Welcome to Newburytoday.co.uk’s message boards where you can have your say and share your views on any number of issues.
Anyone can read messages, but only registered users can post messages, reply to messages or create new topics. As part of the free and simple registration, you will be asked to read and conform to the house rules.
To register, click here ……Enjoy the debate. Newbury Today Forum > Categories > Newbury News
|
|
Council admit election pledge is unworkable |
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 08:18 AM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317
|
QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jun 28 2011, 09:11 AM) 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. I could have told everyone that without it being in a manifesto pledge. It's why we haven't got one already. The level crossing is a blight on Thatcham (and Newbury) life though.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 08:41 AM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076
|
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jun 28 2011, 08:18 AM) I could have told everyone that without it being in a manifesto pledge. It's why we haven't got one already. The level crossing is a blight on Thatcham (and Newbury) life though. I just thought that to dismiss an idea, you at least need to know how much it would cost.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 08:56 AM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 1,863
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 41
|
QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jun 28 2011, 09:41 AM) I just thought that to dismiss an idea, you at least need to know how much it would cost. The problem is that it would cost the tax payer money to determin the cost of building the bridge when it is pretty much agreed that in the present climate there won't be that funds available anyway. What the lack of a solution to this traffic pinch point wont do is limit further possible house building in the surrounding area effectively compounding the problem.
--------------------
Bloggo
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 10:07 AM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317
|
QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jun 28 2011, 09:41 AM) I just thought that to dismiss an idea, you at least need to know how much it would cost. Even the simplest engineer would tell you the bridge alone would cost millions. Where would the money come to fund a bridge like that on a country road?
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 10:37 AM
|
Member
Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 29-September 09
Member No.: 372
|
I think it is agreed that with all the water courses, and the lie of the land, building a bridge would be prohibitively expensive.
The real problem is the length of time the level crossing barriers come down before a train passes, and after the train has passed. Traffic is stopped minutes before a train apprears, and if a train stops at the station, before or after passing the level crossing, the barriers remain down until the train is out of sight, and the result is that traffic can be stopped for up to 15 minutes.
In comparison, in Holland, there is a station in Hilversum, Hilversum Parkway, which looks quite similar to Thatcham, in that the station in adjacent to a fairly busy road, with slow and fast trains using the station, some stopping, some not stopping. What is remarkable to a Brit who is used to the way things work in Thatcham, is just how short a time the barriers need to be down for. In Hilversum, it is very rarely more than 30 seconds from the lights warning of an approaching train, to the barriers descending, the train passing, and the barriers ascending. While a train is stopped at the station (before or after passing the level crossing), traffic is allowed to cross the road.
If the rail companies could improve their huge inefficiencies relating to level crossings, there would be no need for a bridge at Thatcham station.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 11:56 AM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317
|
QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jun 28 2011, 12:52 PM) Unfortunately barriers will be down longer now the control is being removed from signal boxes to Didcot control. My point really is that it it was always known that nothing can really be done to improve the congestion, why did the Conservatives make such a big thing about it on the doorstep? Things can be done about the congestion; it just won't mean a bridge. As for why did they make such a big thing about it: you are in politics, I'm sure you know, hence this mischievous thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 03:41 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076
|
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jun 28 2011, 11:56 AM) Things can be done about the congestion; it just won't mean a bridge. As for why did they make such a big thing about it: you are in politics, I'm sure you know, hence this mischievous thread. The reason they did is was that it would be an amazing delivery if they pulled it off. By promising something you can't deliver, it is bound to bite you on the bum and now it has. I would love to watch the councillors in question go back to those doorsteps and telling residents that nothing can be done, and that has been the Conservative administrations position for years.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 04:41 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51
|
QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jun 28 2011, 04:41 PM) The reason they did is was that it would be an amazing delivery if they pulled it off. By promising something you can't deliver, it is bound to bite you on the bum and now it has. I would love to watch the councillors in question go back to those doorsteps and telling residents that nothing can be done, and that has been the Conservative administrations position for years. They looked & there is no solution , seems they have done exactly what they said they would. No-one ever said 'we will sort the problem out'. Classic electioneering. A bit like offering to look at sorting out the Robin Hood.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 05:03 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317
|
QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jun 28 2011, 04:41 PM) The reason they did is was that it would be an amazing delivery if they pulled it off. By promising something you can't deliver, it is bound to bite you on the bum and now it has. I would love to watch the councillors in question go back to those doorsteps and telling residents that nothing can be done, and that has been the Conservative administrations position for years. As if anyone really votes purely on what the manifesto says anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 05:05 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076
|
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Jun 28 2011, 04:41 PM) They looked & there is no solution , seems they have done exactly what they said they would. No-one ever said 'we will sort the problem out'. Classic electioneering. A bit like offering to look at sorting out the Robin Hood. The problem is, some people in South Thatcham are actually expecting the bridge to be built based on what they thought they were voting for!!! Even at the station, people say how great it will be once the bridge is built, and when you ask what bridge they say that the council are going to sort out the level crossing by building a bridge!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 05:13 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51
|
QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jun 28 2011, 06:05 PM) The problem is, some people in South Thatcham are actually expecting the bridge to be built based on what they thought they were voting for!!! Even at the station, people say how great it will be once the bridge is built, and when you ask what bridge they say that the council are going to sort out the level crossing by building a bridge!!! Based on what they thought they were voting for? More fool them then. In that case it is a **** good job Labour didn't win - their mainfesto was full of unrealisable dreams.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 05:31 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076
|
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Jun 28 2011, 05:13 PM) Based on what they thought they were voting for? More fool them then. In that case it is a **** good job Labour didn't win - their mainfesto was full of unrealisable dreams. Deflect, deflect, deflect!!! EDIT: Where's User???
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 28 2011, 06:49 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 4,025
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50
|
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Jun 28 2011, 06:13 PM) Based on what they thought they were voting for? More fool them then. In that case it is a **** good job Labour didn't win - their mainfesto was full of unrealisable dreams. Didn't Labour promise us a referendum on a Mayor for West Berkshire? They don't need any councillors to make this happen so why hasn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|
|