GWSR Broadway to Honeybourne redundant track bed

[reddragon]

News from the GWSR today

This section of the old line is owned by Railway Paths Limited (RPL), which is in effect a subsidiary of Sustrans the national cycling charity. This section of line was one of a number of such redundant railway lines which were transferred to RPL by the Department for Transport (DfT) some years ago, with the intent that they be turned into cycle routes.

We were contacted by RPL earlier this year, and at a subsequent meeting were told that RPL had decided that it had no wish to convert this redundant railway line into a cycleway and had resolved to dispose of it. It had decided that the obvious party to approach about this was GWSR and offer it.

There is apparently a clause in the transfer Agreement with the DfT to the effect that if RPL wants to dispose of any redundant railway line to a third party, it has to seek the prior consent of the DfT. RPL applied for permission to transfer this redundant railway line to GWSR and the application was refused.

The reason for the refusal is that it is now the policy of the DfT that heritage railways are unable to give a sufficiently strong covenant to secure the continuing maintenance of road bridges which cross these redundant lines, and therefore consideration will only be given to transferring ownership to a body such as a local authority which by definition has the necessary resources.

I will not post the rest until it goes fully public

 

[the sniper]

Heritage railways clearly don't have access to sufficient amounts of concrete...

 

[Cowley]

News from the GWSR today



I will not post the rest until it goes fully public

That looks on the surface a bit of a slap in the face for the railway and each railway shouldn’t be lumped in to one pot together as they’re all managed in very different ways.
There are a few that are seriously struggling at the moment though and there’s a distinct possibility that this will cause issues for the DfT at some point in the future, so from a tax payers view point it may be an understandable decision.
This last 18 months certainly hasn’t helped things.

 

[Journeyman]

Wouldn't a solution be for the local authority to acquire the trackbed, and lease it back to the railway? That's been done before, and seems to work perfectly.

 

[Cowley]

Wouldn't a solution be for the local authority to acquire the trackbed, and lease it back to the railway? That's been done before, and seems to work perfectly.

That would definitely seem like the best option if they’ve got the funds to do it.

 

[reddragon]

That looks on the surface a bit of a slap in the face for the railway and each railway shouldn’t be lumped in to one pot together as they’re all managed in very different ways.
There are a few that are seriously struggling at the moment though and there’s a distinct possibility that this will cause issues for the DfT at some point in the future, so from a tax payers view point it may be an understandable decision.
This last 18 months certainly hasn’t helped things.

There is £10m of immediate bridge works required, need I say more?

I assume that it will go via Local Authority ownership and then a track bed lease to the GWSR and finally track bed to GWSR, bridges to highways. Funding for urgent bridge repairs is 100% of the issue here.

The GWSR are apparently in talks. I can post the rest of the news once it hits the press. There is no embargo on the news release but still I prefer to wait until it's more out in the railway press before posting all of it.

 

[Cowley]

There is £10m of immediate bridge works required, need I say more?

I assume that it will go via Local Authority ownership and then a track bed lease to the GWSR and finally track bed to GWSR, bridges to highways. Funding for urgent bridge repairs is 100% of the issue here.

The GWSR are apparently in talks. I can post the rest of the news once it hits the press. There is no embargo on the news release but still I prefer to wait until it's more out in the railway press before posting all of it.

Yes that’s completely fair enough.
Is that £10m just on the Broadway to Honeybourne section alone? That’s a hell of a lot of money and I suppose some of that will have to be done anyway but some of it probably doesn’t if bridges are removed etc (not advocating that obviously)?

 

[reddragon]

Yes that’s completely fair enough.
Is that £10m just on the Broadway to Honeybourne section alone? That’s a hell of a lot of money and I suppose some of that will have to be done anyway but some of it probably doesn’t if bridges are removed etc (not advocating that obviously)?

That's just emergency repairs from what I understand, many are so bad that replacement is needed.

Toddington to Broadway were rail over bridges, so just general decay and light TLC until repaired for the extension. These up to Honeybourne are all road over rail bridges with HGVs and road salt. Zero maintenance done.

The GWSR could afford to raise funds to build the extension if these bridges were funded and owned elsewhere, but that extension only becomes commercially viable once Honeybourne to Stratford reopens and creates traffic and opportunities that do not currently exist.

 

[ABB125]

Wouldn't a solution be for the local authority to acquire the trackbed, and lease it back to the railway? That's been done before, and seems to work perfectly.

I believe that is being considered.

 

[reddragon]

I believe that is being considered.

