GWSR - Cheltenham Spa and possible extensions

Is not the trackbed north of Broadway now owned by a well known cycle path organisation? I seem to recall that it was offered to the GWSR many moons ago,but was turned down because of the liabilities for bridges etc.
As said cycle organisation is not known for spending money on maintenance it would be fair to assume that nothing has been done to any structure north to Broadway.

 

The local passenger services ceased in March 1960. The line closed from Honeybourne to Lansdown Jct in 1976, a derailment at Winchcombe giving BR the excuse to finally close the line, and the track was lifted in 1979. The GWSR purchased around 15 or so miles of the stripped trackbed around 1981. The trackbed north of Broadway to Honeybourne was, I believe, transferred to council ownership and was leased to Sustrans, who, I am told, have done little or nothing to maintain the route or the structures on it.

 

Looking at the Google satellite map shows an overgrown, in places and moribund right of way. At one point there seems to be gardens or a small sectioned off areas. Could be re-instated I guess but a lot of work and money would be required. The thought of re-instatement might jolt the current owners into action of course.

 

re; bridges

Came across this interesting quote

Having found the relevant section (VIII), I wonder if the various clauses were inherited by private owners/operators when they bought infrastructure from BRB...

 

It all depends on what the lease specifies, eg. is it a repairing lease, have the council agreed to maintain the road overbridges, etc

Looking on Street View, from what you can see the road overbridges don't look too bad, the metalwork needing painting though! Apart from Badsey Lane at Willersey, all the bridges are crossings over the track.
The A44 is the responsibility of the highways authority anyway, as they built it.

 

They're much worse when viewed from below! At least 2 of them are propped, not really a suitable solution of we were to run trains along there, and the remaining bridges won't be in much better condition.

 

Wonder who propped them...

 

A very interesting question!

 

Well this is interesting...
(from Sustrans, October 2015)

 

The route passes *through* Hunting Butts tunnel? I assume the GWSR could (and would) veto that even it it was practical.

 

I hadn't seen that one before! I'd heard of the old proposal that used the trackbed right from Bishop's Cleeve but that was before we laid track there. Obviously Sustrans research not brilliant. We own all the railway land dotted in red and certainly wouldn't sell any of the land between Hunting Butts and the Racecourse - it's full of track and stock for starters!

 

A lot will depend on the clauses in the lease to do with the existing structures and if the lease transfers responsibility for the structures on the lease owner. Could sustrans try to sell the lease to the GWR but it would of course need agreement of the Council , or statutory body that replaced the council to agree to such a transfer,
I always thought that if its a road over rail bridge, the responsibility lies with the highways agency / council depending on the type of road. and not with the railway. The railway does have a responcibility to report any structural defects but its down to the council etc to repair it.

 

Unfortunately it's not as simple as that, certainly not on the road-over-rail bridges on the land we currently own.

A further google finds out this cycle route proposal was still alive in 2017. Point 2 makes interesting reading - it reads like they still don't know who owns the land, and that the existing railway stops precisely at the Evesham road bridge!

Edit - link corrected - hopefully!

 

They've also found an extra arch in the Evesham Rd bridge...

you've linked to a local file

 

Whoops, sorry! Will try and change.

 

Depends on “who came first”. If the road already existed first then the bridge (under or over) is the responsibility / liability of the railway to build / maintain. Thus all bridges on the line will therefore be the responsibility of the railway (or its inheritor) to maintain, unless a road bypass was subsequently built to to the line’s original opening eg A44, in which case the Local Highway Authority.

 

Now corrected, I think.

 

they are seriously loony, & obviously haven't even looked at a satellite view!
Why wouldn't you just go along Swindon Lane to the roundabout?


& what is this???

Sustrans CRC by RichardBrum posted May 16, 2019 at 6:58 PM

 

These people are beyond belief! Their arrogance in the second point by using the word MUST , it is that they think this is what is going to happen because we say so! Mind you there are numerous times this has happened elsewhere, they appear to ride roughshod even agreed plans are ignored.

 

Is this the right place for GWSR as this thread appears moribund?