Goring Gap/AONBs and Electrification of the GWML

[Who Cares]

AM….Absolutely correct….But the intention and the hope is that the courts might insist that a couple of the AONBs’ and residents’ boxes get ticked….At the moment, it’s only NR’s boxes which have been ticked….


PHILIP….Yes, it’s bloody annoying….And as I said a few months ago when we discussed it together, it’s probably about time that this particular 19th century law is dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century….Imagine what the country might look like if sometime soon NR decided, in the name cost savings and environmental improvement, that they wanted to install 40/50 feet high Wind Turbines every 100 yards or so alongside every mile of track in the UK to support a nationwide electrification programme….Scarey thought isn’t it ?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Scarey thought isn’t it ?

No, but I like wind turbines very much.

 

[Who Cares]

Really ??

Then go ahead and suggest it to MC....

Instant NR Board appointment for outstanding blue sky thinking, perhaps....If, that is, you're not already an NR Board member....

 

[HowardGWR]

I think that the irony of depending on the C and ROW Act (I don't think the protesters will be able to, if it is tested in the High Court, for the reasons stated in an earlier post) is that it has been conspicuously ignored by road building scheme Inquiries, and I cite the A354 Weymouth Relief Road, which it was agreed by all, including the promoter, did damage the AONB and was not permitted development and which thus did need planning permission, was given it anyway.

The straw man about building wind turbines would have more impact as an argument, if NR was planning to build them, but as it isn't, I don't see the point of discussing it.

 

[adrock1976]

In regard to the various posts by Who Cares in relation to landscapes/AONB being ruined in the Goring area, I'm of the view that there is nothing wrong at all with the electrification masts. There have been various experts who have posted responses to the various designs of the equipment - all of them have been reasonable with you.

If you want to see what definition of ugly is, perhaps you should venture north along to a place called Cumbernauld. It is one of these fangled New Towns that was constructed in the 1960s, with a shopping centre that only one side was completed until recently. It still looks dreadful to this day, even so that the Urban Realm magazine has awarded Cumbernauld with their annual Carbuncle Award (nicknamed in Scotland as the "Plook on a Plinth" Award) on a regular basis for planning disasters. To be fair though, Cumbernauld did have a break from it recently, with the award going to neighbouring Coatbridge, perhaps due to the amount of empty and broken Buckfast bottles seen lying around there as a form of art. Perhaps that may be the reason why the famous musicians Hue & Cry left Coatbridge when they hit the big time all those years ago.

 

[jimm]

AMYes, it’s bloody annoying….And as I said a few months ago when we discussed it together, it’s probably about time that this particular 19th century law is dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century….Imagine what the country might look like if sometime soon NR decided, in the name cost savings and environmental improvement, that they wanted to install 40/50 feet high Wind Turbines every 100 yards or so alongside every mile of track in the UK to support a nationwide electrification programme….Scarey thought isn’t it ?

No it's a silly thought. Rather like complaining about how obtrusive catenary posts on top of embankments will be, then wanting them painted, which will only make them more obtrusive, not less, most of the time. The English countryside is a patchwork quilt of different colours, not one particular shade of green - and Network Rail seems to favour a very dark green on metalwork when it does paint it, which stands out a treat against a blue or grey sky, so be careful what you wish for.

Also, are you proposing dragging all sorts of other similar aspects of planning legislation into the 21st century, plenty of them of rather more recent vintage than Acts of Parliament authorising railways? Because if this line of attack is taken against Network Rail's powers, then you are opening up a can of worms.

Such as the powers allowing farmers to put up pretty much any type of building or structure for agricultural purposes they like, wherever they like, without planning permission being required. And carrying out any agriculture-related excavations or engineering work without any need to seek consents that other people or businesses would need. The farming lobby would be spitting feathers if someone opens up a debate about permitted development powers, whatever the vintage of the Acts of Parliament that are involved. On the other hand the CPRE would be delighted and see it as a chance to try to reverse all sorts of permitted development powers.

