Project for short heritage railway beside busway Dunstable

Apologies! Alfred was whom I was referring to! I just think it's unfortunate that all the enthusiasm isn't being channelled into something more likely to succeed. Having first hand experience of preservation groups "joining forces" to achieve results, the benefits are self evident.

(Albert Mutton, whatever happened to him..? :-k )

 

Guys, just a little tap on the shoulder to remind you all of posting constructively rather than going "gun ho" into battle.

 

I've never been at all convinced that they aren't the same person. They often seem to be interchangeable . . .

Flip

 

Sometimes it hard to post constructively when well meant advice is ignored. No one doubts the Alfred's enthusiasm but equally most are quite rightly questioning his logic. No doubt the Talyllyn pioneers were thought mad when they proposed to take over the running of the line and other projects have attracted a fair deal of scepticism. I live local to the project yet I've seen nothing in the local papers seeking support, no public meetings called etc. so please excuse me and others for thinking this is one man's rather bizarre dream.

 

I fully agree with "Spamcan81".
There are many readers of this forum who have years of experience of running Heritage Railways watching it grow from the most humble beginnings to a passenger carrying line.
I started with the Spa Valley Railway in 1987 and a framework of our early days was-
Calling public meetings for support,
Putting articles in local papers,
Arranging fund raising publicity stands at (then BR ) open days, model railway exhibitions, local traction engine rallies, etc.
Holding fund raising events such as selling at car boot sales, society meetings, dances,etc.
Set up a exhibition centre/shop in a building (then Groombridge station) by taking a short term lease (at a negotiated rate of few hundred pounds per month/year-not £37k).
A member buys the first working loco which is temporarily stored on another railway until track is ready and a secure compound is made.
Track is relaid/refurbished, undergrowth cut back, security improved.
Slowly the society grows, slowly the financies build, slowly the manpower team builds,
Society formed 1985 ran first public revenue earning train in 1996...11 years of hard work.!
...........been there, done it, seen it..........

It is not a comprehensive list but a few constructive ideas for Alfred.

 

FIRST I am NOT Albert Mutton

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/D ... essage/274

I agree with that comment so I will keep my comments confined to replying to the few postings that are worth looking at!

Luton and Dunstable have above average unemployment for the area and the Northfield ward where this attraction would be is a deprived area so a similar plan of action is being made up. *See 'Note at end'

Constructive advice.

One note - the idea is to buy the land outright with a HLF etc grant, NOT pay high rent every year.

I haven't time to reply to it all now but I will do so later.

Alfred.

*Note: This was the response of Dunstable Town Council :-

As discussed I think the Heritage Railway Scheme has some merit and I also suspect that Luton Borough Council, Central Bedfordshire Council and Houghton Regis Town Council could also be persuaded likewise. However, in order to now take the project forward you need to work on creating some tangible cost figures and operational methods by way of a business plan.

What all authorities will need to see is an estimated capital cost figure for creating the Heritage Railway. This should include as a minimum costs for land purchase and costs for creating the rail link and any associated depot or office costs. The local authorities will also need to see ongoing costs projections by way of a revenue business plan; i.e. how much do you think the railway line will cost to run and how much (if any) revenue do you think it will generate? It would also be useful to have an indication of where you think any funding opportunities might arise.


Until these cost estimates are known it is very difficult for any Council's to know what effort and resources to commit to making the Heritage Rail link a reality.


Once you have worked up a business plan, I would be happy to involve Dunstable Town Council in any round table discussions with Central Bedfordshire Council, Luton Borough Council and Houghton Regis Town Council.

 

"If any...."

 

Having resisted the temptation to comment until now, I was dismayed to learn that Alfred has deduced 50% of Nat Pres members think his scheme is OK. This is based on dividing the previous posters into "for" and "against". Hardly a useful measure yet it has been used to suggest support is 50-50. He doesn't state the ratio of posters to this thread against total NP membership. So. I thought I'd just put myself on the "against" side, just in case he does a similar "poll" again.

Had a look at the Yahoo group shown above. Dismayed to find the discussion about "Unique Selling Point" was dismissed as "corporate speak" by one group member, which shows a lack of grasp of what lies ahead. Commercial exploitation is essential. Further dismay at the suggestion, by Alfred, that the unique selling point is the contrast between "grim housing...urban bedsit...industrial wasteland...to open countryside". I have looked at the aerial photos of the area and I am sorry to say that the open countryside simply does not exist anywhere along the proposed 400m line, unless the definition of open countryside is a small area of waste railway land at the eastern end of the line. Maybe Alfred can advise where I can find this open countryside?

Finally, I am not "baiting" you, I am giving you my heartfelt thoughts on your scheme.

Steve
(WSW)

 

Point taken, however please can anyone explain to me quite how...

... or, to put it another way, "LalalaIcan'thearyou" is in any way constructive towards railway preservation as a whole?