Talks are clearly well advanced between all parties. Hopefully a positive outcome will happen for all sides.

 

[ABB125]

Talks are clearly well advanced between all parties. Hopefully a positive outcome will happen for all sides.

Indeed. I look forward to the days of direct trains from Holyhead* to Cheltenham Racecourse for the Gold Cup...

*because it's probably the easiest place for all the Irish fans to get to

 

[reddragon]

Indeed. I look forward to the days of direct trains from Holyhead* to Cheltenham Racecourse for the Gold Cup...

*because it's probably the easiest place for all the Irish fans to get to

Imagine Tyseley putting on a Snow Hill to Cheltenham Gold cup train?

 

[ABB125]

Imagine Tyseley putting on a Snow Hill to Cheltenham Gold cup train?

THat's a bit more realistic methinks...

Though of course it all depends on whether a solution can be found for the trackbed problem!

 

[paul1609]

This is nothing new there were similar objections to the Light Railway Transfer Order to the Kent & East Sussex Railway in the !960s with regard to the River Bridges and subsequent flooding risk if they collapsed. It was resolved by the Rother Drainage Board taking a charge on the railways assets to cover the cost of emergency clearance work. The charge is now held by the environment agency. One of the side effects of the transfer order is that the heritage railway has the status of a statutory authority for the railway between Tenterden and Bodiam.

 

[The exile]

There is £10m of immediate bridge works required, need I say more?

Which is possibly why RPL are suddenly keen to sell?

 

[trebor79]

Do RPL have sufficient finances to repair these bridges then? If not one wonder why the DfT transferred ownership to them in the first place, and are now citing that same reason to block transfer to the GWSR.

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

It would be good if they could extend onto Honeybourne and beyond one day.

 

[reddragon]

Do RPL have sufficient finances to repair these bridges then? If not one wonder why the DfT transferred ownership to them in the first place, and are now citing that same reason to block transfer to the GWSR.

I'd imagine that the response to Highways England wanting to infill bridges; the now more realistic proposals to reopen Stratford to Honeybourne and the fact that these bridges cannot be left much longer have resulted in RPLs decision.

 

[Neen Sollars]

Indeed. I look forward to the days of direct trains from Holyhead* to Cheltenham Racecourse for the Gold Cup...

*because it's probably the easiest place for all the Irish fans to get to

I have always thought that "Specials" from Holyhead to Cheltenham on all festival days would be a nice earner for the GWSR, but a great expense for the punter. Trouble is GWSR already run two trains per day and three on Gold Cup day for At the Races. You could likely just about stagger arrival times, but everyone wants to leave at the same time and it would be chaos with only two platforms and a single line. Stabling the visiting trains would also present problems, there are sidings at Honeybourne not sure how long and how many composite rakes they could stable, no run rounds?

 

[reddragon]

I have always thought that "Specials" from Holyhead to Cheltenham on all festival days would be a nice earner for the GWSR, but a great expense for the punter. Trouble is GWSR already run two trains per day and three on Gold Cup day for At the Races. You could likely just about stagger arrival times, but everyone wants to leave at the same time and it would be chaos with only two platforms and a single line. Stabling the visiting trains would also present problems, there are sidings at Honeybourne not sure how long and how many composite rakes they could stable, no run rounds?

An upgrade of the trackwork south of Racecourse station would allow 5 departures, one every 15 minutes. The longer distance ones would need to go first and the others terminate at Toddington, Maybe 1 elsewhere.

Whilst it's true everyone loves to see the last race, walk to the train a few yards away and be on the coach to their hotel within the hour, the reality the only other option (if you cannot afford a private helicopter) is several hours in traffic trying to get out worse the wear for drink. An hour wait for a train in the bar / catering versus 4 stuck in a jam is a no brainer.

 

[Journeyman]

Surely the biggest issue is the line's 25mph speed limit. It's quite a long journey from Cheltenham to Broadway as it is.

 

[Neen Sollars]

I'd imagine that the response to Highways England wanting to infill bridges; the now more realistic proposals to reopen Stratford to Honeybourne and the fact that these bridges cannot be left much longer have resulted in RPLs decision.

Nail on the head there I think. Clearly RPL/Sustrans have done little or nothing to both track bed and bridges such that the bridges are now dangerous. I would think the cheapest option is to demolish the over bridges and infill. Unsure as to whether the bridges are in Warwickshire or Worcesteshire, could be a combination, I cannot see either wanting the liability. I also believe that Warks. CC are not too enthusiastic about opening Stratford upon Avon to Honeybourne/Moreton in Marsh. If the local authorities did take on the wider liability and lease the track bed to the GWSR, I guess in the short term the GWSR could turn it into a cycle way to Broadway. It all looks a bridge too far to me with little attraction at Honeybourne.

