Redundant bridges that ought to be removed ?

[Halifaxlad]

Recently NR has removed two redundant sections of 'Taylors Bridge' over Rose Bank Road, Todmorden.

Read more about here in this Network Rail press release entitled 'Passengers warned of railway closure as historic bridge work starts' dated 21st October 2020. https://www.networkrailmediacentre....sure-as-historic-todmorden-bridge-work-starts

Apart from removing unnecessary large maintenance liabilities, this can also bring improvements to public highways and footpaths beneath.

Inspired by this I thought I create this thread so people can suggest other bridges that could be removed to aid either of the above.

 

[Ploughman]

As long as it does not kill off any potential reopening.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Is there any point in retaining the GCR bridge over the M1 between Leicester and Lutterworth?

 

[Halifaxlad]

As long as it does not kill off any potential reopening.

I was mainly thinking about bridges adjacent to existing lines such as Taylor Bridge, not disused lines. Obviously I don't want to prejudice any reopening plans or aspirations.

There is an abundance of bridges where it used to be 4 or 6 tracks but have been reduced in number that don't need to be retained and will never likely be used again.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As long as it does not kill off any potential reopening.

Often the bridges will have deteriorated during closure to such an extent that they need to be replaced anyway, and they aren't that major a cost for a reopening, as long as you're just talking a simple bridge and not the Ribblehead Viaduct.

Crikey, the Bletchley flyover deteriorated during the line being open!

 

[Bald Rick]

Is it wrong to suggest Meldon Viaduct?

 

[Halifaxlad]

They're are some humorous suggestions on this forum at times that make me chuckle!

As an example, here we have Water Lane just south of Halifax station.



The line to Halifax is two tracks but yet we have a total of three bridges here with capacity for 6 tracks due to historical railway use! A girder bridge closest to the camera and two separate stone bridges, the earliest being the one in the middle.

Now its never going to be any more than two tracks out of Halifax on either the Up or Down lines. Therefore they're isn't any point in retaining capacity for 6 tracks!

Before anyone suggests it may be useful to retain it to act as a buffer against HGV's, in this particular case this doesn't apply as they're a further 3 bridges behind the camera that carry B&M bargains over the road. (Yes it used to be a railway line as well)

Removing this bridge could improve the highway below whilst removing a maintenance liability on NR. Although if this was done I would keep the middle bridge that is the oldest, slew the lines back over it as the embankment to the east is extremely steep.

 

[The Planner]

How long would it be before the cost of maintenance overtakes the cost of removing them?

 

[Halifaxlad]

How long would it be before the cost of maintenance overtakes the cost of removing them?

A similar remark came up recently when discussing cost of operating all these mechanical signal boxes.

I'm not sure on how much is spent on inspecting them periodically.

At the end of the day a lot of these structures will need to be taken out one day, so why not start planning for this now ?

Don't forget they are other benefits like improving the local highway (mainly for pedestrians)

Specially regarding the above mentioned bridge, a few years ago they're was a particular serious incident that wasn't helped by the fact the highway has 6 bridges over it plunging it into total darkness at night!

Nobody died but it was taped off the following day from what I remember.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Bridges/viaducts that are no longer required for railway use can often be very useful for pedestrians and cyclists.

By definition they can address "severance" - where a large obstacle (e.g. a river or a motorway) prevents pedestrian/cycle passage from one area to another. Fledborough and Torksey viaducts, for example, are the only crossings of the River Trent for several miles in either direction, with only Dunham Bridge (on a twisty, fast, dangerous A road) as an alternative.

The standard of maintenance required for pedestrians and cyclists is much less than that required by heavy rail. Plus they can be worthwhile attractions in themselves - such as Meldon Viaduct.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

I thought I create this thread so people can suggest other bridges that could be removed to aid either of the above.

One I've mentioned before is a bridge over Commercial Road in Limehouse, east London near the Lowell Street T-junction. The old rail route is now blocked by new buildings so the bridge is totally redundant.

 

[Dr_Paul]

One I've mentioned before is a bridge over Commercial Road in Limehouse, east London near the Lowell Street T-junction. The old rail route is now blocked by new buildings so the bridge is totally redundant.

The retention of that bridge, especially after the removal of sections of the viaduct leading to it, has long been a puzzle for me as well. The last time I saw it, a few years back, it looked as if it had had a nice new coat of paint.

 

[Cowley]

Is it wrong to suggest Meldon Viaduct?

Leave our viaduct alone!