Recent content by SteveRainhill

The Design and Access Statement for the whole Huddersfield-Westtown scheme (March 2021) said (para. 8.7.35) 'The decision to match the existing span and skew angle of the MDL1/9 [Thornhill Road underbridge] creates the opportunity of reusing the existing MDL1/9 deck, albeit with modification to...

Demolished, and replaced. See attached plan. https://sacuksprodnrdigital0001.blob.core.windows.net/twao-huddersfield-westtown/Huddersfield%20to%20Westtown%20(Dewsbury)/02%20TWAO%20Application%20Documents/NR13%20Planning%20Drawing%20-%20Colne%20Bridge%20Road%20-%20Proposed%20Highways%20GA.pdf

Here's one (NR13 Planning Drawing - B6117 Fall Lane, Thornhill Road (MDL1-9) - Proposed Highway GA.pdf):

Yes that's what I meant, thanks snowball, but thanks to G for reply. Here's why I think so (from the Design Guide): [/URL][/IMG]

My impression from the plans is that several of the piers and abutments supporting the Trinity Way bridge can't be built until the road is realigned, either back to its original course or to a new temporary one. Good to hear of progress though.

Also not quite finished are the footbridges at Rainhill Station. According to a letter from NR to local residents, the metal grilles that replaced the temporary plywood and scaffolding are themselves being replaced by clear plastic panels. Work is now underway. Personally I thought the...

NR didn’t ‘forget’ any such thing (though your quotation marks seem to suggest something even more implausible, namely deliberate evasion). Their case is that they consulted heritage bodies at the appropriate time according to the GRIP rules. If there had been either forgetting or deliberate...

There's another indication here, from a while back though still probably some kind of guide (pdf link seems to be broken however).

Indeed, and it wasn't a rubber stamp but a 15-page letter. Someone had to write it, thoroughly checking and in part modifying the Report in the process. Opponents will pore intensively over the decision for a chance to object - the record suggests it would take a lot of work to deter inveterate...

It was presented in public. The Inquiry website (still open) shows that Mark Whitby and other objectors presented their various alternative schemes. You are perhaps misled by Nym's remark about the public consultations, which were earlier (three of them). Network Rail presented at these only the...

So: headspans. See post 2178 (smug look).

Information on the Rainhill gap is thin on the ground. As far as I can tell, there is no mention of electrification plans on the St Helens planning site (beyond already completed work). Except for this interesting paragraph from English Heritage's letter responding to the Sankey Viaduct...

They could accommodate perturbations with a platform change, provided there was a platform available. The question is what should be the standard pattern, and it remains a puzzle why a simpler and more convenient one hasn't been introduced.

Or, route all the slow trains along the slow line, which I assume will be the eventual configuration, and for which the infrastructure now seems to exist. I can't understand why they aren't doing it already, given the evident inconvenience that you speak of.

There's nothing in the 'Prior Approval' request submitted to Knowsley Council about alterations to the canopy. I imagine it's been temporarily removed because the props supporting it needed to make way for the works to raise and resurface the platform.