Norton Bridge Flyover

[Astro Boy]

Hmmm. Option A will cut directly by my parents house - dramatically decreasing its value. Option C seems to be the one that avoids most residential property.

proposed routes

I drove past your old man's place t'other day. It needs a new railway line like a hole in the head!

Better to have your house devalued, than like my friends, demolished under Option B

Still what's £220 million pounds nowadays?

@shoes - i know! it's such a beautiful spot. the current track can be heard and seen but its far enough away not be distracting. as kids we used to go down there, cross the tracks (!), and mess about in the fields. quality fun!

if they do option a the whole 'living out in the sticks' vibe will be ruined!

@ norbert nodge - demolished?! thats not good at all. apparently all three plans will cost the same to impliment so hopefully they'll listen to the locals. hopefully.

if a house were to be demolished would they give the full property value, pay for the move and compenstate for the inconvenience?

 

[Astro Boy]

oh yeah - this is what we're talking about:

Norton Bridge Flyover

 

[Astro Boy]

We started the thread discussing Stafford Station Car park. It has now moved on to Doxey International via a tunnel that nobody knows about and Astro Boy concerned about the value of his parents house. ( code for inheritance ) Where else can you be so well informed!

Yeah, thats why im trying to start a new thread (perhaps not too successfully!)

I love this forum and the local info it provides. Am usually a spectator as I live in Manchester but have a few connections to the mighty 'ford. Case in point - this thread.

Although inheritance is a factor I'm more worried for.......... well, perhaps this isn't the place to post about personal family business.

 

[Astro Boy]

Article:

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.u...ottleneck/article-2873473-detail/article.html

 

[Astro Boy]

The flyover at NB isn't about doing Stafford out of a rail service. It is a major bottleneck on the West Coast so needs something doing with it.

The point I make is that the flyover is about speed

The disruption, the huge cost ( we all pay ) will not be a benifit to Stafford - Why on earth would you spend £300 million pounds speeding up the London service only to pull it up 4 miles down the track in Doxey approaches.. ( Stafford )

Yes, I've thought this too. Surely there would have to be major changes to the tracks immediately leading onto Stafford, the station itself and therefore the town.

Perhaps the Norton Bridge changes are the start of many that will probably take 50 years to complete.

 

[tek-monkey]

From what I can see the alternative would be to rip up the lines through stafford and recreate them in a way to allow the fast trains through. This would both destroy Staffords rail links for a long time and possibly impact on Castletown should we need more tracks?

 

[John Marwood]

Having three options is an old trick - it then ensures locals are set against each other rather than uniting to oppose the plans together

Is ten minutes worth £300 million quid?

( only if its with Vanessa Paradis a little voice in my head says.. )

 

[Astro Boy]

From what I can see the alternative would be to rip up the lines through stafford and recreate them in a way to allow the fast trains through. This would both destroy Staffords rail links for a long time and possibly impact on Castletown should we need more tracks?

Thats the problem with having an infrastructure that was built many many years ago - it's not really future proof. So many buildings so close to the tracks limits expansion. We're bursting at the seams already.

Bigger high speed trains require more room. We simply cannot accommodate without major upheaval. If it has to be done I hope they think about what would be required in another 100 years, if we're to keep pace with other nations in terms of development of infrastructure.

High Speed Trains Around the World

 

[Astro Boy]

Having three options is an old trick - it then ensures locals are set against each other rather than uniting to oppose the plans together

Indeed. I'm often sceptical about these things. I'd like to think that they'd listen but they'll probably go with option A - it's their first choice.

We are but little people stood in the way of progress. In fairness, if it's for the greater good then who am I to selfishly oppose a project that could benefit the country / economy / etc?

 

[John Marwood]

I am all for looking ahead - particularly when exiting The Sun Inn - but have we not just 'upgraded' this line? Im pretty sure this is so - so all that work on this stretch was another waste of money?

I think the - to be borrowed - money could be better spent, say on.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJrHSfDSm34

 

[Astro Boy]

Exactly! If only the long term were considered and all the changes made efficiently. But that would hurt profit margins......

 

[John Marwood]

Some inspiration for the Bridge Massive - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuQFZ-DD5xs&feature=related

Perhaps Tom Sharpe could be consulted

 

[Astro Boy]

Damn the work web filter - if only I could waste time on youtube too! Will check it laters............

 

[tek-monkey]

Did they upgrade Stafford when doing this work? I thought our stretch was missed out?

 

[John Marwood]

There was substantial work on the railway alongside the Marshes for certain - its ruddy noisier anall

 

[henryscat]

Having three options is an old trick - it then ensures locals are set against each other rather than uniting to oppose the plans together

Is ten minutes worth £300 million quid?

( only if its with Vanessa Paradis a little voice in my head says.. )

It isn't primarily about journey time saving, it is about having capacity for more trains per hour. Norton Bridge junction as it stands is a limiting factor because of conflicting movements. Building a flyover will enable more passenger and freight trains to run.

 

[henryscat]

Exactly! If only the long term were considered and all the changes made efficiently. But that would hurt profit margins......

Notwork Fail is a not-for-profit company and doesn't have shareholders to answer to...

 

[Astro Boy]

Notwork Fail is a not-for-profit company and doesn't have shareholders to answer to...

ok........

webpage

Network Rail is a “not for dividend” company and all our profits go straight back into improving the railway.

As a commercial business Network Rail will have a turnover. Any business with a turnover will aim to increase that turnover year on year. This also goes for making a profit so they can keep pace with inflation and rising prices. Banks wont touch a business if they cannot be seen to make the money.

 

[henryscat]

Notwork Fail is a not-for-profit company and doesn't have shareholders to answer to...

ok........

webpage

Network Rail is a “not for dividend” company and all our profits go straight back into improving the railway.

As a commercial business Network Rail will have a turnover. Any business with a turnover will aim to increase that turnover year on year. This also goes for making a profit so they can keep pace with inflation and rising prices. Banks wont touch a business if they cannot be seen to make the money.

Most not-for-profit companies are run on that basis, i.e. the dosh doesn't go to shareholders. As most of Network Rail's money comes from the Treasury, it really isn't a profit making outfit. That isn't to say they aren't a spectacularly idiotic organisation sometimes.

 

[zebidee]

Not for profit MEANS the profits go back to the service/company, else how else could a company running as such deal with any profits they might possibly make?