Shillingstone Bridge demolition - Appeal started and support required ASAP

[phil-b259]

Standing back and putting a non emotional opinion, it's a restricted access bridge on an unused rail route. If the railway group was to extend north then they would have to pick up the liability for that bridge and the potential damage that could come if the arch was clobbered by a vehicle. Would the railway be better off if it did strike north to replace the arch with a straight girder bridge span which would be less of a risk? If that's the case then demolition in the short term would be fine as long as the option to reinstate remains with a straight span rather than an arch.

 

Not if it means the replacement structure cannot be built without raising the railway / lowering the road so as to provide the official "minimum" highway clearances (as in the height above which bridge heights don't need to be signed). I believe that this has already occurred at least once on the Waverly project as despite the basic formation being an ex railway route, all the specifics MUST be done according to modern standards (including bridge heights, station curvature and graidents, the spacing between double track, the grade of cuttings / embankment slopes, etc. While a Heritage railway can get derogations in some matters compared to the likes of the Waverly project of course, the installation of a sub standard height bridge over a public road isn't one of them.

 

But what about where a bridge needs replacing for structural reasons I hear you ask? Well its quite simple, because the bridge is physically there in the first place a straight forward like for like replacement is entirely aceptable with no requirement to increase the headroom (though it cannot be made any less I believe). So the best solution at Shillingstone  - assuming it is structurally sound (as far as keeping itself up goes) is actually to keep the bridge in place. That way any replacenment can be done on a "like for like" basis where as if the bridge goes now any replacement will be far more expensive than would otherwise be the case.

[bike2steam]

I simply think - in general terms - that the Shillingstone group could, with the right type of support and approach from within the group, achieve greater things. It may take a while, most things worth having don't happen overnight, and it won't happen without the kind of local authority 'political' support that many of the larger railways now enjoy. Dorset is a lovely and under-rated county, in my view.

 

It would be nice to agree with you, but given the obstacles in their way, I somehow can't. But I certainly agree with the last sentence. The only way they can overcome is with a large influx of both cash, and volunteers, their management of both has been seriously lacking. The one way to guarantee a good income is a good length of running line that can accommodate a well patronised train service to help fund expansion, for example, to Blandford, and back. That will help to encourage further investment, but it will never happen because of the said obstacles, it is a classic case of the 'chicken and the egg' situation.    

[PaulRhB]

A quick view using Google Earth shows the bridge to be in a poor state of repair - water damage to bricks, lots of leakage streaks underneath.

 

Stu I wouldn't look too closely at most mainline bridges then if that worries you damage in the outer layer of brick isn't a problem unless it's the full depth of the course and over a largish area. We have restrictions if the damage goes too deep or wide, though I'm no longer bridge strike certified, that bridge looks in fairly good condition to me on the surface.

Though I share the Captains passion for the S&D, as does Paul M, I can't see another railway there getting far enough to connect two tourist destinations. Blandford is hardly a major destination, though if they could get the bridge across to near the Brewery they'd certainly have a unique opportunity for beer festivals!

My concern is that the ever increasing age of volunteers generally means too many railways in an area will inevitably lead to problems in 20 odd years time if they don't have a core tourist draw on the line. Shillingstone is a cracking restoration but I do see it having more future as an event venue and village hall type venue. If they can get some more coaches and strip them internally like they've done to half the current coach and possibly a rebuilt goods shed They'd have a novel and fairly large event space, imagine an exhibition held in two or three coaches and the goods shed

[Ian J.]

I haven't looked at the maps of the area recently, but I've always held the view that obstructions like commercial premises are 'easier' to overcome, and sometimes roads too (depending on just how busy they've become since taking over the alignment). Also it's never impossible to put a new alignment alongside a road on the old alignment. Bridges can be rebuilt, if necessary.

 

The real problems in any reinstatement of a line are the private homes. They contain voters, and no government of any colour likes to upset voters, no matter how few of them there are. So the only way to get past them is with an overriding commercial case for a line reopening. The S&DJR route has only really got one case for reopening. That is, 'local community reconnection', which would require the whole line to be reinstated to be of any practical use. Unfortunately that isn't a sufficiently strong case for the amount of money needed to do it.

