Council admit election pledge is unworkable Options

[Richard Garvie]

During the election campaign, residents in Thatcham were promised by the Conservative Party that the council would "look far and wide" to come up with a solution to fix congestion around Thatcham Station. They haven't looked that far as they still don't know how much it would cost, but they apparently know enough to say that it will never be resolved.

From the council:

"There is nothing that the Highway Authority can do to resolve this problem whilst there is a level crossing at this location. The only way that the problem could be resolved would be to build a bridge over the railway thus removing the need for the level crossing. However this would be extremely expensive and there is unfortunately no likelihood in the foreseeable future of the Council being able to fund such an expensive proposal. The cost of providing this structure at present is unknown. Given the vertical alignment at the level crossing it is likely that any such structure would also need to continuously span the Kennet and Avon Canal and the River Kennet, which would considerably add to the cost.

There is very little funding for transport schemes being provided from central government in the current economic climate but where it is this is only provided for projects of high strategic importance. It is highly unlikely that this location in Thatcham would ever be deemed to have significant strategic importance to the highway network even if central government funds were to become more widely available at some point in the future."

[spartacus]

The line was designed in the 1850's when speeds were very much slower - nothing much has changed in infrastructure terms.

As McEnroe might say........... You CANNOT be serious....!!

[Biker1]

As McEnroe might say........... You CANNOT be serious....!!

Yes, I had to laugh at that statement!!

Don't understand OTE's logic - if the trains went slower then surely the barriers would be down longer?

I'd like to see the reaction from the Kennet Valley commuters - "Sorry but the trains are going to go slower to help the people on the road at the crossing in Thatcham so we will be taking much longer to get you to London."

[dannyboy]

Yes, I had to laugh at that statement!!

Don't understand OTE's logic - if the trains went slower then surely the barriers would be down longer?

I'd like to see the reaction from the Kennet Valley commuters - "Sorry but the trains are going to go slower to help the people on the road at the crossing in Thatcham so we will be taking much longer to get you to London."

slower trains take less time to stop, so you can leave the barriers up longer.

[Biker1]

slower trains take less time to stop, so you can leave the barriers up longer.

You would have to re-signal the line so that they were closer to the crossing and more frequent. This would mean that ALL trains would be slower. It's nothing to do with "sensors" it's to do with braking distance. (Thatcham level crossing is controlled manually - not with sensors.)
The crossing barriers are kept down for the minimum time possible taking into consideration the speed and signalling of the line.

I find it unbelievable that we have a suggestion to make our railway slower just for the sake of a bridge, and yes there would be very loud remonstrations from passengers if it were to be even suggested by Network Rail.

The problem is that the road has become increasingly busy as Thatcham has grown. It is only a C - class road carrying A - road traffic.
When the railway was built the road was probably a dirt cart track.
Nothing has been done about a replacement for the level crossing (mainly because of the arguments as to who should pay for it), and the by-pass was built on the wrong side of Newbury.
Having said that people wait at level crossings all over the country. They are a fact of life.
Waiting times vary but on high speed lines all are as long as Thatcham and some are on "A" roads.

OTE, according to the NPS you are in a minority with the opinion of "dirty" and "clapped out"
Notwithstanding that I do not dispute that the quality of rail travel needs improvement but we seem to have settled for a profit - making private industry suffering from lack of investment.
The trains are getting older but they are not "clapped out".
As for cleanliness - blame the habits of some of those that use them.
FGW has a rigorous cleaning regime at its depots but it is a losing battle against dirt and graffiti often caused by those on late night trains.