As things stand, if a farmer could prove that a string of 50ft-tall sheds every 100 yards for miles across their land was necessary for agricultural purposes then there is nothing you could do to stop them. A daft example but in theory perfectly legal. And go to Herefordshire and see all the fields now filled with acres of polytunnels used to grow strawberries for a real-life example of what can happen.

Homeowners and business owners enjoy all sorts of permitted development rights on their property, under powers in Acts of Parliament, no different in their way from the sort of powers granted by Parliament that Network Rail also enjoys on its own property. There are marginally tighter restrictions on properties in AONBs and national parks but the fundamental principle remains the same. So attack Network Rail's powers and someone will likely pipe up and say it's high time homeowners were reined in as well...

 

[w1bbl3]

Permitted development you say... page 80 clause A.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/596/pdfs/uksi_20150596_en.pdf.

All sorts of unintended permissions for each use class, unlimited front extensions or outbuildngs to domestic dwellings being a particularly amusing even in ANOBs.

The document isn't particularly clear on if statutory undertakers need to legally consult on works done under permitted development rights or if consultation is common courtesy.

 

[AM9]

In regard to the various posts by Who Cares in relation to landscapes/AONB being ruined in the Goring area, I'm of the view that there is nothing wrong at all with the electrification masts. There have been various experts who have posted responses to the various designs of the equipment - all of them have been reasonable with you.

If you want to see what definition of ugly is, perhaps you should venture north along to a place called Cumbernauld. It is one of these fangled New Towns that was constructed in the 1960s, with a shopping centre that only one side was completed until recently. It still looks dreadful to this day, even so that the Urban Realm magazine has awarded Cumbernauld with their annual Carbuncle Award (nicknamed in Scotland as the "Plook on a Plinth" Award) on a regular basis for planning disasters. To be fair though, Cumbernauld did have a break from it recently, with the award going to neighbouring Coatbridge, perhaps due to the amount of empty and broken Buckfast bottles seen lying around there as a form of art. Perhaps that may be the reason why the famous musicians Hue & Cry left Coatbridge when they hit the big time all those years ago.

The whole issue of AONB is an anachronism. Just ponder over what the initials stand for: Area Of Natural Beauty. Then look at the pictures that NIMBY pressure groups proffer as examples of AONBs. They more often than not have a patchwork of managed hedgerows, cleared agricultural areas, twee little villages and other settlements, plantation wooded slopes of hills, river developments like marinas, in fact very little that is natural. So maybe the NIMBYs are trying to preserve what they currently have, because the developments that are there for them to enjoy, strangely are counted as part of the natural environment! I live just a few minutes drive from the edge of the Chilterns and regularly walk in some of the most beautiful parts of them. Some of them are as they were 200 years ago apart from lots of expensive self-indulgent houses, and cottages that locals cannot possibly afford have been snapped up as commuter pads for well paid Londoners. In some of the valleys, the WCML with its four track gantries, weaves its way along the floor of the valley. It doesn't spoil the natural beauty, it just represents part of human development that we are all responsible for.
The classification of AONB should be restricted to genuine natural environments, i.e. what would normally be regarded as wilderness, - not manicured countryside that preserves a pastiche of days gone by. Those places should maybe get a classification of Area Of Visual Beauty, whatever beauty means in legal terms.

 

[Who Cares]

ADROCK - It's usually me who's accused of putting forward straw man arguments ( as HowardGWR does again here ) so better not introduce the ugliness that is Cumbernauld and Coatbridge into this thread....Loved the trumpet sound on 'Violently' by the way....

AM9 - Come on, it's not me or the residents of the Chilterns who 'christened' them AONB's....It's just a name, used to define an area with different planning requirements as JIMMM has pointed out....I use the term AONB because everyone else does - including NR and Atkins....

