Campaign for Tavistock reopening

[whole diary]

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the Western Daily Press:

Tavistock Viaduct Walk wall collapses


Tavistock Viaduct Walk wall collapsed on Monday

Part of a property boundary wall near to the start of the Tavistock Viaduct Walk collapsed on Monday, May 26.

Police and West Devon Borough Council^s Building Control Team went along to investigate and cordoned off the area with tape and signs.

The path has been closed from the viaduct to Bolt House Close until further notice.

People are being asked to stay away from this section for their own safety while survey work and repairs are carried out.

The 200 metres of pathway from Crease Lane to Bolt House Close remains open along with the Viaduct itself and the cycleway to the north towards Old Exeter Road.

West Devon Borough Council would like to thank residents for their patience.

[34104]

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Plans-Tavistock-Bere-Alston-train-line-goes/story-21348120-detail/story.html?ito=email_newsletter_plymouthherald#LjWePUKdTXf4jJT0.01

[Red Squirrel]

Coo - will there be direct trains from Barf Spar to Tavistock?

I know I shouldn't but: ^33M for 7 miles of railway equals under ^5M/mile - less than half the per-mile cost of the Borders Railway. Blimey, at that rate (even allowing ^50M to fix Meldon Viaduct) you could extend to Okehampton for less than ^130M...

[alexross42]

Consents would be sought in 2016/17, potentially allowing commencement of railway delivery in 2019/20

My God it's such a drawn out process - Get a move on already!

[ACE]

Can never understand how a double track formation, with plenty of room for a single track railway and a cycle way, can take so long to reopen. 2019??? Unbelievable Jeff No wonder not everyone takes proposed English re openings that seriously as it stands, and I for one, want this one to really happen

[Red Squirrel]

Yes, behind all this there is a hand so dead it makes Alma Cogan look positively spritely. Dare we speak its name?

[ellendune]

I know I shouldn't but: ^33M for 7 miles of railway equals under ^5M/mile - less than half the per-mile cost of the Borders Railway. Blimey, at that rate (even allowing ^50M to fix Meldon Viaduct) you could extend to Okehampton for less than ^130M...

I do not think that would be a fair to extraplote that cost to the rest of the route to Okehampton. The Tavistock section is probably one of the easiest sections.  For example it ignores the obstructions in Tavistock itself. 

You also need to ask what sort of railway would be reinstated a single track branch line or something more substantial? And would that include improvements to the route from Crediton to Okehampton?

[34104]

Yes, behind all this there is a hand so dead it makes Alma Cogan look positively spritely. Dare we speak its name?

Bet that's got the younger posters feverishly browsing wikipedia.

Who would the dead hand be BTW^▸ (by the way),i am rather ignorant in such matters.

[Red Squirrel]

I know I shouldn't but: ^33M for 7 miles of railway equals under ^5M/mile - less than half the per-mile cost of the Borders Railway. Blimey, at that rate (even allowing ^50M to fix Meldon Viaduct) you could extend to Okehampton for less than ^130M...

I do not think that would be a fair to extraplote that cost to the rest of the route to Okehampton. The Tavistock section is probably one of the easiest sections.  For example it ignores the obstructions in Tavistock itself. 

You also need to ask what sort of railway would be reinstated a single track branch line or something more substantial? And would that include improvements to the route from Crediton to Okehampton?

There are a couple of threads running along parallel lines here, and my comments here have more to do with this one: http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=3098.msg157089#msg157089

I accept that you can't extrapolate. In truth I'm just surprised at how cheap the Tavistock project is.

[alexross42]

Following yesterday's meeting, quite a detailed report can be found here: http://www.devon.gov.uk/loadtrimdocument?url=&filename=PTE^▸ (Passenger Transport Executive)/14/49.CMR&rn=14/WD321&dg=Public

[stuving]

Following yesterday's meeting, quite a detailed report can be found here:

And doesn't it strike you as odd that there is no mention in that document of the possibility, however remote, of the whole line via Okehampton and Tavistock being rebuilt?

 Note that they say there may not be room for a pedestrian and cycle trail on the formation:

• The provision of a pedestrian and cycle route will require significant additional
  engineering as it will mean that the rail infrastructure may not be able to be
  accommodated along the most appropriate alignment. Additional strengthening would
  be a particular requirement. These additional works will increase costs and reduce the
  viability and deliverability of the rail element of the project.
  

That kind of answers the question about whether it is single track, picking its way via the solidest ground.

[alexross42]

And doesn't it strike you as odd that there is no mention in that document of the possibility, however remote, of the whole line via Okehampton and Tavistock being rebuilt?

A footnote wouldn't have gone amiss and perhaps it may have been remarked about at some point during the meeting, but wasn't minuted. Although it would be an entirely separate project from this one, you have to wonder about considerations and groundwork that could be put in place now, to accommodate any possibility of it manifesting in the future.

I thought it interesting that some of the cases for opposing the railway were on the basis that they'd rather the section from Tavistock to Okehampton was reinstated.

[Andy]

The comment that it may not be possible to provide a pedestrian & cycle route alongside the railway is perhaps good news in the sense hat the entire formation would be available for upgrading to incorporate (a) passing loop(s) if the line is further extended towards Okehampton at a later date.

[grahame]

An interesting discussion with regard to mention of any possibility of going beyond Tavistock.

From our campaigning in a different part of the south west, we're very much aware of the ability of a bigger and wider, but longer term and less likely, project to dilute attention from the immediate objectives, and indeed to muddy the waters to a detrimental extent.   We had two such issues involved with the TransWilts, so I can talk here with at least a little experience.

The approach we've taken was to make the case very clearly and completely (operational and business) for the immediate scheme, but ensure that the operational case was compatible with the longer term project too.  Thus, the TransWilts case and service works well without a station at Royal Wootton Bassett, but the timing and pathing of the trains is such that an extra stop could be accommodated there, probably resulting in an arrival in / departure from Swindon a handful of minutes later / earlier.  At is current frequency, we know our service probably doesn't run often enough to tempt the people of RWB (I note that station code is available!) onto trains for the short trip into Swindon ... but we're a step in the right direction for them.

The second case concerns a potential operator of an open access service calling at TransWilts stations and going beyond. At times that was a more difficult circle to square, with a fear that running a local train would take away enough of the traffic and enough of the paths to make that other service unviable.  It's a difficult thing to prove one way or the other; we have plenty of evidence to suggest that an hourly service, alternating the local and Birmingham trains would / would have actually generated more traffic per train, and we've also plenty of practical experience now of the TransWilts 15x service meshing with diverted HST^▸ (High Speed Train) services up to and beyond the number of trains that would have been involved in the combined service.

Extrapolating our experience to what I read from Tavistock, I would hope that any works being done would not block a further extension of the line.  In other words that no new station building would be placed on the old trackbed just to the north of the new station, I would look at consideration of the future prospect of a second platform at Tavistock, and I would acknowledge in the work done that the case was mindful of other aspirations and doesn't block them.

We have our TransWilts service now.   RWB may happen at some point (delighted if it does), and I wouldn't rule out through services to Birmingham.  Current passengers / ridership / comments I've had back do indeed point to journeys to and from that city, and it's one of the destinations shown on the A to Z.

[34104]

Snippet from the Tavistock Times 21 August;

A scheme for 750 homes and a railway station on land adjacent to Callington Road Tavistock will be discussed by WDBC planners on 26th August.Bovis Homes plans have been recommended for conditional approval subject to a section 106 agreement being signed,which will see a financial contribution of more than ^13m towards the reinstatement of the railway.

Watch this space,as they say!