 

This leaves us with a fragmented route of a few preserved sites, but where the value of them is never likely to be enough to make the case for getting major sections of line reinstated. In the case of Shillingstone, I think PaulRhB is probably right that it would be best as less of a running line and more of a static museum and event space. However, that doesn't mean I think any particular bridge should be demolished unless a very strong case can be made to do so. And in the event that a line could be reinstated, I feel that it should be for the authority that does such a demolition to be held to pay for its replacement.

[The Stationmaster]

I think part of the problem with Shillingstone is that it's not the right place to start if you want a railway to go somewhere.  Fine perhaps as a station restoration and a demonstration running line but whichever way they go in order to get to 'somewhere' they face major bridging tasks and that means very big money.  Equally it's all well and good acquiring disused trackbed but where it has got into other use, mainly it appears agricultural plus some residential (albeit the latter is not in exact line of route I think), they are going to come up against people who are not in favour of their presence and they will take a lot of persuading.

 

Even with a large pool of very effective volunteers to re-establish a railway from Shillingstone is inevitably going to require major professional engineering input which means big bucks and it will be difficult to find those big bucks if the railway doesn't really go anywhere, or from anywhere.  And, if I read Paul M's comments correctly, this bridge would seem to lead to a now non-existent embankment which would also require rebuilding, assuming someone is happy to lose their garden space to allow that to happen.

[Captain Kernow]

It would be nice to agree with you, but given the obstacles in their way, I somehow can't. But I certainly agree with the last sentence. The only way they can overcome is with a large influx of both cash, and volunteers, their management of both has been seriously lacking. The one way to guarantee a good income is a good length of running line that can accommodate a well patronised train service to help fund expansion, for example, to Blandford, and back. That will help to encourage further investment, but it will never happen because of the said obstacles, it is a classic case of the 'chicken and the egg' situation.    

I make no comment on the management/staff of the project (although I've had a lot of contact there), or their funding situation, but I wish the project well nevertheless. 50 years ago who would have thought that Imberhorne Cutting would get cleared, or the WHR rebuilt?

[The Stationmaster]

I make no comment on the management/staff of the project (although I've had a lot of contact there), or their funding situation, but I wish the project well nevertheless. 50 years ago who would have thought that Imberhorne Cutting would get cleared, or the WHR rebuilt?

Absolutely true Tim - but look how long it took the organisations involved to get to and achieve those things, around 50 years (or more) I think in both cases from their early preservationist days and in both cases with a strong body of committed volunteers to keep supporting their existing, and successful, operations and revenue streams.

 

I'm not saying that folk can start from scratch and gradually face a significant challenge because that is what several railways have done but most of them started or were aiming to go 'somewhere' and most, again, had strong and diverse volunteer support and financial backing.

[Captain Kernow]

Absolutely true Tim - but look how long it took the organisations involved to get to and achieve those things, around 50 years (or more) I think in both cases from their early preservationist days and in both cases with a strong body of committed volunteers to keep supporting their existing, and successful, operations and revenue streams.

 

I'm not saying that folk can start from scratch and gradually face a significant challenge because that is what several railways have done but most of them started or were aiming to go 'somewhere' and most, again, had strong and diverse volunteer support and financial backing.

Yes indeed, I'm thinking about the long haul here, Mike.

 

One scheme that I sometimes quote is what is now known as the Avon Valley Railway. When I first knew it, in 1973, it was the Bristol Suburban Railway Society, and a couple of friends of mine were volunteers on it - all the track had just been lifted, (in order to build a new layout called 'Tytherington'), so the volunteers laid all the early track, by hand and with minimal tools, completely from scratch.

 

I do take my hat off to any heritage railway that has now achieved operational status, but which started from pretty much nothing, as opposed to those (such as the also highly-esteemed WSR), which had at least the basics of a railway left in situ.

That's not to say that I don't take my hat off to other heritage railways, that did start off with track in situ, it's just that those with a bare trackbed must have been that much more daunting in the beginning...

[Joseph_Pestell]

Local District Councillor, Sherry Jesperson, wrote about this in the local free newspaper, Blackmore Vale Magazine, last week.

 

She is urging everyone to write into DCC and object and also to attend a public consultation event due later this year.

 

She has been in contact with the Trailway (Sustrans) and says that they do favour retention of the bridge so that there is grade separation for cyclists/walkers to cross the road.