JIMM - I don't really have any thoughts on or about what other Planning Laws should or need to be changed, although I do agree that farmers in the UK do seem to get away with all sorts of things which appear to be impossible for everyone else, whether inside an AONB or not....And just to point out that the potential improvement in painting the OLE is not just a benefit for the residents in the Goring Gap, but is to reduce their impact on the landscape - check the pictures on the website and you should be able to notice that it is the OLEs' impact on the landscape from the hills either side of the valley which the AONB Team are very concerned about....Painted a dark green-ish brown ( you know, the colour of old line side telegraph poles ) would be a huge improvement on the current plain steel as from above, of course, and against the background of the valley sides, the OLE's are not seen against blue skies or white-ish clouds....

 

[po8crg]

Imagine what the country might look like if sometime soon NR decided, in the name cost savings and environmental improvement, that they wanted to install 40/50 feet high Wind Turbines every 100 yards or so alongside every mile of track in the UK to support a nationwide electrification programme….Scarey thought isn’t it ?

That sounds like a great idea.

The view from my parent's back window is much improved by the three wind turbines, so why not make the country much better-looking?

 

[Who Cares]

That sounds like a great idea.

The view from my parent's back window is much improved by the three wind turbines, so why not make the country much better-looking?

You mean they used to have to look at OLEs before ?

Only joking....C'mon, only joking....

 

[AM9]

AM9 - Come on, it's not me or the residents of the Chilterns who 'christened' them AONB's....It's just a name, used to define an area with different planning requirements as JIMMM has pointed out....I use the term AONB because everyone else does - including NR and Atkins....

I wasn't criticising those taking advantage of AONBs in any protest against change, either at Goring or anywhere else, after all it's just another tool for them to further their own case. I just feel that it is in reality a specious argument around something that has few 'natural' attributes, compared with any other landscape where development on a medium scale has taken place over several centuries.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the landscape of the Chilterns (my experience is more north of the Amersham-Wendover corridor through to the downs near Hitchin) and each area within has a character which includes the road rail and water routes that run through them. If the locals had the knowledge/time and money to notice that the canals or the railways would change their environment, they probably would have objected because they didn't like to see that which they were used to change. There were objections when the A41 was made better between the M25 and Aston Clinton. I doubt that there would be much enthusiasm for digging it up now, and there would be an uproar if the canals were to be filled in, yet they have little to do with economic life in the area. When I stand on top of the Ashridge or Combe Hill, I can see (and hear if the wind is in the right direction) the roads and rail routes below. When I w2alk along the banks of the Grand Unito canal near Tring, I can hear (and sometimes see) the 390s and 350s passing every 2-5 minutes.
None of that is a problem and just represents the nature of this country today. I don't want to preserve my view of what the landscape should look like in aspic, after all, who says that my (mental) view is the best anyway!

 

[route:oxford]

The straw man about building wind turbines would have more impact as an argument, if NR was planning to build them, but as it isn't, I don't see the point of discussing it.

Forget Wind turbines...

But a gantry that was designed to accommodate solar panels would be a magnificent idea.

 

[jimm]

ADROCK
AM9 - Come on, it's not me or the residents of the Chilterns who 'christened' them AONB's....It's just a name, used to define an area with different planning requirements as JIMMM has pointed out....I use the term AONB because everyone else does - including NR and Atkins....

JIMM - I don't really have any thoughts on or about what other Planning Laws should or need to be changed, although I do agree that farmers in the UK do seem to get away with all sorts of things which appear to be impossible for everyone else, whether inside an AONB or not....And just to point out that the potential improvement in painting the OLE is not just a benefit for the residents in the Goring Gap, but is to reduce their impact on the landscape - check the pictures on the website and you should be able to notice that it is the OLEs' impact on the landscape from the hills either side of the valley which the AONB Team are very concerned about....Painted a dark green-ish brown ( you know, the colour of old line side telegraph poles ) would be a huge improvement on the current plain steel as from above, of course, and against the background of the valley sides, the OLE's are not seen against blue skies or white-ish clouds....

