Ordsall Chord

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Someone on SSC has found a Salford City Council document giving the inquiry date as 23 April:

http://services.salford.gov.uk/solar_documents/6 report ordsall chord & salford central.docx

A good example of cross-website information dissemination.

 

[Rail Ranger]

The Public Inquiry into the Ordsall Chord has started this week and is taking place at the Malmaison Hotel in Manchester (near Piccadilly station). A friend of mine is giving evidence.

 

[snowball]

A good example of cross-website information dissemination.

A large proportion of the information I post on here, about subjects like Metrolink or the fourth platform at the airport station, is stuff I learned on SSC. I'm not the only one who does it. It also happens in the opposite direction sometimes.

The Public Inquiry into the Ordsall Chord has started this week and is taking place at the Malmaison Hotel in Manchester (near Piccadilly station). A friend of mine is giving evidence.

That's somewhat alarming if true - a secret public inquiry. Could be grounds for a legal challenge. The information does not appear to be anywhere else on the web. The NR site still says some time this spring.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

That's somewhat alarming if true - a secret public inquiry. Could be grounds for a legal challenge. The information does not appear to be anywhere else on the web. The NR site still says some time this spring.

Is it possible to find out exactly what is going on ?

 

[snowball]

Nothing on the MEN site. I suspect Rail Ranger or his friend mixed up the month.

 

[Rail Ranger]

Just to clarify, what happened at the Malmaison Hotel in Manchester this week was a pre-meeting for objectors to the scheme. These include English Heritage, the Friends of MOSI, the L & Y Society and the LNW Society (among many others). The Public Inquiry itself does start on 23rd April and is expected to last 16 days.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Just to clarify, what happened at the Malmaison Hotel in Manchester this week was a pre-meeting for objectors to the scheme. These include English Heritage, the Friends of MOSI, the L & Y Society and the LNW Society (among many others). The Public Inquiry itself does start on 23rd April and is expected to last 16 days.

My thanks are afforded to you for this posting of clarification.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Nice to see so many objectors... :/ I cant see it being ready for Dec 2016 to be honest...

 

[Darren R]

Why is the Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway Society objecting to the Ordsall Chord - or am I misunderstanding?

 

[YorkshireBear]

Why is the Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway Society objecting to the Ordsall Chord - or am I misunderstanding?

Lots of heritage associations are due to the impact on MOSI. In the grand scheme of things a little bit of track at a museum is not as important as something like this which will provide a positive step change in travel around Manchester and the surround regions. But i am trained to look at the big picture.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I remember making a recent posting somewhere else stating that the MOSI objection to the Ordsall Chord in its current line projection was being handled by someone with connections to the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Society.

This is the posting that I made on 22nd February.

 

[Darren R]

Lots of heritage associations are due to the impact on MOSI. In the grand scheme of things a little bit of track at a museum is not as important as something like this which will provide a positive step change in travel around Manchester and the surround regions. But i am trained to look at the big picture.

Obviously I am aware of the heritage implications and the potential impact on MOSI (and I fully agree with what you say about the bigger picture) but I am just a little surprised at the L&YR Society objecting. After all - the Ordsall Chord mainly impacts on the heritage of the L&NWR - to me that's 'foreign territory'!

 

[snowball]

Network Rail's page on the Ordsall Chord inquiry now has supporters' and objectors' "statements of case".

Followers of this thread know the date of the inquiry, which probably means the venue is known too, though NR has not yet put these details on its site.



--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



The inquiry now has its own website.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Network Rail's page on the Ordsall Chord inquiry now has supporters' and objectors' "statements of case".

The inquiry now has its own website.

I attended day one of the Public Enquiry yesterday, 23rd April at The Mechanics Institute, Princess Street, Manchester. Network Rail were represented by a QC and gave the first opening statement. This was then followed by the opposing view put forward by English Heritage who were represented by a barrister.

The MOSI objection is being handled by a senior and highly respected technical personage from Derby who belongs to the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Society.

I should imagine four days will still be required to hear all the statements that have been formally lodged with the enquiry.