As I've said before, it's Alfred's prerogative to spend his time and money in any way he chooses. However, what bothers me about schemes like this is the potential damage they can do to the image of railway preservation overall. What happens if a serious bunch of well-organised enthusiasts with a different, viable scheme approach the same local council(s) after this hare-brained scheme has inevitably got nowhere? Are members of the council not likely to go "Oh no, not another bunch of no-hope railway obsessives?" I have a feeling they might.

I appreciate that for many years a lot of railway restoration schemes have been written off as no-hope, crackpot ideas. But the world is a very different place to what it was even ten years ago and the fact that Alfred refuses to even acknowledge that people who aren't completely agreeing with his idea may actually have a point or two, makes me think that the whole idea is pretty selfish.

Certainly there appears to be not even a moment's thought on his part about the 'bigger picture' of railway preservation and what the longer-term effect of this strangest of schemes and the blinkered way that the protagonist is going about it is likely to have.

 

There have been some pretty strange proposals made on this forum. I wouldn't go so far as to say this one is completely barking mad but, knowing the area, its certainly well up the loony tree.

 

Please check but it is my information that you cannot buy land with HLF money.

HLF money can only be used to restore/renovate land or buildings which you already own.

Can anyone confirm..?

 

There have been some posts above about every potential heritage railway getting stick on this site.

I got into a tussle on her a while ago with some chaps wanting to re - open the Malton - Driffield branch. My response to the idea being based on proximity to the NYMR, that it has been lifted 50 yrs, and it is hard to find volunteers in rural Yorks. However, that is a far more sensible idea than this one. After some discussion, the M&D gents started suggesting a short preserved railway on a section of the former route, and stopped mentioning reopening the whole lot with HLF funding. I believe that could be done, and they've got my best wishes to do so. Their line is in a smashing area, with tourist & day trip traffic.

Luton - Dunstable are an area you seek to get out of on your days off. In the area are Woburn Abbey & Safari Park, Whipsnade Zoo, Dunstable Downs, Leighton Buzzard Rly., Milton Keynes Shopping... - and you're 30 Mins on the train from Central London.

This chap has seen a mothballed railway and thought "My full size train set." Not going to happen.

I spent several years drivng trains through Luton, and thinking that the Dunstable Branch was an opportunity wasted. But that meant putting 25KV along it, and running 319's! That does not mean that it could be a heritage railway.

 

Now that starts to make some sense but I have a mental vision of 319s mixing it with mis-guided buses.

Seriously. I had even thought the line could be diverted in the Bury Park area crossing the car park near Telford Way to join the MML immediately north of Luton Station. It might require the demolishion of the arcade along New Bedford Road. A shuttle service could even use a refurbished platform where the parcels bay was.

 

Of course the irony in all this is that on internet forums it's the 'barking' schemes that always generate the most postings, which merely serve to provide the protagonists with the attention that they so desperately crave. :-k

This is why, in my opinion, the internet is as much a curse as it is a blessing. It has radically democratised global communication and, in doing so, has given the lowest common denominator a platform which they previously never had to air their views. Now I wouldn't accuse the OP of LCD status - he is clearly an articulate and reasonably intelligent individual, if IMO a little tunnel-visioned and suffering from a dose of unrealistic railway obsession! - but some of the really unhinged, semi-literate ranting you see on internet forums proves my point, I think! #-o

The thing is, if we were in the pre-internet age, you can guarantee that nobody except the OP and a few long-suffering local council officials would ever have heard of this plan. But, with an internet forum as a platform, there are potentially thousands, milions who might hear of it, some of whom are those (myself included) who really should know better, but whose fingers reach for the keyboard and react.

The best thing we can all do when it comes to such unworkable plans being aired is to have the sense to simply ignore them. Because seven pages of reaction (so far) says to such an OP that they have something worth reacting to...

 

An even better idea would be to reopen Leighton Buzard-Luton-Hatfield, electrify the lot as a diversionary route, and provide a service connecting Birmingham and Luton airports. Unfortunately leaving transport strategy in the hands of the local authority seems to have ensured that this will never happen. And as for the proposed 'heritage' railway (I use the inverted commas advisedly), when it inevitably fails it will only harden the anti-railway views of many of the councillors concerned.

Still, in the spirit of constructive advice, I would suggest that as the council have asked for a 'business plan', Alfred's first step should be to engage the services of a professional consultancy with experience in the leisure and tourism industry to produce one - since the council will inevitably only give credence to such a plan if it is produced by someone with the necessary qualifications. This, of course, will cost money (thousands, I would imagine, but it costs nothing to ask for a quote), and if (as I suspect) the report ultimately states that the proposal is not viable, Alfred would be well advised to cut his losses and drop the idea.