Planning law in AONBs is actually scarcely any different to what applies elsewhere, with the local councils taking the lead - unlike the National Parks which have their own planning boards and far more power to set their own rules than any council.

Demanding that Network Rail's permitted development powers should be reined in cannot be done in isolation from all the other similar rights that people and businesses enjoy. And there is not going to be any change anyway, since the broad sweep of the powers in those Acts of Parliament allows all sorts of other activities necessary to the operation of a railway to take place, not just planning-related matters.

When you started posting, one of your key complaints seemed to be about the height of the catenary on top of embankments looming over neighbouring homes - in those circumstances, I repeat, painting the masts will not make it less obtrusive, quite the contrary, in fact, because they will be obtrusive, dark features against the skyline, especially if in that shade of green I mentioned. And on top of an embankment is precisely where much of the catenary between Goring and South Stoke will be. Nor would I mention unobtrusive telegraph poles, or someone will link back to that old picture of just how unobtrusive they weren't.

I do like the image on the campaigners' website showing the shocking impact of the catenary, along with the shocking impact of lots of houses in front of the railway, with a good few of them painted in white. Will you be demanding those are also painted a fetching shade of green instead?

And if the track and catenary is down in a tree-lined cutting, as seen in this Henley Standard story, no one will be able to see them from any hillside to begin with, however hard they try...
http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=40714

The AONB people - and local residents - have had since 2009, when the GWML electrification was authorised by the Government, to say something or to go out and actually study any number of other sensitive locations across the country* where overhead catenary has been in use for decades, so why is it that only when the metalwork appears locally do they choose to pipe up about it?

*eg: The Lune Gorge - which is of course far more scarred by the M6 than the railway line.
Longdendale in Derbyshire, where much of the catenary metalwork for the Woodhead electrification was in place before the Second World War - and before the Peak District National Park, which the line ran through, even existed. In this case, there were portals galore, spanning three or four tracks in lots of places where there were long loops to allow passenger trains to overtake freights.

In neither location was catenary metal work painted green or brown and in both cases, the railway lines themselves, never mind the catenary uprights, are (or were in the case of a working railway through Longdendale) mere details in landscapes which still remain impressive (at least if you don't look at the M6) and are far less developed/farmed/touched by human hand generally than the Goring Gap.

So long as the campaigners continue to make silly statements, such as the one in their video that the GWML catenary amounts to "the most devastating visual assault that has ever occurred in a designated area of outstanding natural beauty" then they will get scant sympathy from me and a lot of other people, especially given that the M40 runs right across the self-same AONB and carves a socking great hole in the Chiltern ridge at Stokenchurch, but then of course it's not in the backyard of the residents of Goring, is it?

 

[QueensCurve]

That sounds like a great idea.

The view from my parent's back window is much improved by the three wind turbines, so why not make the country much better-looking?

Buses replace trains to and from Paddington today because of the wrong type of wind.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And if the track and catenary is down in a tree-lined cutting, as seen in this Henley Standard story, no one will be able to see them from any hillside to begin with, however hard they try...
http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=40714

*eg: The Lune Gorge - which is of course far more scarred by the M6 than the railway line.

From that picture and others I have seen, the masts of the portals appear to be of different heights. They would look a lot better if they were uniform and extended less far over the horizontal part.

The OHLE in the Lune gorge is a damn sight more elegant than this, at least it was untill they added on the autotransformer wire.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

From that picture and others I have seen, the masts of the portals appear to be of different heights. They would look a lot better if they were uniform and extended less far over the horizontal part.

The OHLE in the Lune gorge is a damn sight more elegant than this, at least it was untill they added on the autotransformer wire.

