Project for short heritage railway beside busway Dunstable

I have been following this thread for quite some time now, initially with a lot of interest as I had not heard anything of this scheme. However, as it has gone on and more information has come out about the proposal, the above quote sums the whole thing up pretty succinctly for me.

I feel a quality standard gauge scheme somewhere in the Bedfordshire/Hertfordshire/South Cambridgeshire area really could take off, Alfred is quite right when he says there is nothing of that nature anywhere near the area. However, why not find a location in the area that has attractive scenery and an open landscape? This could even be a greenfield site rather than a disused trackbed if need be, although the latter would probably be preferred. I have heard somewhere that Hertfordshire is the 'Devon of the East', in many parts having open rolling countryside and picturesque historic villages, although never seen as a tourist destination. However, a 'day out' attraction would probably be able to attract visitors, especially if easily accessible from London. Any proposal in this area MUST include steam, whether ex-BR or industrial locos, to make it a worthwhile stand-alone attraction.

I'm really sorry, but a tatty DMU running a short distance in a deprived area simply won't cut it in either Dunstable, Luton, or anywhere else for that matter.

 

Project for short heritage railway beside Helmand River Afghanistan
I can see it now; 8Fs trundling along the scenic landscape from Kajaki through the Sangin Valley to Lashgar Gah. Doesn't really take much imagination if you think of Luton and Dunstable.

To be serious for a moment, I am aware that the landscape in parts of AFG really is scenic and breathtaking, that's why its such a shame that it's been a restive part of the world for so long.

 

The original layout of the oil depot site was as follows, a rail spur diverged from the Luton to Dunstable branch line on a falling gradient and entered the site at NE corner before splitting into two sidings and continuing on a lower level than the branch track to a terminous at High Street North near to the boundary with what is now Bee Hire van premises.

There were oil tanks beside the sidings.

Road access to the site was from a pair of entrances from Tavistock Street at SE of the site, and the road access led on to a large raised platform made of concerite. This platform extended across to the oil tanks.

Trains would enter on the low level rail connection, the oil would be off loaded into the tanks, and then road vehicles would enter on the high level road access and collect the oil from the tanks, which were between the rail and road protions of the site so that they adjoined each portion.

Plan of oil depot until 1989 is at http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/2412 ... 3016ILRCkv

After the closure of the oil depot at Dunstable on 30 April 1989 (at the same time as the last freight services on the Luton to Dunstable branch line), during the re - development of the land in the 1990s, the land across the course of the old rail sidings at the NE corner of the site (where the rail access once split into two sidings) was built up to road height (at the same level of the old oil depot loading area nearby) and became a pallet store. A palisade fence was erected around the land. The old oil loading area became a machinary centre until this ceased to trade from the site in early 2009, the land is now up for letting.

Because building up the ground level at what is now the pallet store to a higher level reduced the gradient leading from the Luton to Dunstable branch line, creates a level ground for sidings and vastly improves road access to the land it is in fact a great improvement.

Outline planning application to redevelop the Bee hire premises, pallet yard and vacant land beside.

The oil depot used to be owned by BRB Residuary LTD but the land was sold to the pallet store cia 2007 and the owner of the pallet store now plans to redevelop the whole site. At one time the proposed heritage railway project planned to use the vacant land as road access, a depot and museum etc, but in line with the outline application 00171 the proposed use of the vacant land has been shelved (at least for now). The pallet store offers much better road access, and has an existing rail connection on the same level as the pallet store so is far superior to the vacant land for the purpose.

Landowners plan is at http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/2365 ... 3016wUDMEg

Anyone wanting any information on the planning application needs to look at link http://62.253.210.148/pap/searchresult. ... er=09/0171

The outline planning application does refer to contamination issues in the application form (see link above) BUT this is at the vacant land. The pallet store was dealt with when the land was redeveloped if only by rasing the ground level above any contamination.

Good question, although the embankment for the railway is only chalk and spoil and trains ran for 110 years from 1859 until closure on 09 October 1969 and the pallet store has had pallets stacked on it and lorries running in and out for 12 years plus.

The connection to the Luton to Dunstable branch line and old railway spur leading right up to the boundary with the pallet store is still in situ. The 'entrance' between the old railway spur and what is now the pallet store is on the same level as the pallet store land. So there is no problem with this.