 

[Muzer]

I'll be interested to hear what compromise is reached with MOSI. I assume there's no way of retaining the mainline connection (perhaps while still unfortunately shorting MOSI's line) with the new track layout?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Why is the Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway Society objecting to the Ordsall Chord - or am I misunderstanding?

They are using the undoubted expertise of some of their senior personages in their membership and aiding the MOSI in their objections. One of these people who is resident in Derby and greatly versed in certain matters will be representing the objections of the MOSI case at the public enquiry in Manchester.

 

[Nym]

There is a way to retain MOSI and have an untimately better layout, but it would need a flyover and a lot of the land to the West that has aparently been baught but is undeveloped.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There is a way to retain MOSI and have an untimately better layout, but it would need a flyover and a lot of the land to the West that has aparently been baught but is undeveloped.

Yesterday at the meeting, whispers were in circulation as to a possible deal, so let us see what has actually been said, rather than adding suppositions that may be well off target.

 

[Darren R]

The objection from MOSI concerns me somewhat, although I find myself a little conflicted on the matter. I understand the importance of the Heritage of the site, and whatever can be done to preserve that is to be applauded.

However, the Ordsall Curve is a vital transport infrastructure project - too important (in my view) to be derailed (sorry!) because of a mainline connection to a siding that sees little or no use. If money were no object an engineering solution could be found that keeps everyone happy. But funds are not unlimited, and in any case I'm not convinced that a solution to allow the connection to such a rarely used siding into a museum justifies any delay to the project nor any increase in the cost to the public purse.

How serious are MOSI in their objection? Do they have an alternative in mind? If so, is it a realistic and viable solution in terms of extra cost and delay to the project?

 

[TheKnightWho]

I'll be interested to hear what compromise is reached with MOSI. I assume there's no way of retaining the mainline connection (perhaps while still unfortunately shorting MOSI's line) with the new track layout?

I expect it'd be possible with a bit of track lowering and a connection slightly further along the line, but it wouldn't be cheap.

 

[YorkshireBear]

The objection from MOSI concerns me somewhat, although I find myself a little conflicted on the matter. I understand the importance of the Heritage of the site, and whatever can be done to preserve that is to be applauded.

However, the Ordsall Curve is a vital transport infrastructure project - too important (in my view) to be derailed (sorry!) because of a mainline connection to a siding that sees little or no use. If money were no object an engineering solution could be found that keeps everyone happy. But funds are not unlimited, and in any case I'm not convinced that a solution to allow the connection to such a rarely used siding into a museum justifies any delay to the project nor any increase in the cost to the public purse.

How serious are MOSI in their objection? Do they have an alternative in mind? If so, is it a realistic and viable solution in terms of extra cost and delay to the project?

This. Just because they want to run a bit of a train set does not mean a nationally important infrastructure project should be abandoned.

I have made me views on heritage clear before....

 

[Baggypants]

This. Just because they want to run a bit of a train set does not mean a nationally important infrastructure project should be abandoned.

I have made me views on heritage clear before....

I think it's a little more delicate than some pensioners wanting to run their kettles back and forth.

I think most of the objections will be centred about forever cutting off one of the first passenger stations that started the mainline railways in Britain and that remains in nearly original condition and building over a bridge constructed by George Stephenson.

Edit: having read the proposal, they're not against the chord, just against the proposed ridiculous big arch design and subsequent dismantling of various grade 1 listed buildings. Can't imagine why, After all demolishing the Euston Arch brought nothing but benefit.

 

[kevconnor]

One thing that does make me smile in this is the irony of some of the arguments against. Some of the nay sayers (not MOSI I hasten to add) oppose the current plans on the basis of the impact it will have aesthetically to Castlefield forgetting that when the victorians built the railway viaducts they just rode roughshod over the what was a the remnants of a roman fort and all in the name of progress. it is nice to be able to preserve these items where we can but there is no point turning the city into a museum.

 

[TheKnightWho]

One thing that does make me smile in this is the irony of some of the arguments against. Some of the nay sayers (not MOSI I hasten to add) oppose the current plans on the basis of the impact it will have aesthetically to Castlefield forgetting that when the victorians built the railway viaducts they just rode roughshod over the what was a the remnants of a roman fort and all in the name of progress. it is nice to be able to preserve these items where we can but there is no point turning the city into a museum.

