Great Western Coffee Shop

Rail plan: it could ruin Brunel's Bath

In the fanfare and spin surrounding the proposed electrification of the original Great Western Railway, I believe one important issue has been completely ignored ^ the impact both visually and structurally on the Brunel assets, particularly through Bath.

Brunel paid particular attention in landscaping the GWR to make it as attractive as possible to the public who treated the development with much suspicion. He intended the railway to be seen and enjoyed. And today it is pretty much as constructed.

In Bath we are lucky to have one of the best collections of Brunel architecture on the route. It brings many visitors to Bath from all over the country to photograph the steam engines that still traverse the line in the surroundings as created by Brunel.Would they continue to travel to see such sights in amphitheatres such as Sydney Gardens if overhead wires and gantries were installed?

I believe the installation of such infrastructure in Bath would be devastating, with such famous vistas as Sydney Gardens, the St James' Viaduct and Twerton Viaduct being irrevocably damaged ^ especially as the GWR cuts a swathe through the heart of the World Heritage Site.

No indication has been given that any other method of electrification has been considered, and when push comes to shove, the cheapest and quickest option will likely be taken.


In its 2006 report about the Great Western World Heritage Site, English Heritage states: "The GWR through the city of Bath is one of the most impressive and varied sections of urban railway landscape in the world" and it is. . . "the most complete surviving example of a major railway of this period".

Yet despite the announcement that Network Rail has identified 113 structures on the route, mainly bridges and tunnels, several of which were built by Brunel that will have to be demolished or altered because of the lack of headroom for overhead wires, English Heritage has not commented. How can this agency responsible for protecting our heritage remain silent on such proposals? Does this indicate it is likely to sanction the demolition of listed/unlisted Brunel assets?

To date I have been unable to uncover mention of any public consultation at all, whether with national or local amenity societies or residents. Nor has there been an announcement as to whether there will be any.

It is imperative that full and meaningful consultation is undertaken.

Is it coincidence that the Government has announced these proposals only a few months after deciding to review the Tentative List of World Heritage Sites with no guarantees that the GWR will remain on it? Is the Government listening to lobbying from departments such as Network Rail, rather than treating nominations on its own heritage merit?

The proposals are said to cut 12 minutes from the journey between Bath and Paddington which, at present takes one hour, 30 minutes. When the first HST 125s were introduced in 1976 the journey took one hour, 16 minutes. With allegedly faster trains and faster acceleration, the journey will be three minutes longer than 33 years ago. Hardly progress!

Electrification will simply displace the pollution source from the trains to the power stations. The substantial power supplies required will not be available from renewable sources.

Is this a price worth paying? I certainly don't think so and anyone who feels the same should write to Network Rail, English Heritage, The Victorian Society, SAVE and, perhaps, Gordon Brown before this damaging scheme is foisted on us.

Electrification will simply displace the pollution source from the trains to the power stations. The substantial power supplies required will not be available from renewable sources.

A good Engineer is also an Artist.

The obvious answer is some sort of glass/perspex wall.

It'll have to be impervious to spray cans/etching. If the scrotes can't trespass to graffiti then a nice smooth canvas will suit them fine!

My stock answer to these people is "How dare they insult Brunel's memory". Had he had 25Kv technology we'd have had at least 200 mph broad gauge trains sweeping through Bath.

Just for the sake of argument, what's to stop SouthWest Trains for example bidding for & winning the franchise at some future date and laying a 3rd rail power source to run their trains through Bath?

Just for the sake of argument, what's to stop SouthWest Trains for example bidding for & winning the franchise at some future date and laying a 3rd rail power source to run their trains through Bath?

Sorry if this is a particularly stupid or naive question, but why is there what appears to be a universal assumption that overhead power lines are going to be installed - has that been explicitly stated anywhere?

Just for the sake of argument, what's to stop SouthWest Trains for example bidding for & winning the franchise at some future date and laying a 3rd rail power source to run their trains through Bath?

It's still electrification of the route, but I fail to see how laying a third rail alongside the existing line could have much of an "impact both visually and structurally on the Brunel assets, particularly through Bath" - hence my question: why the assumption?

Your plug in the wall is 250v.  

It isn't actually - it's 240 - but it isn't that either because the EU says we must call it 230, even though it isn't !  ;D

The obvious answer is some sort of glass/perspex wall.

A new campaign has been launched to win international heritage status for the railway line through Bath. Government officials are compiling a fresh list of buildings and places to be put forward to UNESCO as potential World Heritage Sites. It will replace Britain^s previous Tentative List, which was drawn up in 1999 and which included key stretches of Brunel^s Great Western Railway. Work by the pressure group Bath Heritage Watchdog has ensured that the historic railway has joined nearly 40 other sites on a new long list drawn up by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

It is now keen for people in the city to press the case for the line^s inclusion ^ but it faces opposition from Network Rail, which is responsible for its upkeep.

Network Rail is calling for the public to choose their preferred type of ornate fencing to secure the railway boundary at Sydney Gardens at a public exhibition on 4 November.

This public exhibition follows on from the consultation held in February 2009, when ornate fencing was found to be the preferred option to secure the railway at Sydney Gardens.