The OLE in the Lune Gorge is mainly single track cantilevers, one per track, for the twin track route. The GWML will look very similar where it is twin track route, it should actually be a little less visible as the single track cantilever structures are smaller and less intrusive.

The shape and size of the portal structures isn't accidental though - the ATF cable runs are above the horizontal portal and inboard, at the top of the masts, which is why they extend above the horizontal part. It removes the requirement for earthing bars as fitted to some of the previous OLE systems which have been upgraded to AT feeding, and keeps HV cabling within the footprint of the OLE, which is one of the many design criteria.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

From that picture and others I have seen, the masts of the portals appear to be of different heights. They would look a lot better if they were uniform and extended less far over the horizontal part.
The OHLE in the Lune gorge is a damn sight more elegant than this, at least it was untill they added on the autotransformer wire.

It seems it is the autotransformer requirement which has increased the height of the masts, compared to the original WCML kit (eg through the Chilterns AONB at Tring).
The Lune Gorge comparison is not really valid as that is a 2-track route with single track cantilevers.
But I agree today's WCML kit has worse visuals than before because of the autotransformer extensions (and the way they have strung the new catenary).

 

[Who Cares]

JIMM....

It’s always interesting to discuss whatever with people who have opposing views….And on this thread I’ve always appreciated your help when I’ve asked questions - even if sometimes your answers are as myopic as my own but from the opposite direction….Doesn’t mean either of us are right or either of us are wrong and I would have let your post above pass if wasn’t for a few necessary corrections....

So I'll dissect and reply if I may....

Planning law in AONBs is actually scarcely any different to what applies elsewhere, with the local councils taking the lead - unlike the National Parks which have their own planning boards and far more power to set their own rules than any council.

From personal experience 4 or 5 years ago ( sadly I wasn’t a farmer ) it’s quite a bit more stringent….More to the point, the District Councils have to refer to the AONB's before taking decisions about major developments and associated issues....This would certainly have happened ( even with the rather useless SODC ) in a case like this Project had NR been required to seek and obtain planning permission for all the work that this Project requires and the associated issues re AONBs, Listed Buildings, etc, etc…..Which leads on to….

Demanding that Network Rail's permitted development powers should be reined in cannot be done in isolation from all the other similar rights that people and businesses enjoy.

No, I'm not demanding....I’ve just said, a couple of times, that it's worth rethinking the historical exemptions from almost 200 years ago which apply to just NR ( plus British Waterways, is it ? ) which don't really have a place in the 21st century....Yes, HowardGWR will call me a strawman yet again, but if, as some on here appear to believe, that this is perfectly normal and acceptable for NR, I wonder how many of the UK’s public at large would support this exemption from planning requirements / permissions if they were all aware of it ? Why not the same, say, for Mobile Phone operators and the National Grid to erect masts and pylons wherever they wish just because they say they need to and because they can ? I'd argue that there are far more people and businesses in the UK dependent on good telecoms networks and electricity supply than there are people who need to get from Cardiff to London 20 minutes more quickly....But these other infrastructure providers and organisations don't enjoy this kind of exempt status, of course....Thinking about it, I would prefer that everyone is subjected to the same existing planning controls, a level playing field for everyone and certainly for all infrastructure providers so that all are exempt or non-exempt….Best to let Parliament decide, although with the tight fisted Tories, as NR’s current owners, anxious to avoid further cost overruns on this project, and Labour and SNP as would be ‘nationalised’ owners, I can’t really see either of them changing NR’s exempt status anytime soon even if, in my opinion, it is worth the debate….Which leads on to….

The AONB people - and local residents - have had since 2009, when the GWML electrification was authorised by the Government, to say something or to go out and actually study any number of other sensitive locations across the country* where overhead catenary has been in use for decades, so why is it that only when the metalwork appears locally do they choose to pipe up about it?

