no just for enthusiasts.
2.3 is over the line

For everyone in theory, but 95% of people don't use trains on any kind of "regular" basis

Skipton-Colne will be nearer £400m. Any new line is going to be in the region of £30-£40m per mile, and that’s cheap.

(quoted just in case anyone doesn't realise how expensive these things are, next time they start doodling some meandering links through empty countryside)

I don't understand the vogue for guided busways. Just build an ordinary road with car traps (as can be seen on the Cambridge busway) and save a lot of cost.

Partly to ensure faster services, partly to use a thinner corridor (since the vehicles aren't going to swerve, they can run on a route narrower than a conventional single carriageway road - this can free up space for a parallel cycle path etc)

 

[quantinghome]

The Bicester service was done on a line that was properly maintained and was in regular use for freight. The Wisbech line is derelict, needing not only track replacement but work to the trackbed as well. I walked it as part of looking at the line as part of the last Greater Anglia bid for my OG and it is, to use a technical term, totally shagged.

The original station site has been redeveloped and access from the town centre to the possible replacement sites isn’t ideal either. I have seen that business case for reinstating the line and the projected traffic forecasts are very, very optimistic. As the person who did the business cases for all the Anglia local service enhancements earlier this century, frankly I found it unbelievable.

Operating the line, once re-instated, is the easy bit.

This is exactly what I was going to say, except with relevant experience.

 

[trebor79]

I don't understand the vogue for guided busways. Just build an ordinary road with car traps (as can be seen on the Cambridge busway) and save a lot of cost.

Partly to ensure faster services, partly to use a thinner corridor (since the vehicles aren't going to swerve, they can run on a route narrower than a conventional single carriageway road - this can free up space for a parallel cycle path etc)

Do buses go faster on the busway than a normal road then? I don't think they do.
The alignment is no narrower because you need an access road alongside the busway so that emergency services and breakdown repair vehicles can access. The whole thing is at least as wide as an A road. In any case, the fens is hardly difficult the thread a road, railway or busway through.
Busway has the other disadvantage that if a bus breaks down, everything stops until it's sorted, precisely because the other vehicles can't get past.
It's a nonsense solution. Just build a road reserved for public transport.

 

[Clayton]

You could do the same with buses for a tenth of the cost. Is traffic between Wisbech and March really so bad that it requires a dedicated right of way for public transport to give a decent travel time? Buy 4 high quality buses and install some bus lanes approaching the busier junctions. Sort out some through ticketing. Job done.

I agree that a rail shuttle just to March would be pointless. You’d need a direct service to a bigger place where congestion is bad and parking difficult

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

But, in the long run, a bridge is cheaper as well as safer. That’s the point.

and every road should have crash barriers down them

Railway safety used to be underpinned by risk assessments and pragmatic engineering but now we seek gold plated perfection but the only outcome from this pursuit will be very few if any of these lines will reopened as heavy rail.

I can build a tram line down a road with no protection against vehicles disobeying traffic lights but we can no longer have level crossings is just absurd. Im not advocating diluting safety but measures need to be proportionate to the risk exposure to ensure costs are reasonable otherwise none will reopen. Thus we leave people to use our roads which are far more risky but thats alright because the railways conscious is clear.

 

[quantinghome]

I agree that a rail shuttle just to March would be pointless. You’d need a direct service to a bigger place where congestion is bad and parking difficult

But then you're into a world of pain upgrading the existing rail network to take the additional services.

 

[Bald Rick]

There's no point in it being cheaper in the long run if you don't get past the first hurdle of reopening.

But this is precisely the point. The case for any reopening is judged in value for money. With lower costs in the long run, the case is therefore better for the project with no level crossings, and it is more likely to open.

Specifically on the level crossing issue, the law is clear. If there is a reasonably practical method to reduce risk, then it should be done. For a new railway that needs primary consent to construct, it is always reasonably practical to have an alternative method of crossing the line.

Who would be the person that decides to ignore that, and sign the paperwork that permits a level crossing? For when the inevitable happens, and someone dies, that person will be in the dock, literally.

 

[quantinghome]

and every road should have crash barriers down them

Good idea.

Railway safety used to be underpinned by risk assessments and pragmatic engineering but now we seek gold plated perfection but the only outcome from this pursuit will be very few if any of these lines will reopened as heavy rail.

They still are and we really don't. But you know, perhaps we can go back to slam door stock, or barrow crossings? Let's build new London underground lines with no safe walkway - saves plenty of money on construction after all... etc etc.

I can build a tram line down a road with no protection against vehicles disobeying traffic lights but we can no longer have level crossings is just absurd. Im not advocating diluting safety

Yeah, you kind of are though.

but measures need to be proportionate to the risk exposure to ensure costs are reasonable otherwise none will reopen. Thus we leave people to use our roads which are far more risky but thats alright because the railways conscious is clear.

Important point but this is nothing to do with 'the railway' which must obey the law of the land. A law which still applies ALARP principles to health and safety issues, so what you're asking to happen does actually happen.

 

[Taunton]

Specifically on the level crossing issue, the law is clear. If there is a reasonably practical method to reduce risk, then it should be done. For a new railway that needs primary consent to construct, it is always reasonably practical to have an alternative method of crossing the line.

I don't follow that. New roads are built all the time, with normal Give Way junctions on them. Now, you can show with figures that if a bridge was built instead, for each and every one, there would be a reduction in risk. A traffic engineer can give you the numbers for a Give Way junction versus a bridge. There may actually be accidents on there from time to time. Yet a sensible approach is taken, and nobody from the design/operation side is prosecuted. There is no specific law just for railways on this.

