Dawlish Avoiding Line - ongoing discussion, merged topic

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

Everyone seems to be forgetting that Rail has recently had a multi-billion ^ spent on it, including electrification projects. This spend is the roads equivalent - rail has had its share.

[chuffed]

Ah, but think how much has been chronically  under invested in rail at the expense of massive road building schemes over the last 20 years. I think that even with the projected spending on rail it makes little different to what has been a glaring lack of balance between road and rail.

[ChrisB]

really?

[Red Squirrel]

Ah, but think how much has been chronically  under invested in rail at the expense of massive road building schemes over the last 20 years. I think that even with the projected spending on rail it makes little different to what has been a glaring lack of balance between road and rail.

Shall we call that 50 years?

[DavidBrown]

Over 50 years, then yes - there was massive investment in the roads in the 60s and 70s whilst rail was in terminal decline. But over the past 20? Quite the opposite. There's been very, very few new roads with only a handful of mostly minor schemes in each county. Whilst rail hasn't had the infrastructure investment, there's definitely been massive progress in terms of electrification, rolling stock, service frequency, fares and the upkeep of stations.

The problem is that lots of people think that we only need one or the other. That is simply not the case. We need rail investment AND road investment. The A303/A30 dualling is of huge benefit to the south west, in the same way that investment in the mainline to Devon and Cornwall would be. And there's also the possibility that investing in roads can benefit the railways. More people will come on holiday here. Many of them will decide to have a day out by train to the nearest city, or preserved railway.

What makes me laugh are people who suggest that money should be invested in cycling facilities instead.
1 - NOBODY will go on holiday from London to the South West by bicycle. Thus ZERO benefit to our economy.
2 - Cyclists just don't use facilities provided for them anyway. No point buying them something they're not going to use.

[ChrisB]

That's the point I was making - Rail has had/is still getting ^billions in electrification/IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) & other stock etc...this road spend is their equivalent. No point in calling for even more rail....

[Red Squirrel]

Over 50 years, then yes - there was massive investment in the roads in the 60s and 70s whilst rail was in terminal decline. But over the past 20? Quite the opposite. There's been very, very few new roads with only a handful of mostly minor schemes in each county. Whilst rail hasn't had the infrastructure investment, there's definitely been massive progress in terms of electrification, rolling stock, service frequency, fares and the upkeep of stations.

The problem is that lots of people think that we only need one or the other. That is simply not the case. We need rail investment AND road investment. The A303/A30 dualling is of huge benefit to the south west, in the same way that investment in the mainline to Devon and Cornwall would be. And there's also the possibility that investing in roads can benefit the railways. More people will come on holiday here. Many of them will decide to have a day out by train to the nearest city, or preserved railway.

What makes me laugh are people who suggest that money should be invested in cycling facilities instead.
1 - NOBODY will go on holiday from London to the South West by bicycle. Thus ZERO benefit to our economy.
2 - Cyclists just don't use facilities provided for them anyway. No point buying them something they're not going to use.

Obviously rail is getting a lot of investment at the moment, but a huge portion of that is simply repaying the massive 'technology debt' - the cost of not keeping systems up to date over many decades. Electrification is fantastically good news, but it should have been done 40 or 50 years ago. And whilst clockwork signalling adds interest to the railway, it is absurd that such systems exist outside of museums.

During the last fifty years, or the last twenty come to that, I cannot think of any cases where trunk roads have been reduced in width just to save money, despite the known operating problems it would cause. We may not have built many roads in the last twenty years, but the roads have been maintained properly and enhanced. There is no technology debt here! So if investment seems skewed towards rail at the moment, that's simply because it needs to be if we're serious about having a modern railway.

As DavidBrown's anti-cyclist comments - I won't rise to his bait..!

[JayMac]

What makes me laugh are people who suggest that money should be invested in cycling facilities instead.

With precisely no one on this thread mentioning investment for cycling facilities.

That said, as you've shown you've an axe to grind raised the issue, if it's not an issue of having investment for one or the other, then why not road and rail and cycling?

Of course no one will cycle from London to the south west, but they may very well take bicycles with them. Plenty of roof racks with bikes on to be seen on the roads in the summer. So why not investment in cycling facilities for when they get there?

[TonyK]

That said, as you've shown you've an axe to grind raised the issue, if it's not an issue of having investment for one or the other, then why not road and rail and cycling?

Compare the cycle racks at Temple Meads now with a few years ago, you will see the growth in people cycling to the station. A few years ago, Bristol City Council fitted cycle racks on strategic corners around the city. They stood empty for months, if not a couple of years, but try and find space now.

[Trowres]

And there's also the possibility that investing in roads can benefit the railways. More people will come on holiday here

For me, its very remoteness is a great attraction of Cornwall. It still possesses some relatively unspoilt places and the sense of distance from the daily grind is uplifting.
Yes, I expect more people will come to the coastal car parks at the end of the dual carriageways. The tills will ring. Whether or not the underpaid inhabitants benefit after the second-home balance has shifted against their favour is moot.

But there are losses that GVA doesn't measure.

[JayMac]

If I lived in a flatter city I'd get out more on my bike. Although I have this past year used dedicated cycle facilities next to major roads to get to both Portishead and Chepstow. Avonmouth Bridge (M5) and Severn Bridge (M48). To think, during the widening of the former consideration was given to removing the footpath/cycleway. Glad that idea never took hold.

[Red Squirrel]

If I lived in a flatter city I'd get out more on my bike. Although I have this past year used dedicated cycle facilities next to major roads to get to both Portishead and Chepstow. Avonmouth Bridge (M5) and Severn Bridge (M48). To think, during the widening of the former consideration was given to removing the footpath/cycleway. Glad that idea never took hold.

If you're happy cycling over the M5 and M48 bridges BNM, particularly if you've done it against a headwind, then there aren't many hills in Bristol that'd beat you.

[JayMac]

Part cycling, part walking. 

Up slope, get off and push. On the flat, pedal. Down slope, wheeeeeee!!! 

[TonyK]

Not sure that I would make it the the Blaise end of Long Cross

[alexross42]

More bluster.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-31042325

David Cameron says Okehampton railway line is 'most resilient'

The prime minister has backed a new Okehampton railway route as the "most resilient" alternative to the vulnerable Dawlish line in Devon.

A line from Okehampton to Plymouth via Tavistock would go through parts of Dartmoor National Park and cost hundreds of millions of pounds.

David Cameron told BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) Spotlight the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) was "a wealthy country" that should be making long-term investments in rail.

The Dawlish line connects Plymouth and Cornwall to the rest of the UK.

The BBC discovered last year that Network Rail was looking at an additional inland alternative to the Dawlish line that was closed by storms in 2014.

'Spend some money'
Mr Cameron said the Okehampton line was "worth a long, hard look".

Asked if the Okehampton line was "top of the list" of alternatives to Dawlish, Mr Cameron replied: "That is the one people say could make the most resilient line.

"But we've obviously got to look at resilience, we've got to look at value for money, we've got to look at what is practical."



Mr Cameron said he was "not put off" by the cost of the scheme, which would serve as a back-up route in case of problems at Dawlish.

He said: "These things do cost money but if you want a resilient railway line, you have to spend some money."

Tudor Evans, Labour leader of Plymouth City Council, said he was "puzzled" by the prime minister's comments.

He said: "The region is working with the Department for Transport on assessing the south west plan for future-proofing the railway.

"If the Dawlish line went down, or if the cliffs collapsed, the prime minister is suggesting that traffic would need to be diverted via Okehampton - adding to the journey time to London and removing the railway from most of the passengers in the south of the county."