Portishead Station Site Decided

[caradoc]

Bear in mind that the Borders Railway was built down to the absolute minimum required to operate the planned service, to save money, with no capacity for any additional trains; Hence the planned cancellation of booked passenger trains to allow steam specials to run. I can also say that, while re-opening the line is a magnificent achievement, it is a rail operator's nightmare if even the slightest thing goes wrong. 

[Corbs]

If anyone is interested in the published information, there is data about the Winterstoke road flyover and the Ashton Avenue swing bridge on the TravelWest website.

I am curious about the rather exaggerated height of the new flyover on the Winterstoke Road. It is described as clearing the railway by 7.2m; does that imply future proofing against the possible overhead electrification of the branch?

Best wishes

Eric  

It has to clear the level crossing as well, so presumably they wanted to clear large lorries/low loaders with big items (the road leads to an industrial estate) and double deckers.

[Corbs]

The Borders Railway involved far more work and cost around £100M for every ten miles. It included a complete rebuild of the solum, several new stations, many new bridges, culverts and tunnel work. Port bury is heading for almost double that cost.

 

Is it because it is in England?

As Caradoc mentions above, the Borders railway is a bit like a very long siding. The signalling involved in the Portishead route is quite extensive. 

[Glorious NSE]

When the Shields Junction-Paisley Canal line re-opened in 1990 it was initially single track throughout allowing just an hourly service. Even at that level, there was a timetabled gap in the evening service to allow the Grangemouth-Hawkhead oil train to run. Not infrequently this train was late, resulting in not only the planned gap in the service but unplanned cancellations as well so that the freight could run. This is why sufficient capacity has to be provided from the outset.

I would also say that to be competitive in today's world any decent rail service to a major city has to be (at least) half-hourly.  

I agree, it needs to be done properly if it's to be done at all. And that will cost money. Bodging something up that works badly or not at all is not really a solution. This country has done that too many times over the years and then spent far more money fixing the issues than it'd have cost to do it right in the first place.

 

[phil-b259]

I agree, it needs to be done properly if it's to be done at all.

 

 

Good luck with convincing the UK Treasury of that.

 

Its quite simple, if the cost rises too much the reopening WILL get canned. The fact that ever single station / railway reopening has attracted way more users than all those complicated BCR assessments told us would use it counts for nothing in Whitehall. Hence all the talk of de-scoping the project on the basis that a sub optimal railway is better than no railway at all!

[The Stationmaster]

I agree, it needs to be done properly if it's to be done at all. And that will cost money. Bodging something up that works badly or not at all is not really a solution. This country has done that too many times over the years and then spent far more money fixing the issues than it'd have cost to do it right in the first place.

 

 

And it will cost more in the longer run if it has to be altered.  The Ebbw Vale reopening was built down to a  minimum with virtually no future proofing for increased frequency or any potential branch so by saving a few £millions when teh route was reopened for passenger traffic it will cost at least double what was saved if any additonal routes are added or frequency is stepped up.

[phil-b259]

And it will cost more in the longer run if it has to be altered.  The Ebbw Vale reopening was built down to a  minimum with virtually no future proofing for increased frequency or any potential branch so by saving a few £millions when teh route was reopened for passenger traffic it will cost at least double what was saved if any additonal routes are added or frequency is stepped up.

 

But at least the railway exists!

 

While I fully agree with the sentiment that the job should be done properly at the outset, it is blatantly obvious that such an approch is anathema to the Bureaucrats in Whitehall. As such the question is not "do you want a fully future prof railway or a bodge job" - it is a case of "Do you want a bodged railway or none at all" (with Whitehall favouring the latter)

[Southernman46]

Aye - that A303 Stonehenge Tunnel overspend is going to have be paid for somehow ................

[black and decker boy]

I believe we are now in a right wing government, where only vast profiteering companies with dodgy connections to the establishment will get contracts.

 

By dodgy connections - I mean handshakes.

No.

 

The reality is that there are only a small number of civil engineering contractors big enough to build these high value projects. The cash flow and ability to fund is onerous (cash flow is often negative and margins are miserly in construction, typically 1% nett) and if you add in any bonds or financial guarantees, it rules out many companies.

 

Most major construction schemes use a form of contract where you only recover actual invoices costs plus your fee % and up to the agreed final sum. None of the major civil engineering contractors are making a killing (housebuolding on the other hand generates upwards on 10% margin in the good years).

