GWSR Broadway Developments

Here are some shots of the building without the scaffolding, platform side.







In this last picture you can see the sunlight reflected on the arched ridge purlins. That is what the canopy fight was all about. The glass is a special greenish hue, which we were told by the supplier is as it used to be. The platform will be surfaced in recycled 3'x2' slabs, much better and original than the tarmac that was initially planned.

 

The canopy we were told that no-one would see because no-one looks up......................

Looking simply fantastic! Congratulations to all involved.

Andy

 

It gives a beautifully diffused effect to the evening light, and the eye is naturally drawn up towards it. If those corbels and purlins weren't there just think how dreary, stale, flat and unprofitable it would all look now.
You guys fought and won, and now all of us thank you for it.

 

Great, great job!time to put doors and windows quickly!

 

May I add my congratulations on what looks a really superb building. Well done for fighting and winning with the canopy. Only about five months now until the first public trains and although there will be a few outstanding tasks to tackle, it looks like passengers will be greeted by a really top notch station. Roll on March!

 

Hear Hear! Time is ticking and much remains to be done. However, what's been done so far (and some of it done against sloppy thinking) has been nothing less than superb. My small share purchase in this project was clearly not wasted!

 

Hard to believe now that the person or persons unknown who managed this project originally intended a solid curtain wall up to the apex and a sea of closely spaced horizontal square section girders poking through it.

I hope they look on this picture and hang their head in shame.

Broadway is now born again as a station with the scaffolding removed. It is the only place in the country where time is being reversed because now she looks as she might have done just after closure in the Sixties, sans doors, sans platform, but in the next five months that will change to a picture of how she would have looked in the Fifties. Perfick!

 

Fifties? Twenties, pu-LEASE! That's pristine GWR!
Mores to the point, does anyone know the identities of the individuals who originally masterplanned Broadway as a branch of B&Q?
It might be a good idea if they were never to be allowed anywhere remotely near a heritage project again.

 

After a decidedly iffy start (design wise), Broadway will make a fine flagship station for the G-WR. Much credit is due to all who held out against the pretty damned appalling initial design, but let's not forget to give some credit to those in the upper echelons who had the guts to hold their hands up to errors and permit the vastly improved structure we're looking at right now.

The example of Broadway has become much more than simply the tale of a dodged bullet. Instead of a downright horror story on 'how not to do it', the pitfalls are now laid bare and as a result, the wider heritage movement now has most of the working template on how future projects of this nature can be successfully realised. Dunno about you folks, but I'd call that a win!

 

We are not allowed by Nat Pres rules to identify the person in charge of this rather special project.

However if you look at this Management list from GWSR's own website you can draw your own conclusion.
https://www.gwsr.com/supporting_the_railway/management_and_documentation/the_management_team.html

 

Some of the people who may have been involved, however misguided, have done a huge amount of good work on the railway. I'm not usually one to decry armchair enthusiasts for having opinions, but in this case I don't think some people appreciate what commitment they may have given, all for free for the benefit of the railway. So maybe less of a lynch mob please? The issue has, after all, been largely resolved.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

Erm no! I suggest you reread this thread from the start. The upper echelons as you call them, in fact one person, only caved in on the matter of the canopy after a bitter fight that had cut through to the Railway press and tarnished what up to that point had been a highly respected project and caused the resignation of its dedicated leader. He only caved in to popular opinion after it was pointed out that it might be considered that a false prospectus might have been issued to raise money if the central promise to make a close facsimile of the original was broken.

That promise has now been kept, not thanks to him, but in spite of him. The kudos goes to the BAG Team alone.

The lesson to be learned here is that powerful members of a Management Team who then also take on Management of a very expensive Special Project need to be held accountable otherwise it can be very difficult for the rank and file to keep them in check.

The lesson here, as it often is on Grand Designs , is get a professional Project Manager.

Otherwise you find your footbridge is 10 feet too close to the station. Mind the Gap!

 

It is a pity that some people are so vindictive and threaten to spoil the achievement of the GWSR 'getting it right' by their inability to keep their personal dislikes to themselves - they do far more to 'discredit' the project than others who have at the very least allowed their position to be overturned (despite alleged 'great power') - for goodness sake, GROW UP!

Steven

 

Well said. I think also, reading Alex's post, there are a few people who behind the scenes put a huge amount of work into the railway and sometimes having 'too many' hats is a hinderance. Management teams and committees on railways all over the country are sitting down at pcs and board tables keeping the wheels turning, however onerous it seems with modern practices. I might not get to donn my overalls at toddington as much as I'd like these days but I've been on the gala committee for 5 years now and over that time we've input more than £150k in profit into the railway. Indeed, next weeks meeting will discuss how we work broadway into next years event. Should be the best yet !
Thank you to everyone who's helped get us to where we are today.
Andy

 

Bean Counter, I take it from your pseudonym that you are an accountant.

Well try and understand this. The dispute over the canopy such as it was was never about personalities or personal dislikes. To try and reduce it to this is to misunderstand it completely.

It was about a point of principle, of keeping your word to shareholders who have collectively over the years given you millions of pounds. As an accountant you will understand that is a lot of money.

As I shareholder I have the right to criticize if I see my money being mispent . It isn't personal it is contractual. And very grown up.

 

Has it been mis-spent though? Also don't forget that the project still isn't finished yet and Broadway Station won't look complete for a little while yet!

 

In which case, why do you make such efforts to direct the 'failure to honour the prospectus' at one individual? The original prospectus, and ensuring its implementation, are the responsibility of the Board as a corporate body, even if specific tasks may be delegated, by the Board, to individuals, both on the board and non-members.

I won't go into how prescriptive or legally binding a well written prospectus is - but for preserved railway share issues, there is usually lots of 'this is what we can do if the issue is fully subscribed' and all too often it isn't - no doubt you will be able to advise if this was the case for the relevant GWSR Share Issue, and whether all cost estimates were totally accurate and no unexpected costs arose in implementing the subject of the share issue?

Steven

 

@davidarnold I can appreciate you frustration as a shareholder with evidently justified concerns regarding how the original prospectus was initially implemented. Where I take issue is with continued public airing of issues (many in clear view at the start of this thread, which yes, I have been following) which, for the most part, seem to have been resolved. There clearly are lessons to be drawn from Broadway (as for any large project), but these need to be couched in terms of procedures rather than personalitites.

The logical conclusions of in depth reviews in any case tend to take such issues into account (unless one is speaking of G4S, where the wrong questions seem to be repeatedly asked by the wrong people .... best not head down that rabbit hole on here!). Recall that Sir Thomas Bouch was the architect of the end of his own career.

The purpose of my own post was to celebrate what, by any standard is a significant achievement, which IMO wouldn't be improved by any insistence on a public execution forming any part of those celebrations.

 

Absolutely you do, but it should be possible (and others have managed) to do so without being vindictive to hard-working volunteers. Remember that's who we all are, no one's gaining any profits or anything, we all do it because we enjoy railways.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk