• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Ordsall Chord

Status
Not open for further replies.

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
8,144
Location
Leeds
Well, yes it is rather, Not Historic England, not MOSI or Friends of, not me (checks bank account to be sure)... So who?

According to a post on Skyscrapercity a few days ago it may be the engineer who presented an alternative plan at the public inquiry.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That person was Mark Whitby so it may be him. From the Inspector's Report, para 277:

Mark Whitby is a civil engineer, a previous President of the Institution of Civil Engineers and past chairman of the UrbanDesign Alliance. He was appointed to the design panel for the Ordsall Chord project in late 2012. Having reviewed the options for the Ordsall Chord, Mr Whitby brought to Network Rail’s attention a further option, now known as Option 15. On receipt of Network Rail’s analysis of Option 15 in October 2013, which rejected the option, Mr Whitby resigned from the panel so that he could object to the proposed Order.

Thanks to CHAPS2034 on SSC for this info.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

PR1Berske

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2010
Messages
3,025
I wonder if this is the beginning of the end for this project. How much money can be afforded on a court case before it's considered too expensive?
 

CdBrux

Member
Joined
4 Mar 2014
Messages
919
Location
Munich
If it is Mark Whitby then lets hope he is as successful as Arthur Dent. He's had his opportunity already.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,897
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Can an individual hope to reverse a planning decision?
Unless he has a property interest nearby I don't see how he can hope to succeed, except to delay things.
The aesthetic issues about the choice of route (Option 15 etc) have surely already been debated.
 

HilversumNS

Member
Joined
30 Apr 2015
Messages
232
Can an individual hope to reverse a planning decision?
Unless he has a property interest nearby I don't see how he can hope to succeed, except to delay things.
The aesthetic issues about the choice of route (Option 15 etc) have surely already been debated.

The objection is related to HOW the decision was made, which I believe is all that can be objected to at this late stage.

From http://www.railtechnologymagazine.c...isted-for-september-says-engineer-responsible
He (Mark Whitby)told us: “I can confirm that the case is now listed for hearing [at the High Court] in September. My lawyers have identified errors in the decision making process that, given the significance of the harm to the engineering heritage of the Network Rail’s proposal, I considered should be reviewed in court.”
 

bitmadmax

Member
Joined
17 Mar 2013
Messages
50
It seems to me like its a case of a sore looser that his design was not chosen. He admits it would have cost more (from reading the site)

I'm sure it goes way beyond that. NR hoped to sneak this scheme through. Little or no due diligence in certain areas and they now have ton deal with the fallout.
 

LDECRexile

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2014
Messages
2,149
Location
Southport, UK
I'm sure it goes way beyond that. NR hoped to sneak this scheme through. Little or no due diligence in certain areas and they now have ton deal with the fallout.

'Sneak it through' the blaze of publicity, in the teeth of opposition from English Heritage, MOSI and this chap himself, plus due process, plus DfT plus planners?

Do you know someone at Network Rail who has confessed or bragged of trying to sneak it through or are you ascribing motives and sentiments to people you've never met?

In which areas did they do little or no due diligence?
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
8,144
Location
Leeds
I wonder if this is the beginning of the end for this project. How much money can be afforded on a court case before it's considered too expensive?

The cost of a court case is pretty trivial in relation to the cost of the project. Replacement by a more expensive design, and the cost of the associated delays, could be another matter.
 

bitmadmax

Member
Joined
17 Mar 2013
Messages
50
'Sneak it through' the blaze of publicity, in the teeth of opposition from English Heritage, MOSI and this chap himself, plus due process, plus DfT plus planners?

Do you know someone at Network Rail who has confessed or bragged of trying to sneak it through or are you ascribing motives and sentiments to people you've never met?

In which areas did they do little or no due diligence?

The fact that they initially "forgot" to consult with the various heritage bodies despite going through Grade 1/2 listed structures and severing a 180 year old railway line in the process.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
28,594
Location
Nottingham
The cost of a court case is pretty trivial in relation to the cost of the project. Replacement by a more expensive design, and the cost of the associated delays, could be another matter.

However the time delay of a court case is likely to clobber whatever remains of the Northern Hub programme timescales and indirectly cost far more. That's why Network Rail will have done everything they can to ensure that process is followed - it may cost a little more up front but the costs of not doing so are huge.
 

Senex

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Messages
2,956
Location
York
The process for getting construction powers seems to be slower under the Transport & Works Act than it was when the railway companies and then BR used the local and private bills procedures to obtain an Act.

This whole business raises the interesting question of how far an individual should be able to delay works of importance for the national infrastructure. There's a very interesting German parallel in the planned reconstruction of the Dresdner Bahn in Berlin where the arguments have been rumbling on since Reunification and still shew no signs of resolution. Will the Ordsall Chord arguments take a similar length of time?
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,229
However the time delay of a court case is likely to clobber whatever remains of the Northern Hub programme timescales and indirectly cost far more. That's why Network Rail will have done everything they can to ensure that process is followed - it may cost a little more up front but the costs of not doing so are huge.

I thought back around post #475-483 in this thread we had discussed that there was all sorts of consultation on the other routes that was discussed prior to and during the TWA Order enquiry?
 
Last edited:

SteveRainhill

Member
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Messages
23
The fact that they initially "forgot" to consult with the various heritage bodies despite going through Grade 1/2 listed structures and severing a 180 year old railway line in the process.

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 evasion this would undoubtedly have become apparent by now, and the whole process would have had to be restarted. EH’s claim was not ‘forgetting’ or evasion, but that given the significance of the heritage assets they should have been consulted right at the beginning, notwithstanding the rules, i.e. when the initial choice was made for the Victoria/Ordsall solution rather than the Piccadilly/Ardwick one. Probably it would have been politically wise to do so, as the Inspector seemed to agree, but he also agreed with NR that the result wouldn’t have been any different. In the end it came down not to procedure, but to a judgement as to whether the damage to the listed structures and their setting is outweighed by the benefits of the scheme, as compared to the costs and benefits of other solutions. The Inspector agreed with NR’s judgement, and the Secretary of State agreed with the Inspector’s.

Like HilversumNS, I would think a High Court judge would confine his or her consideration to procedure, and it is noteworthy that EH, who made the procedural argument, are not appealing. Mark Whitby’s case about procedure probably has to do with the treatment of his own evidence, or NR’s rebuttal of it, not this alleged ‘forgetting’. We’ll see if this case is any good, but he isn’t the only party who’s got lawyers, and no doubt part of the reason for the time taken by the SoS was to let his lawyers have a good look over it and get things as watertight as possible.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,388
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
Mark Whitby’s case about procedure probably has to do with the treatment of his own evidence, or NR’s rebuttal of it, not this alleged ‘forgetting’. We’ll see if this case is any good, but he isn’t the only party who’s got lawyers, and no doubt part of the reason for the time taken by the SoS was to let his lawyers have a good look over it and get things as watertight as possible.

This part of your posting voices my own thoughts. It seems such a long time ago when I attended the opening day of the Public Enquiry at the Mechanics Institute in Manchester.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
28,594
Location
Nottingham
I thought back around post #475-483 in this thread we had discussed that there was all sorts of consultation on the other routes that was discussed prior to and during the TWA Order enquiry?

Yes there was - as well as being the right thing to do, it's part of the process to minimise the risk of either having the application turned down or getting some form legal challenge. We don't appear to know what grounds the challenge is based on but hopefully the work that has been done already will allow it to be thrown out reasonably quickly.
 

dysonsphere

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2013
Messages
518
Yes there was - as well as being the right thing to do, it's part of the process to minimise the risk of either having the application turned down or getting some form legal challenge. We don't appear to know what grounds the challenge is based on but hopefully the work that has been done already will allow it to be thrown out reasonably quickly.

Well hopefully when he loses he gets to pay BOTH sides costs. that will be at least a million
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
27,145
Location
Bolton
How many projects historically have been granted TWAO and then not delivered... ?

I thought the whole point of the Order was that they have finally decided: yes - we are going to do this now!
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
8,144
Location
Leeds
Sometimes funding remains a problem even when a TWAO is in place. A TWAO has been in place for ages authorising doubling of part of the Felixstowe branch but nobody has agreed to pay for it. The TWAO currently being sought for the Metrolink extension to Trafford Park is largely a renewal of an old expiring one, though they are also tweaking the route.
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
8,144
Location
Leeds
On Friday or Saturday Network Rail's Northern Programme Twitter feed retweeted a couple of pictures originally tweeted by someone else, of surveyor's pegs being placed in the ground, said to be for the Ordsall Chord:

https://twitter.com/NetworkRailNP

Maybe they're trying to be ready to start quickly if the legal challenge gets to be dismissed before the turn of the year.
 

scouseyb123

On Moderation
Joined
27 Nov 2012
Messages
250
With these current 'pauses', 'rethinks', 'reassessments' or whatever they are being called by the government does anyone here know what the status is with the construction of the Ordsall Chord? I cannot find much information on what the status of it is because of the pause.

Thanks!
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
10,457
Location
Preston Lancs
With these current 'pauses', 'rethinks', 'reassessments' or whatever they are being called by the government does anyone here know what the status is with the construction of the Ordsall Chord? I cannot find much information on what the status of it is because of the pause.

Thanks!