During the re - development of the land in the 1990s a steel palisade post and rail fence was erected around the land. There is some CCTV on the site. In the heritage railway plans this would all be retained and the landowner would be paid to do this out of the funding for the project.

However we are uncertain as to whether the old gates at the NE corner of the site at the entrance on to the old rail spur were left in situ when the site was redeveloped, or if so, whether they would still work. Luton Borough Council has offered (22/10/08) to retain the AWD Siding gates and gateposts for use at this location.

There has been nothing of the sort that I know of, although the fire hazard of all that wood occured to me last week, so I may mention it to them if I have time. The old railway is an overgrown and lonely place. There is a wide verge between the old track and the boundary fence with the pallet yard. The big risk of this sort could occur if a path ran along the top of the old embankment, then the yobs might be able to gain access to the pallet site. If there was a railway there of course, it wouldn't matter.

That point has been replied to. It is certainly true that Mk1 suburban stock is hard to find and has serious problems. It depends what is up, when we look for it.

 

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

See my posting at -- viewtopic.php?f=15&t=18323&p=303537#p303537

or http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/D ... essage/276

 

...and once again he only answers the happy-smiley-everything's-fine questions.

 

Thanks.

Alfred.

 

I have received a letter from Planning online at Central Bedfordshire Council dated 22 July 2009, which contains details of a planning application at Selwood Place Tavistock Street Dunstable - the old road loading area of the BP Oil depot - for Change of Use from stoarge and distribution to car sales, carwash and workshop.

Details are at:-

http://62.253.210.148/pap/searchresult.asp?=cb/09/05172

In the PDF of previous application (referring to the vacant land nearby), the answers to the questions about whether there is any ground contamination (e.g. in this case, from the former use as an oil loading area) indicated that the land was suspected and / or known to be contaminated; but reading the PDF of the application form in the application for Selwood Place the answers indicate that ground contamination is not an issue. This means that the land was decontaminated when redeveloped in 1997.

The pallet store would be the same.

 

Latest news heritage railway / bus way -- What could the time scale be lifting track?

Latest news from the heritage railway and bus way

The preparation of the business plan and summaries for the heritage railway continues apace, when the work is done I will be posting the business plan and summaries on - line.

I have been talking to Luton Borough Council Transport Strategy.

I have told them of my scheme to retain the (much newer) concerite sleepered track alongside A5065 Hatters Way in the Dunstable area and lay it beside the bus way along Blows Down. Once the bus way was completed, the track could then be extended back into Luton at a later date. Although the land issues to the South of the A5065 Hatters Way Road once it has crossed the M1 (could) mean a lot of financial issues (depending on clearances to the south of A5065).

The buses running from Dunstable and Houghton Regis to the bus way along the old railway line would 'feed' (carry passengers to) the new Dunstable to Luton railway line and thus ensure its viability and attract a lot of people to the buses along the bus way. The bus way would cater for local traffic, whereas the railway would aim to cater for a quite different market - commuters to and from St Albans or London.

Luton Borough Council Transport Strategy acknowledged that the lifting of the track along the old Dunstable to Luton railway line could raise the passions of people in Dunstable next year but did not comment on (or disagree with) my ideas to retain and relay some of the track.

We did agree that as you lot have said, some of the other track (wooden sleepered track) doesn't look too bad, but I do point out to you (and did to the transport strategy manager) that the old wooden sleepered track was last re - laid in 1960s so may need replacing even though the condition of it may not be obvious now. But some other track (along embankment at High Street North Dunstable, which was closed in 1969, and near Luton) is very ancient indeed - old two bolt to rail chairs track laid on ash and clinker ballast - which is obsolete. It might be better to replace all the wooden sleepered track on the service section of route and have done with it, and keep the old track for heritage railway use!

As you may be aware, the bus way scheme went out to tender in May 2009. Transport strategy has told me that the tender documents for the bus way scheme are due back at the end of September. At the end of November the bus way and Transport Strategy teams will have identified a preferred contractor for the bus way scheme and then a submission has to be made to the Department for Transport to get their approval of the contractor and the final go - ahead for the bus way scheme.

