The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
NetworkRail_New - News Releases - Local MP visits new Ingatestone underpass
Brentwood MP Eric Pickles was in Ingatestone on Friday 25 March to see the newly completed underpass, which allowed Network Rail to permanently close Ingatestone Hall footpath level crossing. The crossing was identified in 2011 as having inadequate sighting when trains approached. Working closely with Essex County Council, the decision was taken to close the public crossing immediately that same year and pedestrians used an alternative route crossing the railway. Different ways to make the crossing safer were investigated such as clearing overgrown hedgerow, lowering train speeds and diverting the footpath to a nearby under bridge. ...Work began soon after to build the £4.5m underpass underneath the railway tracks using a `box and jack' method sliding the underpass under the railway while trains were still running over the top to avoid disrupting services.
Brentwood MP Eric Pickles was in Ingatestone on Friday 25 March to see the newly completed underpass, which allowed Network Rail to permanently close Ingatestone Hall footpath level crossing.
The crossing was identified in 2011 as having inadequate sighting when trains approached. Working closely with Essex County Council, the decision was taken to close the public crossing immediately that same year and pedestrians used an alternative route crossing the railway.
Different ways to make the crossing safer were investigated such as clearing overgrown hedgerow, lowering train speeds and diverting the footpath to a nearby under bridge.
...Work began soon after to build the £4.5m underpass underneath the railway tracks using a `box and jack' method sliding the underpass under the railway while trains were still running over the top to avoid disrupting services.
So £4.5m in the end even. <shakes head> Without knowing the specifics, this sounds like the super-inflated costs known from the USA. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
when it was closed it was clear that nobody ever really understood what the problem was, cos the issue of sight lines was the least likely.
When I shot the pictures of the steam engine Oliver Cromwell a few years back, that was taken at a crossing about 4 miles further on which has far worse sightlines from the west side, yet afaik it's still open keep to the Fen Causeway
Hm. I checked and the crossing in question is here. There is a gentle S curve to the south-west, so I estimate a line of sight on (left-driving) trains from London of 600 m from the north-west side of the tracks, or 15 seconds at the line speed of 90 mph. To the north-east, there is another curve and I estimate a line of sight of 400 m from the south-east side of the tracks, that's 10 seconds. I also found this FoI request, and photos of the crossing are included on pages 26-30 of "Area Docs Part 2.pdf".
As for what exactly Network Rail sees as a problem, although I blame the Brentwood Gazette journalists for being lazy in reporting their communication in full, it is confusing. In its first longer letter (pages 12-13 in "Area Docs Part 2.pdf"), they refer to high train frequency, and "sighting" that is 27% of the required in one direction and 79% in the other, and say neither whistles (residential area) nor mini traffic lights (station area, more than two tracks) are a possible mitigation and trains would have to be slowed to 25 mph. In a letter on page 8 of "Area Docs Part 1.pdf", however, Network Rail says that one of the three tracks is a siding used by freight trains, which on occasion blocked the footpath, and pedestrians have been walking around the freight trains, thus extending the time they spent in the danger area. (The use of the track by long freight trains is vehemently denied by a protesting local.) However, in another letter on page 36 of "Area Docs Part 2.pdf", Network Rail says that the problem they see is the curvature of the line alone and not foliage or misuse of the crossing. It appears however that three tracks (as opposed to two or one) are a problem.
Even if Network Rail is right, they didn't explain themselves properly on the outset even to the local council (much less the locals) and when the local council denied their initial request for closure, they went one level higher to get it.
The fact that Network Rail waited two years (and further protests) until the actual decision to build the tunnel is also a scandal, though at least it contradicts the hypothesis that the whole affair was a corrupt deal to give an over-priced contract for unnecessary infrastructure to a contractor. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
As for the sightlines on expresses, hmm the absence of any reported incident on the crossing suggests it isn't anything like the problem Network Rail want to portray it as. But I think NR were probably over-reacting to the Enfield incident and got caught out closing a popular crossing without any plan to replace it. So all the justifications were done after the fact to cover their backsides. keep to the Fen Causeway
by gmoke - Nov 28
by gmoke - Nov 12 7 comments
by Oui - Nov 301 comment
by Oui - Nov 2837 comments
by Oui - Nov 278 comments
by Oui - Nov 2511 comments
by Oui - Nov 24
by Oui - Nov 221 comment
by Oui - Nov 22
by Oui - Nov 2119 comments
by Oui - Nov 1615 comments
by Oui - Nov 154 comments
by Oui - Nov 1319 comments
by Oui - Nov 1224 comments
by gmoke - Nov 127 comments
by Oui - Nov 1114 comments
by Oui - Nov 10
by Oui - Nov 928 comments
by Oui - Nov 8
by Oui - Nov 73 comments
by Oui - Nov 633 comments