It would be nice if they built it in the same style as the viaducts it connects to, though.

 

[SteveRainhill]

I think it's a little more delicate than some pensioners wanting to run their kettles back and forth.

I think most of the objections will be centred about forever cutting off one of the first passenger stations that started the mainline railways in Britain and that remains in nearly original condition and building over a bridge constructed by George Stephenson.

Edit: having read the proposal, they're not against the chord, just against the proposed ridiculous big arch design and subsequent dismantling of various grade 1 listed buildings. Can't imagine why, After all demolishing the Euston Arch brought nothing but benefit.

I don’t think you can have read the proposal very carefully, as there is no plan to dismantle any grade I listed buildings. Only two structures in the vicinity are grade I, Stephenson’s bridge and the Liverpool Road station (with associated warehouse), and the Chord avoids both of these. The bridge will in fact be improved by its restoration to its original condition, with stone parapets on both sides.

As for the ‘ridiculous big arch design’, English Heritage actually said in one of their early consultation responses:

we can find no suggestion in the Scoping Report that any consideration is being given to creating landmark new bridge structures of exceptional design quality to carry the proposed new line over the River Irwell and the Inner Ring Road. This might, it could be argued, provide some mitigation for the significant harm which will be caused to historic assets and to their settings by the construction of the Ordsall Chord.

(Scoping Opinion: Proposed Northern Hub: Ordsall Chord, March 2012, p. 47).

After NR followed this advice and produced a landmark design, EH’s position changed, but I think the original position was correct, and that the bold design is indeed a worthy addition to the collection of other bold railway structures in the area.

To my mind, while there certainly is a big impact from driving a two-track railway through a historic collection of structures, this has been very carefully assessed by the proposers, who point out (as kevconnor just did) that the builders of these structures did the same thing, radically altering their earlier interventions as well. Adding a metal extension to the Stephenson bridge, pretty much destroying the view of it from the north, would for instance no longer be countenanced – but that is what happened in 1860, which NR now proposes to reverse. The whole area is a complex of layers of infrastructure, each of which has impacted significantly on the previous one, but the net effect (seen in the exciting views of bridges you get from the Castlefield basin, for example) is a set of structures whose real historic importance lies in their recurrent layering. The Chord, by adding to this, actually remains true to the historic pattern.

The impact on MOSI shouldn’t be dismissed, but also shouldn’t be exaggerated. The steam train ride is an additional attraction to the museum but its value needs to be balanced against the value of the Chord. Main line access, their other objection, is hardly ever used, and isn’t preserved anyway by the alternative proposals.

I’m generally supportive of heritage concerns, but here the narrowness of EH’s remit stands out clearly in contrast to the broad scope of NR’s preparatory work.

 

[CalderRail]

I'm surprised they don't make more of the mainline access link, given that MOSI & NRM are part of the same organisation.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

May I offer my apologies, as having attended the first day of the public enquiry. I felt that I was not well enough to continue with the hoped-for daily attendances, so as such, I have not been able to make reports on what occurred from the second day onwards.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm surprised they don't make more of the mainline access link, given that MOSI & NRM are part of the same organisation.

Fair point, but as far as I'm aware it IS only used occasionally, so the loss shouldn't create much inconvenience. After all, road transport of railway vehicles happens a lot between places that ARE connected to the national network, and given the heritage of many of the vehicles held by both NRM and MMOSI, pathing rail movements of such artefacts would be a nightmare!

 

[34D]

Fair point, but as far as I'm aware it IS only used occasionally, so the loss shouldn't create much inconvenience. After all, road transport of railway vehicles happens a lot between places that ARE connected to the national network, and given the heritage of many of the vehicles held by both NRM and MMOSI, pathing rail movements of such artefacts would be a nightmare!

I believe the _only_ passenger trains over this connection were specials in 1981 and 2013.

 

[edwin_m]

It's a bit hard to see how MOSI could accept passenger specials, given that the original L&M platforms are at rail level and IIRC they only have a very short high platform for their shuttle trains. Despite their rather constrained site they are able to accept rail vehicles by road - I witnessed them loading a "Thomas" onto a low-loader in 2012.