Wake up at the back !! Future consultation was included as part of the NR’s Environmental Statement and so was expected to happen....It isn't the fault of the residents and AONBs that NR didn't produce their detailed plans for consultation and discussion until December 2014 which was AFTER construction work had begun and while everyone was still waiting for the invitation....See the letters from Ian Reay and Richard Turner half way down the page here -

http://www.savegoringgap.org.uk/the-railway-action-group-rag.html

A couple of other points,

When you started posting, one of your key complaints seemed to be about the height of the catenary on top of embankments looming over neighbouring homes….

Still is an issue for many individual residents, but even I am sufficiently realistic to accept that there's really nothing much that can be done in individual cases....However, you'll need to convince several thousand people and the AONBs, not just me, that the currently unpainted OLEs would be an improvement over dark coloured OLEs - particularly because it’s the ‘crossbars’ which are the most visually obtrusive element from a distance....

I do like the image on the campaigners' website showing the shocking impact of the catenary, along with the shocking impact of lots of houses in front of the railway, with a good few of them painted in white. Will you be demanding those are also painted a fetching shade of green instead?

Not sure you meant that did you ? The white houses were there several centuries before even the original GWR and are part of almost every rural landscape in the UK....I suggest that you edit your post to delete that bit, and I'll edit this post to delete this bit....

And if the track and catenary is down in a tree-lined cutting, as seen in this Henley Standard story, no one will be able to see them from any hillside to begin with, however hard they try...

Or….

And on top of an embankment is precisely where much of the catenary between Goring and South Stoke will be….

So which one is it then ? These days my memory is not what it was, but I reckon that between Didcot and the road bridge where the A329 crosses the line between Basildon Park and Pangbourne, the OLE is probably visible at ground level for about 75% of the distance and certainly more than 75% from the surrounding hills on the Goring side and the Streatley side of the Thames….Between Goring and South Stoke it’s probably 50/50, although from about one mile short of South Stoke through to Cholsey, about 5 miles and including the Moulsford viaduct, is almost 100% visible from ground level....So maybe I answered that one myself, but please feel free to correct me on mileages and percentages if I’m wrong….

....especially given that the M40 runs right across the self-same AONB and carves a *socking great hole in the Chiltern ridge at Stokenchurch, but then of course it's not in the backyard of the residents of Goring, is it?

As I've said several times, I fully agree with you about the way the Chilterns AONB was disfigured by the M40 amongst so many other detrimental developments over the past 30 years or so, but I'll also repeat what I’ve already said a couple of times - Let's not work on the basis that two wrongs make a right....

And as for the NIMBY nudge-nudge wink-wink….Although since coming on here I’ve learned a huge amount of ‘ the what is and the what is not ‘ about electrification from yourself, especially from Philip P, and from other posters, I’ve also learned not a lot from the many NIMBYSIDGAFs…. I may be mistaken so I’ll apologise in advance if I am, but I think you’ll find that there is nobody in Senior Positions at both the Chilterns and Wessex AONBs who live within 20 miles of the Goring Gap, so hardly NIMBYs and thankfully not NIMBYSIDGAFs….The 5,000 or so people in the Goring Gap – perhaps and understandable that supporters of this Project would refer to them as NIMBYs….But in my opinion ( and you are entitled to yours ) they are quite right to pipe up about it as you so eloquently put it as NR ( again in my opinion and you’re entitled to your own opinion – I remember you posted a few months ago that work started early in the Goring Gap because of the inability of the infamous HOPS train to work on this stretch, whereas NR specifically refer to the need to finish the Test Track ) deliberately avoided statutory requirements for consultation and mitigation before starting engineering works in the AONBs and in the Goring Gap….

Sorry to be so pedantic – just wanted to correct / add to some of your comments….

 

[Philip Phlopp]

whereas NR...deliberately avoided statutory requirements for consultation and mitigation before starting engineering works in the AONBs and in the Goring Gap.

