Ufton rail crossing, Moaning for the sake of moaning? Options

[Darren]

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/2012/anger-o...at-ufton-nervet

OK a bridge will cost more but surely it's safer than a level crossing and when trains are coming, no delays??

Me thinks the councillor is just moaning so they can hear their own voice.

[Richard Garvie]

I think a bridge is an excellent idea. Would much rather have a bridge that a crossing.

[Adrian Hollister]

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/2012/anger-o...at-ufton-nervet

OK a bridge will cost more but surely it's safer than a level crossing and when trains are coming, no delays??

Me thinks the councillor is just moaning so they can hear their own voice.

It's a good idea, but one that will impact the local area (visual etc) and delay getting something done (funding/building could take a while). On the whole though it seems like a good idea. Well done rail track.

[spartacus]

OK a bridge will cost more but surely it's safer than a level crossing and when trains are coming, no delays??

'Safer'? In what respect? People that are so desperate that they consider standing in front of a train to take their own life are going to be incapable of jumping off a bridge? Things can get dropped from bridges... Things can be suspended from undersides of bridges to hit passing trains... Expensive gold-plated, diamond encrusted hammer to crack a nut comes to mind..
EDIT: Make that solid gold rather than gold-plate.

It's a good idea, but one that will impact the local area (visual etc) and delay getting something done (funding/building could take a while). On the whole though it seems like a good idea. Well done rail track.

It's all Pie in the sky rubbish anyway and hasn't got a chance of coming to anything physical other than an expensive glossy report prepared by design consultants... 'Artist impression' is where this particular journey will end and hit the buffers.

How many million would you estimate a bridge would cost? On a road that I wouldn't be surprised to hear takes less than 100 cars a day on some days... Compulsory purchase of adjacent viable farmland to make up the embankment and supporting approach road/ramp too, just to bump the price further.

It's a non-starter and Network Rail know it... Nonsense.

[Darren]

Apply the same logic to a motorway. Why build footbridges over when you could just put a crossing point.

Separation of traffic.

Of course they could just close the crossing and leave it at that but then that would give the good councillor something else to bleat about.

[spartacus]

Network Rail route managing director Patrick Hallgate said that the imminent electrification of the Great Western main line had provided the rail company with a “once-in-a generation” opportunity to replace the crossing with a bridge.

“It’s true that installing a full-barrier crossing would enhance safety and be less expensive to install than a road bridge – however, while there is still a crossing, a level of risk remains and that is why Network Rail’s preferred option is to replace the crossing with a bridge.

“To make this happen, we will need the support of landowners, the local authority and local people.

A 'level of risk' will always be there while one form of transport crosses over another one. A bridge just changes the dynamics and introduces a different set of risks. (see my post above)


As for "To make this happen, we will need the support of landowners, the local authority and local people" what they mean is they require our money...


Is Swampy still around? Say NO to the Ufton Nervet level crossing By-Pass....

[spartacus]

Apply the same logic to a motorway. Why build footbridges over when you could just put a crossing point.

Separation of traffic.

Doesn't always work though does it. We build underpasses for pedestrians to separate them from traffic but some people would prefer to hop over guardrails and dodge the traffic than run the 'risk' of meeting someone coming the other way in a tunnel. So we spend £40k a time on signal controlled crossings so people can still dodge between traffic but have coloured lights to look at while they do so.

[x2lls]

'Safer'? In what respect? People that are so desperate that they consider standing in front of a train to take their own life are going to be incapable of jumping off a bridge? Things can get dropped from bridges... Things can be suspended from undersides of bridges to hit passing trains... Expensive gold-plated, diamond encrusted hammer to crack a nut comes to mind..
EDIT: Make that solid gold rather than gold-plate.


It's all Pie in the sky rubbish anyway and hasn't got a chance of coming to anything physical other than an expensive glossy report prepared by design consultants... 'Artist impression' is where this particular journey will end and hit the buffers.

How many million would you estimate a bridge would cost? On a road that I wouldn't be surprised to hear takes less than 100 cars a day on some days... Compulsory purchase of adjacent viable farmland to make up the embankment and supporting approach road/ramp too, just to bump the price further.

It's a non-starter and Network Rail know it... Nonsense.

[spartacus]

Speechless?

[Biker1]

You just can't please some people can you?
I thought this was the answer to all the "Ufton Nervet"campaigner's issues?
P.S. You cannot compare a level crossing with a road crossing.
For a start road traffic isn't signalled.
And it doesn't take half a mile to come to a stop!

[motormad]

Doesn't always work though does it. We build underpasses for pedestrians to separate them from traffic but some people would prefer to hop over guardrails and dodge the traffic than run the 'risk' of meeting someone coming the other way in a tunnel. So we spend £40k a time on signal controlled crossings so people can still dodge between traffic but have coloured lights to look at while they do so.

And from what I tell 6 of the 7 deaths were suicide anyway.
Of course, always high profile. Can't ever just die in peace at home in a comfy arm chair.
They always need to ruin everyone elses day. How selfish.


Top tips for train etiquette.







I think they should just put CCTV and a full barrier and then build the bridge at Thatcham instead... Which gets infinitely more traffic but less deaths... oh wait because it has more CCTV and full length barriers in both directions! Rather than just one direction. See what I did there?

[blackdog]

I think they should just put CCTV and a full barrier and then build the bridge at Thatcham instead... Which gets infinitely more traffic but fewer deaths... oh wait because it has more CCTV and full length barriers in both directions! Rather than just one direction.

Seems a sensible solution to me. Though a bridge at Thatcham is much more problematic and hence much more expensive.

[Richard Garvie]

Seems a sensible solution to me. Though a bridge at Thatcham is much more problematic and hence much more expensive.

How do you know this? Have you got the cost estimates for both?

[Penelope]

How do you know this? Have you got the cost estimates for both?

For a start you would need to demolish all of the small business units in the way first, then there's the fact you would need to bridge both the river and the railway at one sweep. Not cheap.

[JeffG]

Might be cheaper to make it single track and sign it buses and taxis only...

[Richard Garvie]

For a start you would need to demolish all of the small business units in the way first, then there's the fact you would need to bridge both the river and the railway at one sweep. Not cheap.

The bridge at Ufton will need to span both the railway and the canal too. I take your point about the small business units, but there are ways around that. I'd love to see a cost analysis for both projects.

[spartacus]

How do you know this? Have you got the cost estimates for both?

You don't have to be blessed with too much grey matter to work that one out and you don't need to have a figure other than "That is going to be much more of a problem and therefore much more expensive than THAT one".

Within a 100m radius of Thatcham level crossing you have the post office depot, The Swan pub, the Rivermead business units, Crown Yard industrial units, the river, the canal, the football club, the station car parks, a large electricity sub-station and Pipers Lane industrial estate. Not forgetting the 1000s of cars that use the road on a daily basis. An enormous amount of disruption and potentially some building demolition to make way for the embankment work in this bridge fantasy.

At Ufton Nervet you have Tree World... oh, and two cars and a cyclist every 3 hours..

But of course you're going to say that the Thatcham bridge would be built elsewhere...? but then you'd have to build/improve a connecting road network.

Academic anyway as the coffers are bare.

[Penelope]

The bridge at Ufton will need to span both the railway and the canal too. I take your point about the small business units, but there are ways around that. I'd love to see a cost analysis for both projects.

What ways?

[spartacus]

The bridge at Ufton will need to span both the railway and the canal too.

Why?
The canal and river are approx 200m from the crossing.

[Penelope]

It's a completely different kettle of fish, nothing like thatcham.