The public will have the opportunity to choose from three fencing designs in the style of Victorian, Georgian and contemporary at the exhibition. The most popular design will be put forward to the council for final consent prior to work starting by Spring 2011.

Kristian Alexander, community relations manager for Network Rail said, ^The public and the council are supportive of Network Rail's work to help make the railway at Sydney Gardens safe. Around 99% of people consulted had agreed that we need to take actions to deter trespassers and vandals in the area, and majority of them had also agreed to back any planning application made to secure the railway.

^To maintain the character of the park while securing the area, we have also taken extra steps in creating three design options for the public to choose from. The chosen ornate fencing will have no impact on listed structures in the area and it will also come with gates for people to access during special events.^

The exhibitions will be held from 10am ^ 8pm at Mercure Francis Hotel (Queen Square, Bath) and public can use the opportunity to view the fencing options, ask any questions and share their comments and feedback.

Public who are unable to attend and would like a copy of the proposals displayed may contact Network Rail on 08457 114141 or email crwest@networkrail.co.uk

Notes to Editors:

In the last three years, there were more than 95 reported incidents of trespass ^ at least one incident had occurred every other week. Last year, nearly half of the incidents involved children or young people and in one occasion, a group of youths were spotted trespassing and placing an object on the track.

The low wall that separates the track and the garden has enabled trespassers and vandals to access the railway easily. There is also the issue of people sitting on the wall and dangling their feet over it, putting themselves at risk of being dragged under by oncoming high speed trains that travel at 40mph on average.

Despite previous efforts to stamp out railway crimes in the area, additional deterrence is considered vital and this decision is backed by the West Country Community Safety Partnership Group, Office of Rail Regulation and British Transport Police.

What will the stick-in-the-mud/NiMBY brigade say when (if) the leccy knitting goes up?

Park-goers rail against new fence blocking popular Bath view of trains

People have reacted angrily to a new safety fence which partially blocks off the view of trains travelling through a Bath beauty spot.

For more than 150 years residents and visitors alike have been able to stand in a section of Sydney Gardens next to the railway line and wave at the trains as they pass through.

However, because of safety concerns from the rail regulator, Network Rail has been forced to erect a temporary tall, wooden structure to fence off the line from the park.

Steve Parkes regularly travels from Bristol with his three children, aged between six and 11, to watch the trains in the park and said he was disappointed by the move.

He said: "I know you are always going to get trespassers on the railway, but the people who go there, most of them have got common sense.

"I just don't know why they would put up any kind of horrendous fencing. For us, it is all part of coming over to Bath. We all like trains but my little boy especially likes it. We are just going to have to find somewhere else."

Glen Batten has also expressed his concerns about the fence, saying: "It effectively blocks the view of the trains, and certainly messes up what has for generations been a classic location for railway photography.

"The reason, apparently, is to separate people from high speed trains, which actually don't travel at particularly high speed at this point. But just how many fatalities or injuries have taken place here? The fence would certainly not be a barrier to a determined suicide."

Councillor Nicholas Coombes (Lib Dem, Bathwick) said he was not convinced by the safety argument and said the fence's only saving grace was that it was a temporary measure.

The long-term plan is to be looked at in greater detail as part of the regeneration of Sydney Gardens, which is due to take place over the next few years.

He said: "This is just the start of the process; residents and park users will be involved, but it may take several years yet.

"We think that the current safety concerns, and also the risk posed by the high voltage power lines of electrification, can be overcome by a good design that reconciles the different needs.

"For example, secluded areas beside the track prone to inappropriate behaviour could be closed completely, while we would like a large, pleasant and safe viewing area to remain.

"While we have not been convinced of the need for this fence, Network Rail are entitled to put it up.

"The timber fence is less intrusive and cheaper for the public purse than earlier designs and will allow us to find a more acceptable and comprehensive solution in the future."

A spokesman for Network Rail said they had consulted local residents and found that most were in favour of some kind of safety measure to protect children and vulnerable people falling onto the track.

A statement from Bath and North East Somerset Council said more consultation was needed before permission was granted for a permanent fence.

Do Network Rail need the permission of the local authority to build a fence on their property? I thought as a 'statutory undertaking' they didn't need planning permission from LAs, rather the application is made to the Secretary of State for Transport.

As for The Royal Border Bridge (http://folkestonejack.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gb_02b.jpg), the OHLE structures are not really very noticable above the level of the stonework, but I really dislike it when they bolt the legs of OHLE masts to the outside of a bridge like that. Hopefully masts as discrete as those on the Royal Border Bridge can be used for things like the Maidenhead bridge but with the legs of the masts hidden within the walls.

Do Network Rail need the permission of the local authority to build a fence on their property? I thought as a 'statutory undertaking' they didn't need planning permission from LAs, rather the application is made to the Secretary of State for Transport.

A permanent fence could be erected if the ORR (HMRI) placed an improvement notice or Prohibition notice on Network Rail it would appear the the ORR are sitting on the fence on this one though as they know the level of public opinion so have just raised safety concerns with Network Rail.  School holidays and in particular the latter end of August (kids get board) have the highest levels of trespass and vandalism.