Same elsewhere. It's known people die every year falling down stairs at home. Yet new homes with stairs continue to be built. There is an alternative, we could all be required to have bungalows. But housebuilders are not prosecuted when any accident happens.

 

[al78]

Coming from Wisbich you be facing a very strong head wind all the way.

Not all the time I wouldn't. Summer 2018 with an anticyclone slap bang over the UK for the best part of three months being a prime example. I appreciate the flatlands are exposed to wind, like the Netherlands (and despite this a lot of people use bicycles for utility transport), but I do think the wind resistance is overhyped to a degree. I live in Sussex and also have to cycle in headwinds occasionally, with hills on top of that.

 

[HSTEd]

The alignment is no narrower because you need an access road alongside the busway so that emergency services and breakdown repair vehicles can access.

Why?
A breakdown repair vehicle will be owned by the bus operator and thus can be expected to be fitted to travel on it.
And how often do emergency services need to get to a bus between access points?

The busways in Leigh and Cambridge have a cyclepath beside them it is true that can be used for vehicels as required.
But they are normally used for people to walk and ride bikes on them.

A public transport road with separate cycle/footpaths is going to be even wider than this, and cyclists are going to nervous about sharing a road with lots of fast moving buses so will likely insist on a separate cycleway.

And thats before the uber/taxi lobby manage to gain access to a "public transport" road and clog it up.

EDIT:
Worth noting that the O-Bahn in Melbourne certainly doesn't have an access road.

Don't hold back. Tell us!

In many "safety case" and similar fields, especially in my own field of nuclear related stuff, we have had serious problems with contracted designers at engineering firms acting in a manner which whilst in their own best interest, was certianly not in the contractee's best interest.

Spending far too long chasing minor optimisations in materials use or whatever but running up costs far in excess of the savings.
Or even chosing design solutions that guarantee future work (hence the enormous proliferation of 'interim' solutions)

Most of the time on the railway or other fields we are not pushing the limits of materials, so the current way engineering work is done is not particularly helpful. And the regulation doesn't help this either.

But that is going drastically off topic.

 

[whittlesfordok]

Having driven several times from Wisbech to March i don’t see the point in reopening the railway. As the traffic is just not there.
Also the rail line is very bendy.
If a different route was taken it would make more sense and might be a lot cheaper.

 

[berwicksfinest]

Having driven several times from Wisbech to March i don’t see the point in reopening the railway. As the traffic is just not there.
Also the rail line is very bendy.
If a different route was taken it would make more sense and might be a lot cheaper.

Actually the railway is fairly straight, and actually deviates from the road at Coldham

 

[Djgr]

To be honest all Boris' Beeching reopenings are likely to have massive levels of financial pain. But he's made a promise and is surely a man of honour.

 

[Robertj21a]

To be honest all Boris' Beeching reopenings are likely to have massively levels of financial pain. But he's made a promise and is surely a man of honour.

Did his promise cover *every* Beeching closure........???

 

[Djgr]

Did his promise cover *every* Beeching closure........???

If we adopt a pragmatic stance and say only the ten "best" reopenings then Wisbech to March is still probably within that ten.

 

[yorksrob]

But this is precisely the point. The case for any reopening is judged in value for money. With lower costs in the long run, the case is therefore better for the project with no level crossings, and it is more likely to open.

Specifically on the level crossing issue, the law is clear. If there is a reasonably practical method to reduce risk, then it should be done. For a new railway that needs primary consent to construct, it is always reasonably practical to have an alternative method of crossing the line.

Who would be the person that decides to ignore that, and sign the paperwork that permits a level crossing? For when the inevitable happens, and someone dies, that person will be in the dock, literally.

Then the law is incorrect. If a law is pushing people onto more dangerous forms of transport, then it is a bad law and needs to be changed.

That's the problem with our legal system. It treats the railway in isolation, rather than as part of the broader transport system, and that puts people in greater danger.

 

[eastdyke]

The difference here being that the Marston Vale line is open, level crossings and all. The part of EWR Western section 2 that is new is being constructed without level crossings (and there were several before it closed).

Am fully aware of that. And of course the reasons that not all crossings will be replaced in Marston Vale include costs and 'reasonable practicalities'
My point was that should the only reason for Wisbech re-opening not happening be the cost of bridges v crossings then it might be a good time to open a debate.
[The design of any bridge and a presentation to local residents would be 'interesting' at a couple of places on the Wisbech route. Example: Station Road, Coldham]

Specifically on the level crossing issue, the law is clear. If there is a reasonably practical method to reduce risk, then it should be done. For a new railway that needs primary consent to construct, it is always reasonably practical to have an alternative method of crossing the line.
Who would be the person that decides to ignore that, and sign the paperwork that permits a level crossing? For when the inevitable happens, and someone dies, that person will be in the dock, literally.

The law is clear, including that a new level crossing can be authorised within an Order under the
Transport and Works Act 1992.
ORR currently state “ORR’s policy is that new level crossings should only be considered
appropriate in exceptional circumstances” without defining what those circumstances might be.

I realise the circumstances are completely different but I am awaiting with interest to see how the TWAO application for 'The Rother Valley Railway (Bodiam to Robertsbridge Junction) Order' is resolved with respect to level crossings. Not just on the A21 but for the minor roads also.

Back to Wisbech, I find it interesting that even at substantially lower cost, a tram-train has seemingly so readily been dismissed.