Which you've been told and have accepted are not statutory requirements for consultation at all. You've accepted that Network Rail under the Acts of Parliament granting authority to construct the railway are entitled to do as they please with regards to maintenance and upgrading works on the line without having to consult anybody, so please stop with the statutory requirements for consultation misdirection.

Most of us have been most patient with you, but in the face of myths being repeatedly perpetuated, enough really is enough now.

 

[steverailer]

WHO CARES

Here's what I suspect will actually happen in the coming months.
1. Work will continue on the electrification including putting the wires up
2. NWR will launch a consultation at some point in the new year to make the locals think they are involved, by which point the wires have been installed as planned.
3. When the report into the consultaion comes out it will decide that it is too costly and too dissruptive to change anything, and that they have gone over and above any statutory requirement.
4. Life goes on and people get used to the structures as they weather and blend in more, the same as all new buildings granted in the area

 

[Kentish Paul]

This thread has made me chuckle.
As a resident of Ashford both before and after HS1 I can well remember the screaming and shouting that went on. This was not just OHLE but a whole new railway. It was originally intended to go next to the M20 but it was decided to connect to the station as before.
It therefore carves its way through the town in tunnel and on viaduct at 270 km/h. Does anyone bat an eyelid? Absolutley not ! People get used to things.

 

[AM9]

WHO CARES

Here's what I suspect will actually happen in the coming months.
1. Work will continue on the electrification including putting the wires up
2. NWR will launch a consultation at some point in the new year to make the locals think they are involved, by which point the wires have been installed as planned.
3. When the report into the consultaion comes out it will decide that it is too costly and too dissruptive to change anything, and that they have gone over and above any statutory requirement.
4. Life goes on and people get used to the structures as they weather and blend in more, the same as all new buildings granted in the area

- over centuries since humans started building in areas of natural beauty.

 

[HowardGWR]

Many thanks to the Mods. This is a subject worthy of discussion. My posting citing the A354 Weymouth Relief Road is merely to illustrate how weak the legislation is that protects AsONB (rather than 'AONBs' ).

After a long time fighting in this area, I was very hopeful of the C and ROW Act, but it was insufficiently proscriptive. 'Having regard' simply does not do it I'm afraid, as our Goring Gap friends will discover.

 

[jimm]

It seems it is the autotransformer requirement which has increased the height of the masts, compared to the original WCML kit (eg through the Chilterns AONB at Tring).
The Lune Gorge comparison is not really valid as that is a 2-track route with single track cantilevers.
But I agree today's WCML kit has worse visuals than before because of the autotransformer extensions (and the way they have strung the new catenary).

In what way is it not valid? It is an electrified railway line through a scenic bit of countryside - although not in a national park or AONB for some reason - which appears to be the protesters' key argument at Goring, even if it apparently took them six years to realise what electrification would bring to the area.

And as I said, the Woodhead route had portals galore on its section through the Peak District National Park, yet I cannot recall any demands that they be painted/replaced by more elegant structures/whatever. They were a fact of life in the area, rather like the stream of traffic on the A628 between Manchester and Sheffield, which is a sight more of an environmental disaster for Longdendale than the catenary ever was.

Oh silly me, I forgot that two wrongs don't make a right... so I guess I'll have a bit of a wait for the Goring protesters to also demand the grassing over of the M40 and infilling of Stokenchurch cutting to right another wrong in the Chilterns AONB because this, unlike GWML electrification of course, is not "the most devastating visual assault that has ever occurred in a designated area of outstanding natural beauty" - nor is it on their doorstep, but how dare I suggest they are NIMBYs. Had the GWML taken the other route to Bristol studied by Brunel, through the Vale of Pewsey, would the burghers of Goring have been rising up in defence of the countryside in that area? Of course not.

 

[Who Cares]

Yes....Thank You Mods....Posting on the previous thread was like trying to run a gin bar in Jeddah….

JIMM....