The bus way pages of the Luton Borough Council web site are at http://www.luton.gov.uk/internet/tr...port_planning/projects/luton dunstable busway

If any of you want to make any comment on the bus way scheme to the Department for Transport then they will need to do so when the final submission has been made.

The address is :-

Department for Transport
Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DR
Fax: 020 7944 9643
http://www.dft.gov.uk/

I suggest myself that you mark the envelope 'Luton Dunstable bus way'.

What could the time scale be for lifting the track along the Dunstable to Luton railway line?

I am aware that some very strongly about the bus way vs railway issue in Dunstable - as exemplified in article http://www.dunstabletoday.co.uk/dunstable-news/Why-don39t-you-bus-off.4247593.jp
when a presentation made by the Luton Borough Council bus way team to Dunstable Town Council's highways, parks and planning committee degenerated into a slanging match!

There is an article in Dunstable news at:

http://www.dunstabletoday.co.uk/dunstable-news/Legless-lizards-could-delay-busway.5548612.jp

This is about the need to remove slow worms along the Blows Down so that the bus way construction can go ahead.

In the article it refers to, "the site clearance that would then take place for the busway needs to be completed before the next bird breeding season, from late February to early March".

The 'site clearance' is the lifting of the track along the Dunstable to Luton railway line. If the article is correct then the removal of the track along the Dunstable to Luton railway line could take place in the New Year.

However I do not think that the removal of the track along the Dunstable to Luton railway line is likely in the New Year. To begin with after a preferred contractor is nominated the final submission has to be made to the Dft to gain final approval in late November 2009 and then Department for Transport have to make a final decision on the scheme and this will take time - over Xmas and New Year too!

The bus way tender is being let as a 'design and build' scheme which means that the preferred contractor has to design the whole project as well as build it. This means that time will need to be taken by the preferred contractor to design the bus way.

Then because the bus way only has 'deemed planning permission' - outline planning permission for the route along which the bus way will run and the layout on the land - before work can start planning officers of Luton Borough Council or Central Bedfordshire Council (depending on whereabouts along the route) must approve the design of all structures along the bus way route. http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/twa/ir/lutondunstabletranslinkinspe1032?page=34#a1079

Then the preferred contractor will need to complete the process of getting site work plans for the individual jobs (time span, when done etc) and tenders for materials etc, sorted out before work can start. (Some may word this sentence better than me). --> Does anyone have any details on this sort of work required at site management level?

Having read the letter that was sent to me last May I suspect that the track lifting work will start in summer 2010 after the bird breeding season.

Reading all this one can see why the removal of the slow worms is such an issue, because to have the bus way open by 2012 (as noted in the article) is a very tight time scale.

 

Train operators say "easy to resurrect heavy rail link" to dunstable

TRAIN OPERATORS SAY "EASY TO RESURRECT HEAVY RAIL LINK" TO DUNSTABLE

06 August 2009

http://www.andrewselous.org.uk/record.jsp?type=news&ID=506

The Chief Executive of the Association of Train Operating Companies [ATOC] has written to South West Bedfordshire MP Andrew Selous to say that Dunstable is the third largest town in the UK without a railway. He said in his letter, "We are also aware that the line formation is more or less intact and mothballed, and so would be easy to resurrect as a heavy rail link if it were decided to do so".

The Luton to Dunstable Busway scheme is currently scheduled to run along the former Luton to Dunstable railway line and is out to tender for construction at present. Shadow transport minister Stephen Hammond MP has said that a future Conservative government would review the Busway scheme leaving the door open for the rail option to be looked at again.

The Association of Train Operating Companies have said that they could appraise a heavy rail scheme between Luton and Dunstable. Andrew Selous has written to ask if ATOC could also look at the possibility of a light rail option and running trains between Luton, Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard, as used to happen. Although the former railway track near Leighton Buzzard has been built on it would be possible to join the railway track from Leighton Buzzard to the south of Leighton Buzzard.

 

Out of interest is the M1 bridge under any threat from future motorway widening? If anyone seriously wants to re-open this line they'd do well to do it before any motorway scheme comes along, else the costs will end up on the railway's budget rather than the roads one...

 

Please somebody just shut him up. He has Farcebook to drivel on with all the other dreamers, droners, frothers, fruitcakes and fools.

It somehow feels really uncomfortable to be witness to a human being wasting so much of its (one and only) life in this way.