[The Stationmaster]

Yes indeed, I'm thinking about the long haul here, Mike.

 

One scheme that I sometimes quote is what is now known as the Avon Valley Railway. When I first knew it, in 1973, it was the Bristol Suburban Railway Society, and a couple of friends of mine were volunteers on it - all the track had just been lifted, (in order to build a new layout called 'Tytherington'), so the volunteers laid all the early track, by hand and with minimal tools, completely from scratch.

 

I do take my hat off to any heritage railway that has now achieved operational status, but which started from pretty much nothing, as opposed to those (such as the also highly-esteemed WSR), which had at least the basics of a railway left in situ.

That's not to say that I don't take my hat off to other heritage railways, that did start off with track in situ, it's just that those with a bare trackbed must have been that much more daunting in the beginning...

Track isn't so much of a problem in my experience - provided you can get the material, or afford to get the material, it is then a question of finding some retired or part time professional help and building up expertise.  That is the way many preserved railways/heritage sites have tackled it and generally it has worked quite well and still is with the most recent ventures such as some in the north of England.

 

Bridgework, particularly new longish spans over awkward sites are a different matter and very few Railways have either had to or actually have tackled them from the old piers upwards.  And even then with professional skills available from their membership they have still had to buy in fabrication and erection etc which is far from cheap and is really only the preserve of a mature and well financed organisation or an extremely lucky one.  I'm not saying railways can't get there because some obviously either have got there or are getting there but in every case that I can think of they are either going somewhere or coming from somewhere (in a geographical sense.

 

The problem I see with Shillingstone is that they can't get anywhere, in either direction, without major bridgeworks - there is a river to cross to the south and a major road to the north plus of course various minor roads in both directions.  If they can't bridge either or both of those obstacles all they can possibly achieve is a comparatively short 'demonstration' type line.  If they can build up such a line as a starting base then it seems to me they are best advised to go south because although they will face major expense they will at least be going somewhere - and it's the lines which do that that which get the business from the leisure and tourist trade, even if they are fairly short.

[bike2steam]

Bridgework, particularly new longish spans over awkward sites are a different matter and very few Railways have either had to or actually have tackled them from the old piers upwards.  And even then with professional skills available from their membership they have still had to buy in fabrication and erection etc which is far from cheap and is really only the preserve of a mature and well financed organisation or an extremely lucky one.  I'm not saying railways can't get there because some obviously either have got there or are getting there but in every case that I can think of they are either going somewhere or coming from somewhere (in a geographical sense.

 

The problem I see with Shillingstone is that they can't get anywhere, in either direction, without major bridgeworks - there is a river to cross to the south and a major road to the north plus of course various minor roads in both directions.  If they can't bridge either or both of those obstacles all they can possibly achieve is a comparatively short 'demonstration' type line.  If they can build up such a line as a starting base then it seems to me they are best advised to go south because although they will face major expense they will at least be going somewhere - and it's the lines which do that that which get the business from the leisure and tourist trade, even if they are fairly short.

 

Just about 1 & 3/4 miles from Shillingstone station to the River Stour crossing just beyond Gains Cross, but with beautiful views with the twin hillforts of Hod and Hambledon Hills to the north-east, and the North Dorset Downs around Okeford Hill to the south. If they'd got their act together they could have been there by now ( just a personal view !!??)

[Ian J.]

I find it interesting that the section from Charlton Marshall to the outskirts of Blandford Sturminster Marshall has never seen any attempt at preservation activity, or am I wrong about that?

[PaulRhB]

Yep the Charlton Inn to the Badger Brewery would certainly have a unique selling point to the non enthusiast!

[Ian J.]

 

Doh! I meant Charlton Marshall to Sturminster Marshall. I don't know how I got that wrong

[bike2steam]

Just a problem with the level crossing that goes over the A350 me thinks Ian.  But there are plans for Spetisbury station, to give walkers on the track-bed information on what they are walking over, a few gifts and refreshment from their exertions. 

[Captain Kernow]

Track isn't so much of a problem in my experience - provided you can get the material, or afford to get the material, it is then a question of finding some retired or part time professional help and building up expertise.  That is the way many preserved railways/heritage sites have tackled it and generally it has worked quite well and still is with the most recent ventures such as some in the north of England.