The Woodhead Line - is that the one which used to have the 'Tommy Sheds' or was it the 'BoBo Sheds' near Reddish North station in the early 50's ? I grew up in Reddish and we used to go regular bike rides down to some sheds....And the same line which I used to get to Guide Bridge where my wife-to-be lived when I was working in Manchester's Corn Exchange in the late 60's ?

Small world or is it just my memory not what it was ?

Anyway, what I was going to say is that peoples' attitudes to the environment and National Parks, AsONB ( ! ) etc 50-odd years ago was a whole lot different than it is now....Apart from writing to The Times, or whatever, what other means of awareness and opposition did people have in those days to Big Brother government ? Nowadays we have the internet which allows forums like this....Who knows what more publicity and means of communications would have provided for opposition to the electrification to have surfaced if this forum had existed at the time and would then, perhaps, have pushed the custodians of the Peak District National Park into a little more action….

Of your question….I can't speak for everyone in the Goring Gap, of course, but I suspect that many would take up arms for anything that threatens the status quo in what is a lovely part of the world, whether it's this Project, school closures, stopping local bus services, Tesco wanting to convert an empty pub into a local store, etc....If you feel that that makes them NIMBYs then OK you can have your opinion - my opinion is that it shows they take an interest and a bit of pride in what's happening in the area where they live and are not just a bunch of bone idle, brain dead Wayne and Waynettas....

Would they be as vocal for other events outside the Goring Gap such as Pewsey ? My experience is that if they (1) knew about it and (2) felt strongly enough about it, then many would....Most of my friends still in the area and people I’ve met the past few months on-line are actively involved with some HS2 Groups - which as you'll know is miles from the Goring Gap – because they care passionately about it, some for ecological reasons and some for socio-economic reasons….Others are very active in the Heathrow debate and the opposition groups….Some others are very active in trying to get more affordable homes in Oxfordshire while some others, simultaneously, are trying to stop more housing developments in Oxfordshire….It’s whatever you know about and personally feel strongly about, I suppose….

And as for the M40 and Stokenchurch - had I been in the UK at the time, I and several other Goring and Wallingford residents who I know would most certainly have joined in opposition to what I agree is an ugly scar in a beautiful part of the Chilterns….Would mass opposition have changed anything – probably not, as David rarely beats Goliath in these cases but as long as you have enough people who refuse to be bullied, then at least give it a shot….

 

[Elecman]

AM….Absolutely correct….But the intention and the hope is that the courts might insist that a couple of the AONBs’ and residents’ boxes get ticked….At the moment, it’s only NR’s boxes which have been ticked….


PHILIP….Yes, it’s bloody annoying….And as I said a few months ago when we discussed it together, it’s probably about time that this particular 19th century law is dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century….Imagine what the country might look like if sometime soon NR decided, in the name cost savings and environmental improvement, that they wanted to install 40/50 feet high Wind Turbines every 100 yards or so alongside every mile of track in the UK to support a nationwide electrification programme….Scarey thought isn’t it ?

Don't worry it's probably already being considered but not as often as you suggest.

 

[Tw99]

There's an article about this in the Sunday Telegraph today:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ctrification-ruining-English-countryside.html

 

[Philip Phlopp]

There's an article about this in the Sunday Telegraph today:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ctrification-ruining-English-countryside.html

It's getting a bit tedious now. They're not getting new portal gantries, no matter how much they keep banging on about it. There is nothing else out there designed, ready for production, which has been tested and which fits into certification. The metalwork, if it's not fitted, has already been ordered, paid for and mainly manufactured for Goring anyway, and was done long before this campaign kicked off.

They're trading a loss of some views for a railway that 24/7/365 will makes considerably less noise, which will have much less air pollution and for those people in the area using the train service, will have more capacity, be more reliable and offer better journey times and options.

 

[Ironside]

And there is nothing the objectors can do about the structures going up so I imagine they will go up this year anyway.

 

[Carntyne]

When are the gantries due to go up? This thread will be fun round about then.