Surely the biggest issue is the line's 25mph speed limit. It's quite a long journey from Cheltenham to Broadway as it is.

Yes, probably 45 mins minimum Honeybourne to Cheltenham?

 

[Brissle Girl]

Yes, probably 45 mins minimum Honeybourne to Cheltenham?

From what I recall of comments in previous years, that would simply increase the opportunity to maximise on train sales, which can be quite lucrative? Could be another bottle of champagne per passenger group?

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Nail on the head there I think. Clearly RPL/Sustrans have done little or nothing to both track bed and bridges such that the bridges are now dangerous.

RPL/Sustrans have continued to inspect the bridges during the period of RPL ownership. I would be very surprised if there were £10m of works required right now to keep the bridges safe.

Restoring them to (heritage) passenger railway standard is, of course, another matter entirely.

I would think the cheapest option is to demolish the over bridges and infill. Unsure as to whether the bridges are in Warwickshire or Worcesteshire, could be a combination

Some in Warwickshire, some in Worcestershire, some in Gloucestershire.

If the local authorities did take on the wider liability and lease the track bed to the GWSR, I guess in the short term the GWSR could turn it into a cycle way to Broadway.

The real need, and one I hope the GWSR will give some thought to, is for a cycleway to share the A44 bypass overbridge at Broadway. Beyond there cyclists can take to the lanes, but the A44 is horrid to cross. Local authority ownership could help to achieve this, though (I'm choosing my words carefully here...) there has been some degree of disquiet locally about the local authority's cycling policies.

 

[Falcon1200]

I hope a solution can be found and that one day the GWSR can extend to Honeybourne, however I cannot see any realistic prospect of Stratford/Cheltenham being rebuilt as a main line as part of the national network (requiring a lot more than just 're-opening' !); The line was built to give the GWR its own route between Birmingham and Gloucester in competition with the Midland, a need which disappeared the moment the railways were nationalised. Local traffic alone could not possibly justify the huge expense involved.

It all looks a bridge too far to me with little attraction at Honeybourne.

The attraction at Honeybourne would be a connection with the rest of the railway, for both stock and passenger transfer. But I agree it would make for a very long preserved line, with the expense that brings.

 

[ABB125]

But I agree it would make for a very long preserved line, with the expense that brings.

Especially as it would require a minimum of three trains in service (unless you want a very infrequent timetable), whereas currently the "off peak" timetable manages with two (usually one steam and the class 117 DMU, though this is often replaced by another steam or a diesel).

 

[AndyY1951]

And bring it into the Premier League of preserved railways, alongside the likes of the Severn Valley and North York Moors Railways...…………..

 

[Neen Sollars]

From what I recall of comments in previous years, that would simply increase the opportunity to maximise on train sales, which can be quite lucrative? Could be another bottle of champagne per passenger group?

Wow! They start in Dublin at 5.00 am catch the ferry arrive and depart Holyhead then have a final bottle of champagne between Honeybourne and Cheltenham, and then crawl into the racecourse?

And bring it into the Premier League of preserved railways, alongside the likes of the Severn Valley and North York Moors Railways...…………..

If only that were true. Going from Honeybourne to Cheltenham Racecourse premier league? Kidderminster to Bridgnorth, with the many attractions along the route. Pickering to Whitby, Hmmm

 

[Brissle Girl]

Wow! They start in Dublin at 5.00 am catch the ferry arrive and depart Holyhead then have a final bottle of champagne between Honeybourne and Cheltenham, and then crawl into the racecourse?

Well I wouldn't put anything past the Irish. (A Cheltenham restaurant owner once told me that they sell more bottles of champagne in Gold Cup week than in the whole of December.)

But more seriously, simply running the existing Gold Cup services from further afield (or having them split to distribute inbound traffic more efficiently) would be possible. And another option would be to link with GWR so that its GC traffic was split between existing Cheltenham services and Worcester ones, with through tickets to the racecourse via Honeybourne. Lots of possibilities - all would have challenges, but the honeypot of maximising GC week traffic is well worth pursuing.

 

[Brush 4]

Plus the other 7 fixtures. 8 in total during their season which runs from October to April. The perfect way to increase business during the low season.