 

Bridgework, particularly new longish spans over awkward sites are a different matter and very few Railways have either had to or actually have tackled them from the old piers upwards.  And even then with professional skills available from their membership they have still had to buy in fabrication and erection etc which is far from cheap and is really only the preserve of a mature and well financed organisation or an extremely lucky one.  I'm not saying railways can't get there because some obviously either have got there or are getting there but in every case that I can think of they are either going somewhere or coming from somewhere (in a geographical sense.

 

The problem I see with Shillingstone is that they can't get anywhere, in either direction, without major bridgeworks - there is a river to cross to the south and a major road to the north plus of course various minor roads in both directions.  If they can't bridge either or both of those obstacles all they can possibly achieve is a comparatively short 'demonstration' type line.  If they can build up such a line as a starting base then it seems to me they are best advised to go south because although they will face major expense they will at least be going somewhere - and it's the lines which do that that which get the business from the leisure and tourist trade, even if they are fairly short.

Exactly - it's all long term stuff, and multi-discipline, as any big railway undertaking is. The point I'm making is that if they/we give up now, then there'll be nothing in 50 years time, whereas if everyone sticks at it - and with realistic short/medium term expectations and a good dose of professionalism etc. - then there is at least a chance of something good coming of it.

[Captain Kernow]

If they'd got their act together they could have been there by now

For reasons I won't go into on here, I'm not going to completely disagree with you on that one, Paul...

[TravisM]

Placed my objection but focused it on tourism rather than opening the whole line.  The Shillingstone Trust have invested so much time and effort only to have it thwarted by the demolition of the bridge.  Maybe a structural survey of the by the local authority and Shillingstone Trust of the bridge to determine it's true condition, remember that it's been untouched and unloved for nearly 50 years, there could be serious water damage inside and the only practical solution is to demolish.

 

I'm not saying they should, just let the local authority look at every option available before making a decision.

 

Julian Sprott

[PaulRhB]

How about another idea?

Let the bridge go, put in a mini roundabout at its location and regrade the trackbed to provide a better entrance to the site, currently an industrial estate.

 

 

 

 

 

They currently only have parking for around 15 cars which could be extended to 30 or so. Then use the site as a village hall and events venue with say four coaches as the hall continuing to sell teas from the station building. I'm sorry but I think it has more chance of keeping the station preserved as it is long term than another railway which goes nowhere. The Gartell Light Railway is a little further on and only survives because it is the passion of it's owner and supporters opening a few times a year.

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

...sample letter made fit for purpose, printed out and posted to Dorset Council.

 

Dave

[bike2steam]

The Shillingstone Trust have invested so much time and effort only to have it thwarted by the demolition of the bridge.  

Julian Sprott

Please explain what you mean by what has been 'thwarted', when the bridge is a dead-end anyway ??.

[Maudslay]

Returning to the original topic perhaps this quote from Mike Winter who is the Chair of the UK Bridges Board and (more particularly) the Head of Dorset Highways Management for Dorset County Council may prove helpful.  Perhaps he needs reminding..

UK Bridges Board introduction “The vast majority of the public give little thought to bridges as they travel around our transport network until, that is, one has to be closed or restricted due to maintenance works, damage, structural instability or even complete failure. Only then is our reliance on bridges appreciated. The nation’s bridge stock is an extremely valuable asset, the maintenance of which we must invest in if we are to avoid unplanned disruption to communities, industry and the travelling public. In these challenging economic times it is important that we get the greatest possible return on such investment and the UK Bridges Board can play its part in this through collaboration on developments and by sharing best practice.”

Mike Winter, Chair of UK Bridges Board and Head of Dorset Highways Management, Dorset County Council

 

More info at http://www.ukroadsliaisongroup.org/en/UKRLG-and-boards/uk-bridges-board/

[TravisM]

I said "thwarted" as assumed that the trackbed was still there and removing the bridge, having read some of the comments that have been posted, I thought it was the attention of the trust to extend the line to give a decent length to run.

 

Julian Sprott

[Ian J.]

That intro re bridges seems geared towards bridges actually in use. This bridge, unfortunately, isn't.

[bike2steam]

I said "thwarted" as assumed that the trackbed was still there and removing the bridge, having read some of the comments that have been posted, I thought it was the attention of the trust to extend the line to give a decent length to run.

 

Julian Sprott

With respect, I presume you've read all the posts ??