 

There has been a lot of disagreement about the rail option with some advocating a 142 Pacer service (basically a diesel rail shuttle) and others a 25 kv electrified service with a 319, either to and from Leighton Buzzard or as far as Dunstable. Those basically were the options considered and rejected in 1994 - 5 in favour of the bus way.

Somebody suggested demolishing some buildings and diverting the rail line over a viaduct to Luton main line station. In BR days the Dunstable service ran from the GNR - LNER - BR (ER) station at Luton Bute Street. The Luton to Dunstable rail line has a 300 yard break in it at Luton (this is at the site of Luton Bute Street station).

When the re - opening of the Luton to Dunstable railway line was considered by the councils in 1994 - 95 the intention was to use a terminous at the site of Luton Bute Street station.

Recently I made enquiries of the HM Railway Inspectorate about the planning requirements for the heritage railway proposal.

Their response was

"... [they] could find no repeal or Abandonment Order of the 1855 Luton Dunstable and Welwyn Junction Railway Act or 1856 Amendment Act (1856 Luton Dunstable and Welwyn Junction Railway Act) for the original railway powers and that all the powers and responsibilities continue to the present day. [This includes in planning terms the power to re - open the old railway line, or any part of it, or to construct a new railway within the limits of deviation.]

Luton Borough Council has taken those powers with modification in its Translink Order 2006 and acknowledged this state of affairs in s47 ss2 in which all the former powers etc. are transferred to it. [In the bus way statutary authorisation - Translink Order 2006 all the old railway powers powers are transferred to Luton Borough Council in s47 ss2.]

It is not therefore, a further matter for planning permission being required for a railway but entirely for Luton Borough Council to determine whether it will or will not grant any powers to anyone else for the purpose of a railway within the scope of any lease or sale and transfer of powers. [So, if anyone wanted to build a railway from Luton to Dunstable after the bus way is built (on a new alignment within the limits of deviation of the 1856 Act) they would need to approach Luton Borough Council for permission to transfer powers.]

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/D ... essage/259

Railway powers
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2006/20063118.htm#47

Powers to transfer undertaking
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2006/20063118.htm#42

In certain parts of the TWA enquiry into the bus way project the Luton Borough Council has mentioned the possibility of rail line from Luton to Dunstable being reinstated alongside the bus way once the latter is completed -

6.9.25 -- http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/twa/ir/lutond ... 32?page=27

The intention of the bus way project is to demolish the railway embankment between Luton Bute Street and Telford Way when the construction starts to 'open up' Luton town centre.

However, the above section of the TWA enquiry makes it clear that if a railway line in this area to Dunstable were to be built then viaducts along the course of the railway could be used. ["6.9.25 While it is accepted that removal of the bridges and embankment would create an obstacle to the later reinstatement of a railway, new vehicle technologies or the use of viaducts would not preclude this."]

Once the railway line reaches Telford Road it is important to note that between Telford Road and Skimpot Land the original railway line has been used by the A5065 road and the Dunstable branch follows a new alignment to the North of the A5065 (this will be used by bus way). Any new railway line would have to run to the South of A5065 (using viaduct technology or possibly as has been said demolition!). This would fall within the limits of deviation of the 1856 Luton Dunstable and Welwyn Junction Railway Act because the built railway ran along what is now the A5065 and when diverted in 1987 it was able to be diverted a similar distance to the North within the limits of deviation of the 1856 Luton Dunstable and Welwyn Junction Railway Act.

When any new railway line reaches Skimpot Lane - Blows Down, it would have to run to the South and West of the bus way (which follows the old railway alignment into Dunstable). Liason with Blows Down management committee would be needed, and they did have concerns over the bus way which had to be dealt with at the TWA enquiry.

There is a busway access road across the path of any new railway near to the site of Dunstable Town station so any railway could have to stop at this point. Clearances between this point and Dunstable Park are very tight, and Central Bedfordshire Council were worried about any encroachment of the railway on to Dunstable Park.

 

The only reason I've bothered with this thread is that the Dunstable Branch demonstrates what is wrong with transport policy in this country right now.

The road between Dunstable & Luton gets log jammed morning & evening. I would suggest that this is mostly due to the more afluent inhabitants of Dunstable driving to Luton to take advantage of its excellent rail service into London.

A connecting railcar service, or better still 25kv, and Thameslink units running directly, would remove this traffic at a stroke. Luton station is a bottleneck in the rush hour, and a couple of units an hour being turned off to Dunstable would actually ease congestion.

As I stated many pages ago, the reason for the guided bus proposal is that govt funding is available for it. The falacy is that reinstating the branch was costed at 10% of that, but there were no grants.

This could be a major asset to the rail network. Sorry Alfred, but it's not a heritage line.

If anyone wants to look along it, go to Google Earth, and type in Dunstable Sainsburys. The line is just to the west, and can easily be followed through various housing & industrial estates.

 

[attachment=0:3ag10fuq]fingersinears.jpg[/attachment:3ag10fuq]