Chiltern Evergreen 3 project - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[TonyK]

Are you sure about that?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/feb/15/foodanddrink

You've got to move with the times...

https://www.gov.uk/legal-aid/what-youll-get

I think a distinction is drawn between instigating a case and defending yourself against one. A lot has changed since that Guardian article was written in 2005, with the specific aim of cutting the bill to the taxpayer. In any case, I haven't said anything defamatory. He might not have a firm grasp of the essentials of efficient public transport, but he knows his environmental law.

[stebbo]

Just been to Oxford and picked up the latest Oxford Times. Apparently some guy is going to take Network Rail to court over the bats in Wolvercote Tunnel and potential vibration issues.

I know these issues have been commented on before but as I read the report Network Rail are about to start work on the upgrade of the line. I notice some equipment in the form of diggers and piles of ballast or gravel appears to have arrived at the site of the new Kidlington station by the park and ride - unless this stuff is there for some other purpose. Mind you it may be the Oxford Times is wrong - there's another piece in this week's edition (which is nothing to do with railways) which is complete balderdash.

Somebody else has probably commented already by why are we allowing the bats (who presumably arrived after the tunnel was built) to hold things up? And surely vibration was an issue when the line was built - the houses round there aren't that modern. Seems similar to the tree problem along Port Meadow (see other thread).

[paul7575]

The current hold up is only tangentially to do with bats. 

The sole remaining objector is complaining about the procedure used to allow the project to take place, he seems to disagree with the decision making by DfT^» (Department for Transport - about), Chiltern, and Natural England to allow the project to be built whilst allowing for the presence of bats.

I don't think Network Rail are a party to the latest case either. 

Paul 

[stebbo]

Mind you, I understand the guy in question has been to the High Court over a planning matter before and he lost. He has "form".

[paul7575]

Have you come to this topic late Stebbo, all this is discussed on the previous page?

Paul

[stebbo]

Perhaps - I don't visit this site every day I'm afraid and I certainly don't carry i-phones or other paraphernalia that allow me to log-in 24/7 (even if I wanted to). And although the Oxford Times is published on Thursday, I only happened to buy it today. I know the bats etc is "old news" but I read this morning about the legal challenge.

[ChrisB]

Hopefully, you've read rhis thread now & have caught up?

Judicial review decision should be sometime in March to allow a start in early May. Still nowt about line closure length & alternatives for what could be anything up to 18 months.

[ChrisB]

http://m.buckinghamtoday.co.uk/news/business/track-clearance-work-starts-near-bicester-1-4841860

[paul7575]

I don't understand why the OBRAG chap is reportedly suggesting NR^» (Network Rail - home page) have no plans for the work, and is therefore supposedly 'complaining'.

Not making something publicly available doesn't mean it doesn't exist, by any stretch of the imagination. 

Paul

[ChrisB]

I'm sure it does exist, but they're playing safe.

Reference what Ian is also after is the RRS (is that in the abbreviation list - it should be - Rail Replacement Service).

Now this is going to be the same whether the closure is in 5 weeks or 15 weeks. He wants it released so that all the commuters can start planning their most effective route to work. So why not release it, even if only to the OBRAG committee?

The RRS will involve more than just replacement buses - likely to include trains via Bicester North & Banbury, as well as hopefully being allowed to join different service buses too. The line will be shut for at least 18 months (not just a week) and I also feel that for that length of disruption -

a) Pax are entitled to some notice as to their options - a couple of weeks or so is not enough time to set-up car-shares etc should all the alternatives on offer not be suitable, for example) - and if that option suits some, shouldn't they be able to get a refund on part-used seasons (without deductions!)

b) To negotiate for better options should only a RRS bus service be offered.

THis ought to be on offer from the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)....

[Electric train]

All the clearance work NR^» (Network Rail - home page) are doing will be classed as a maintenance activity as such will not prejudice the Judicial Review.  NR are quite rightly not publishing their program of works because the plaintive in the Judicial Review may use it the argument against the project.

[ChrisB]

BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) Radio Oxford had a piece this morning about Water Eaton Parkway & the likely traffic congestion.

BBC Oxford (@BBCOxford)
11/03/2013 05:53
There are concerns plans for a new railway station at Water Eaton will cause more delays and traffic problems around Kidlington.

Didn't catch it myself, but prob on the iplayer.

[paul7575]

If there are concerns they should be addressed at the TWA Order inquiry.

Ah but,  that's already happened I hear - so why don't Radio Oxford realise that?

Paul

[ChrisB]

Because its sweet-FA to do with the works within the rail envelope? :-)

[IndustryInsider]

Part of the TWA submission included details of proposed traffic control measures immediately surrounding the new railway station though, didn't it?  That would obviously affect traffic levels and aims to mitigate the increase in traffic heading to the site.