Churnet Valley Railway General Discussion

I imagine it will be one, or even two, S160s and the dining rake normally is 8 coaches

 

the big project for the beginning of 2019 is to create two extra sidings at Froghall so that coaching stock can be kept there rather than having to bring down each day from Cheddleton. Lots of site clearance work has been done in the last week and storage containers moved. The sidings will be formed from the half mile or so of line left south of Froghall so the big job over the last week has been to undo all the fishplates and unscrew all the chairs - done by MPD with air tools and a class 33. OAPWay had the task of unkeying the rails by hand (about 1000 keys), which has been completed so that the rails can be lifted out followed by chairs and sleepers. Next week and the week after should see them all being put in again.

 

Photos added above

 

Cracking day today - not a cloud in the sky, not much wind and a light dusting of snow on the ground. However changing sleepers when the ballast and replacement sleepers were frozen was challenging at times.

 

Emergency work to replace a broken rail at Apesford Crossing started this morning. Fortunately we called in a big digger to do the hard work, lifting the tarmac and new concrete sleepers. Should get to replacing sleepers and rails by close of play Wednesday and then tarmac and new crossing surface by Friday.

 

Preservation debut of a 31 on the CVR !
https://www.churnetvalleyrailway.co.uk/news/class31-power-returns-to-the-preserved-churnet-valley

 

Apesford Crossing work continues. Bed dug out, ballast added and compacted rails dragged onto edge of new ballast, sleepers placed and then rails lifted onto sleepers and keyed to sleepers. A long day.

 

Just wondering - does the extension to Leek require a new TWAO? I know that planning permission has been obtained.

 

Apesford crossing -job done. Worth comparing before and after.
Before and after

 

Massive improvement and not before time.

 

Planning Application SMD/2019 This is a planning application for for houses on the site of Endon goods yard with the up line trackbed used as an access. If this goes ahead it will kill off any chances of reopening the railway because it is an encroachment and to mitigate the flood risk they are proposing to have a soakaway right next to the track which with a pond will flood it or destabilise it at best because the railway will have no drainage at all. The expected purchasers are expected to be wealthy, elderly down sizers so they would be up in arms at any proposals to reopen the railway. Anybody who cares about the line should submit an objection or comment before March 4th.

 

Surely NR should be objecting since the line is officially not closed, but just out of use?

 

Who owns the up line trackbed, anyway? Can't they just say 'no, you can't use it'?

Noel

 

The trackbed is on 150 year lease and is a protected freight route. Has anyone told NR? Do they read the Leek Post and Times? According to the planning application the line is described as "Redundant" meaning of no further use, not "Mothballed" as most people like to describe it. The houses on their own probably would be too much trouble other than causing future objections to the railway but the access uses half the trackbed and as the land is described as a flood risk they propose mitigating it by using the remaining trackbed as a soak away which leads into a pond also created on the trackbed. The houses will not be connected to a public sewerage system or provided with septic tanks according to the tick boxes so no doubt that will also have some adverse effect on the railway as well.

 

I may be remembering this incorrectly, but I'm sure I read that you don't need to own the land for which you seek planning permission, in which case, the status of the line is perhaps not especially relevent.

On the other hand, not sure if the planning authority would check it's status and whether that status would influence their decision.

Why someone would apply for permission for land they don't own is a different matter. Surely all it would do is increase it's value and hence the cost the PP applicant would have to pay should they try to buy it.

 

Where can i read this information about the leek brook jct to stoke housing planning application putting this section of the churnet valley line under threat of development, i thought the goverment were proposing lines in future that are possible to be reopened under a feasability study should be protected from development or am i missing the point here somewhere that the line has a 150 year lease on it saying it should be free from development. Ile most certainly sign a petition objecting this proposal

 

Try this link Davo...

http://publicaccess.staffsmoorlands.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=128217

 

I see Network Rail have objected

They say the applicant claims they own all the land and confirm they own some and insist the application does not affect it.

The document can be viewed at the bottom of the page I've linked to above.

 

Full ref is SMD/2019/0077

 

So in other words network rail are saying the trackbed cant be built on without permission from themselves i always thought when the churnet valley line gets to leek eventually network rail planned to run service trains from stoke to leek and a future mainline connection 4 the C.V.R.