 

So nothing to do with brown envelopes, more to do with commercial reality.

[Captain Kernow]

Its quite simple, if the cost rises too much the reopening WILL get canned. The fact that ever single station / railway reopening has attracted way more users than all those complicated BCR assessments told us would use it counts for nothing in Whitehall. Hence all the talk of de-scoping the project on the basis that a sub optimal railway is better than no railway at all!

It was a bit like that when the Penryn loop on the Falmouth branch opened and the service went to every half an hour for most of the day. To begin with, the business case would only support the use of a single 153 unit on each service, and there was much concern expressed locally, but I always felt, as did the local FGW management, that all we had to do was give it time, and the financial case for a 150 or more would present itself, and this is exactly what happened.

[pwilson]

How much freight traffic goes down the line daily? i thought the coal traffic was finished.

 

On the most recent rail tour down there, the coal stock piles were gone but I have seen a coal train travelling down to Portbury earlier this month and there are coal wagons in the sidings.

 

It's sad times for Portishead as one of the largest towns without a rail link. The traffic situation there is terrible and it would be great to get a simple link up and and running.

[jjb1970]

No.

 

The reality is that there are only a small number of civil engineering contractors big enough to build these high value projects. The cash flow and ability to fund is onerous (cash flow is often negative and margins are miserly in construction, typically 1% nett) and if you add in any bonds or financial guarantees, it rules out many companies.

 

Most major construction schemes use a form of contract where you only recover actual invoices costs plus your fee % and up to the agreed final sum. None of the major civil engineering contractors are making a killing (housebuolding on the other hand generates upwards on 10% margin in the good years).

 

So nothing to do with brown envelopes, more to do with commercial reality.

 

Quite so, but it is simpler and more gratifying to imagine that it is all part of some corrupt right wing conspiracy involving brown envelopes and handshakes at the gentlemans club over port and cigars.

 

On consultancies and government contracts, one of the problems is that in many cases the government lacks the basic technical capability to properly understand either what they need or what they want. Add to that multiple layers of control because they're convinced that the sole object of their contractors is to rip the government off and it's easy to see why the government is seen as the client from hell by many companies but also why their work is worth so much that in many industries you'd be mad to opt out. I've sat in meetings with government departments where I'm sure I wasn't the only one thinking "if you don't know what you want then how the ***** is anybody else meant to know?".

[Fat Controller]

How much freight traffic goes down the line daily? i thought the coal traffic was finished.

 

On the most recent rail tour down there, the coal stock piles were gone but I have seen a coal train travelling down to Portbury earlier this month and there are coal wagons in the sidings.

 

It's sad times for Portishead as one of the largest towns without a rail link. The traffic situation there is terrible and it would be great to get a simple link up and and running.

There are still daily trains of cars and light vehicles both too and from the port.

[royaloak]

How much freight traffic goes down the line daily? i thought the coal traffic was finished.

 

On the most recent rail tour down there, the coal stock piles were gone but I have seen a coal train travelling down to Portbury earlier this month and there are coal wagons in the sidings.

 

It's sad times for Portishead as one of the largest towns without a rail link. The traffic situation there is terrible and it would be great to get a simple link up and and running.

Maybe Bristol Council will extend their proposed underground network out there! 

[96701]

From Network Rail's internal intranet site.

 

Network Rail is providing support to four West of England councils that are working together to upgrade the local rail network around Bristol and Bath, a city region with a population of more than 1.1 million residents.
The MetroWest Phase 1 project, being delivered by the Western System Operator and Infrastructure Projects (IP) teams, will deliver new services to Portishead and Pill, and increase frequencies on the Severn Beach and Bath lines.
Reopening the closed line to Portishead requires development consent from the Secretary of State through a Development Consent Order (DCO), which is being promoted by North Somerset Council (the client for Phase 1) with Network Rail’s technical support.

Disused railway

Reopening the Pill to Portishead branch line is a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) because legally it entails a new railway line that is more than 2km in length and outside Network Rail’s existing operational railway network. 
North Somerset Council purchased the disused railway from the British Rail Residuary Board after privatisation and as a result the line no longer benefited from permitted development rights. All NSIPs are required by the 2008 Planning Act to use the DCO process for powers to build and operate the scheme. 
The DCO process is overseen by the Planning Inspectorate. Independent planning inspectors are appointed for the examination in public, who then report their recommendations to the Secretary of State.
The stage 2 consultation for the Portishead branch line commenced on Monday 23 October and will run until Monday 4 December.
The Portishead branch line includes new stations at Portishead and Pill, with an initial hourly to Bristol Temple Meads, stopping at Parson Street and Bedminster stations.

Branching out

The line to Portishead will also require work to the existing Portbury freight line between Parson Street and Pill, which passes through a number of environmentally sensitive areas including the Avon Gorge Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), and a number of local wildlife sites.
Within the Gorge rare whitebeam trees are a designated feature of the SAC and some are found nowhere else in the world. One species, the Avon whitebeam – Sorbus avonensis, has a total world population of fewer than 50. Where retention of these rare trees is not possible North Somerset Council is proposing to undertake mitigation including the planting of new trees. 
Following the collection of seeds in 2016 and 2017, with consent from Natural England, new trees are being grown at Paignton Zoo and will be planted at agreed sites within the gorge.
The new trees will be checked and monitored to ensure their successful establishment.

Edited November 10, 2017 by 96701

[burgundy]

Not a good week for Bristol's transport plans.

The application for a central government contribution to the Portishead branch reopening has been refused, leaving a significant funding gap - although the local councils remain bullish about making It happen.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/heads-should-roll-residents-furious-1584917

 

At the same time, the long awaited guided busway project opening has been postponed again

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/metrobus-confirm-further-delays-south-1572004

 

Fortunately, there are still people with a sense of humour and so we have the suggestion of a rail link between Bristol Airport and Taunton. Given that Bristol Airport stands on the top of a hill, with steep slopes on three sides, it will be interesting to see how this might work. The approach from the south west is possibly even steeper than the approach from Bristol itself. And it is not clear why a rail link from the south west is so important, when almost certainly the majority of traffic comes from the other direction (Bristol claims to be Wales' busiest airport) 

http://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/news/16229528.Taunton_could_get_direct_rail_link_to_Bristol_Airport/

 

Best wishes 

Eric 

[locoholic]

Not a good week for Bristol's transport plans.

The application for a central government contribution to the Portishead branch reopening has been refused, leaving a significant funding gap - although the local councils remain bullish about making It happen.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/heads-should-roll-residents-furious-1584917

 

 

So only a few months after the Transport Minister announced that the government wanted to reopen some of the lines closed by Beeching, one of the easiest of those projects has been refused funding?! No wonder people hold politicians in such contempt.

 

England is becoming rather a depressing place to live for anyone interested in transport away from the route of HS2.

[Great Western]

How much freight traffic goes down the line daily? i thought the coal traffic was finished.

On the most recent rail tour down there, the coal stock piles were gone but I have seen a coal train travelling down to Portbury earlier this month and there are coal wagons in the sidings.

It's sad times for Portishead as one of the largest towns without a rail link. The traffic situation there is terrible and it would be great to get a simple link up and and running.

Not a single train has used the branch since before the recontrol to TVSC, and probably a month before that !

There are still daily trains of cars and light vehicles both too and from the port.

The Portbury to Mossend hasn't run for months sadly.

[Christopher125]

So only a few months after the Transport Minister announced that the government wanted to reopen some of the lines closed by Beeching, one of the easiest of those projects has been refused funding?!

 

Apparently it's not quite that simple, according to the Portishead Railway Group - this was one of the ways they are attempting to plug the funding gap that's recently emerged, though one that was always unlikely to pay off:

 

"On Thursday it was announced that MetroWest (i.e. all four local councils) has failed in its bid for funding from the Large Local Major Transport Schemes fund. The DfT’s Large Local Major Transport Schemes fund guidance explicitly states “....There is a presumption against funding rail schemes ....". So it was a long shot, but NSC/MetroWest felt it was worth trying. In fact all the fund went to 3 major road schemes, none to any rail schemes.

 

This doesn’t mean the project is dead, just that particular source of funds is not available - as the fund’s guidance said. One of the reasons for that rule is that there are other sources of funds available for rail schemes, which NSC/MetroWest will have to utilise instead."

Edited May 20, 2018 by Christopher125

[MarkC]

Can't say that I'll shed any tears over the canning of any (mis)guided busways, tbh...