I do not know -but would be shocked if it did not go ahead.
 

deltic

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2010
Messages
3,713
There is a judicial review ongoing see http://www.building.co.uk/top-engin...ew-challenge-to-ordsall-chord/5076558.article

"A high-profile engineer has launched a last ditch legal challenge against his former client to stop an £85m infrastructure project he says would damage “the Industrial Revolution’s Stonehenge”.

Mark Whitby has hired lawyers to take Network Rail to court, claiming errors were made in the decision-making process over the route of the Ordsall Chord project in Manchester.

A judicial review is slated for the High Court in late September, around the time work was due to start on the project.

The 340m Ordsall Chord rail link, designed by BDP, would connect Manchester’s Piccadilly and Victoria stations for the first time with a new bridge over the River Irwell, just west of the city centre. Supporters say it would improve links between Manchester airport and other northern cities and allow more trains through central Manchester by easing congestion at a bottleneck. It was given planning permission by transport secretary Patrick McLoughlin after a public inquiry last year and was expected to open in 2017.

Whitby was originally hired as a design consultant on the project but walked off the job when Network Rail rejected his proposal for an alternative route avoiding the historic bridges and buildings.

Whitby, a former president of the Institution of Civil Engineers, tried to stop the project at last year’s public inquiry where Historic England also expressed its “profound concern”. HE, formerly English Heritage, described the site as “a cradle of the modern industrial world” and of international significance.

It includes Liverpool Road station, built for George Stephenson’s 1830s Liverpool & Manchester Railway, the first passenger railway in the world. The station itself – now part of the Museum of Science and Industry – and associated buildings are grade I listed, as is Stephenson’s Bridge.

Several other structures within the conservation area are grade II listed, including the Girder Bridge – which would be demolished – Water Street Bridge and Zig-Zag Viaduct – which would both be partly demolished – Castlefield Viaduct, Colonnaded Viaduct, 1830 viaduct and other buildings on Liverpool Road.

“This assemblage tells the story of how this station served as a blueprint for all other railway development which followed. It is not overstating the position to say that this is one of the most significant railway sites in the world,” said Historic England’s lawyer, Scott Lyness, at the public inquiry.

“There is a troubling irony in such a severe magnitude of harm to our railway heritage being caused by a railway line, as promoted by a guardian of our railways infrastructure.”

Whitby said he objected not just to the loss of historic fabric but to the damage that would be done to the setting.

“It will completely truncate the world’s first passenger railway, turning bridges into functionless artefacts,” he said.

“It’s very unusual to have three grade I and eight grade II listed buildings together. People don’t understand how special this place is. It’s the place that triggered the modern world.

“It stands alongside Runnymede in terms of history. [Former HE chairman] Neil Cossons likened it to the Stonehenge of the Industrial Revolution. This is the place where it happened and this is the evidence of the courage and skill of the engineers who made it happen. It’s still here, albeit unloved, but this would kill it.”

He added: “I have no problem with the necessity of the railway line but there’s an alternative route that they’ve unfortunately missed. It would be huge folly to do this when it’s not necessary.”

Whitby’s engineering firm whitbybird, which he sold to Ramboll in 2007, designed the award-winning Merchant’s footbridge a quarter of a mile from the site. The bridge was later caught in an authorship row involving the RCA’s then head of architecture, Charles Walker.

Meanwhile, MOSI, the Manchester Museum of Science, which withdrew its objection to the proposals last year, has launched a £4 million design competition for a temporary gallery in one of the listed warehouses. Whitby dismissed the idea of calling for a boycott.

Network Rail said as an interested party in the legal action it was not in a position to pre-judge the outcome, but repeated its commitment to “delivering the benefits of the Northern Hub which will provide space for hundreds more trains each day and room for millions more passengers”.

On its website it points out that following previous objections it changed the route which originally cut through Stephenson’s Bridge."
 

Darren R

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2013
Messages
1,252
Location
Lancashire
I can't help wonder what the total cost of this delay is going to be. If he loses the judicial review will he be billed for Network Rail's legal bills and any increase in construction costs that occur as a result of his actions? (Rhetorical question by the way - we all know the answer!)
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
8,144
Location
Leeds
I think the work that is happenning is minor stuff that NR has the legal power to do anyway, such as new signal gantries on the existing viaducts.
 

Senex

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Messages
2,956
Location
York
I can't help wonder what the total cost of this delay is going to be. If he loses the judicial review will he be billed for Network Rail's legal bills and any increase in construction costs that occur as a result of his actions? (Rhetorical question by the way - we all know the answer!)

I'm afraid we do. But why shouldn't he be billed? He can hardly get his costs paid on the grounds that what he is doing is in the public interest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top