North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Yes they've got 3 weeks to prop it before full service resumes.
I'm going today to see things. There's usually a lot of interest in the Easter hols.

 

Hmm. If it gets to summer and the bridge hasn't been propped by then , the benefits of propping it reduce significantly.

Looks like the Pickering -Goathland services are reasonably priced. Perhaps the railway will learn a lot about whether abandoning Whitby would be viable, or whether it is a case of Whitby or bust.

Thread trains a day of 4 coach lengths wouldnt seem to be enough to sustain the current business model

Jon

 

Propping the bridge and the planning permission are two different things. Because the bridge is a listed structure the proposed repairs require listed building approval (planning permission). Propping the bridge does not affect the structure and thus does not require planning permission but does require agreement from such as the Environment Agency as it affects the river.
As to what is happening with the propping, I don’t know but I’ve not yet even heard of a contract being let.

 

Problem is if you look at the condition of the underside of the bridge in the photos in the planning application theres a good chance you'd ideally need to carry out some work prior to propping the bridge. That work would need planning permission and the scaffolding.

 

I was somewhat surprised that an Environmental Statement wasn’t required, given the river etc.

 

Is it not this? Regardless June looks very sporty to me even if a contract has already been awarded. There will be a lot of "don't know until we start I suspect."

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
A document entitled Environmental Impact Assessment & Species Assessment for the repair of Bridge 42, Grosmont, 2026. prepared by the North Yorkshire Moors Railway Lineside Conservation Manager Kerry Fieldhouse accompanies this application.
The Executive Summary of the report, item 1.4, is as follows:
‘Restoration and repair of Bridge 42 is assessed as having low – medium potential for disturbance to protected species and a low risk to pollution and disturbance of Murk Esk.
The Assessment sets out the best practise guidance, good site management and the recommendations required in connection with the proposed works.

 

Ah. I was going from the application front page where it said “not required”

 

That sounds quite different to a Flood Risk Activity Permit (FRAP) which is what I suspect most people are thinking of, even if they didn't know that's what it was. However, upon checking the EA website, that bit of river is not a statutory main river, so it's not for the EA to regulate what you can and can't put in the river, but down to the local authority as the LLFA to grant consent for scaffolding in the river with a land drainage consent. That's a much simpler process than a FRAP.

 

I'm suprised the local authority has asked for Listed Building Consent (LBC) for the propping, temporary works are normally exempt provided there is no intrusion in fabric and the temporary works are entirely reversible.

Perhaps they have applied for LBC for the full scope of repairs, which probably would need consent. Bit late now, but if the local authority were being pernickity over LBC I'd have applied for a certificate of lawfulness instead, those are much less detailed (essentially a form and covering letter), free, and have a shorter turn-around time.

 

The NYMR have applied to the Local Authority for Listed Building Consentfor the repairs but not for the propping.

 

BRIDGE 42 UPDATE We are currently repairing Bridge 42, which sits between the tunnel and Grosmont station. Unfortunately, the work required to resume services over the bridge will not be completed until May. As a result, at the start of the 2026 season we will be running our reduced yellow timetable between Pickering and Goathland only.

So now we are up to v2.4 of the timetable, so 7th edition.