Platform Construction Costs

[DynamicSpirit]

It is also the case that any third party wanting to enhance the network can do the work themselves - or get a suitably competent contractor to do so in open competition. The fact that most choose NR to do the work suggests that it provides the best value for money.

That reasoning presumes a reasonably free market, with lots of companies that could do such work (in terms of having both the technical expertise and the expertise in communicating with NR to arrange the work)? Is that really the case?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In some cases Network Rail may have to purchase land and apply for planning permission to develop that land, while in other cases it could require a bridge being widened.

While I take your point about a bridge, surely the need to purchase land and apply for planning permission is no different from any new-build house, so that in itself doesn't seem valid as a reason for rail costs being so much higher (although obviously various people have given a lot of other reasons that are valid).

 

[21C101]

It's not just railway costs, road building costs have also risen exponentially during the last 25 years.

I reckon the main cost is due to mainly EU regulations that mean that you have to exhaustively demonstrate, effectively prove, that design and construction is safe before you can do anything along with all sorts of hazardous materials and environmental legislation.

The result is that whereas 30 years ago when I started 90% of resources were doing the work and 10% doing the drawings and paperwork, now 90% of the resources are spent doing, drawings paperwork, getting permission to work and auditing the work and each other and only 10% actually doing the work.

Eg now, to hang a CIS monitor off a brick station building wall you would need to get all sorts of reports on whether the wall could take it, involving complex calculations, drilling core holes etc. along with precise drawings showing where it goes and how it is hung etc., plus ergonomic reports that it was properly visible etc. When all this is done checked, audited submitted to clients and approved, then someone is allowed to install it. Then all sorts of audits are done to ensure it is installed properly.

30 years ago you went out with an experienced in house civil engineer to site, showed him where you wanted to put it, showed him a picture of what it looked like and told him how much it weighed. He looked, scratched his head, said yea or nay using his civil engineering knowledge and his local knowledge of the condition of various station buildings in the area. You then went out with the contractor and said please put it there and sprayed the wall with an X in yellow paint where you wanted it. He then had it installed by his staff. Afterwards you went and checked that it was in the right place and working properly and, if so, signed off the contractors invoice, if not you phoned them up, gave them what ho and told them to sort it and until they did you wouldn't sign the invoice off.

I'm simplifying a little but you get the idea.

 

[eps200]

Whilst I am sure many of you know bestsyou are not comparing like for like.

As Bald Rick says try asking your builder to work in a very short slot and stupid o clock on a Sunday morning, then see that slot cancelled a couple of times, after you have mobilised all your staff, then try to rearrange the work and re book all the machines.

Once that is done then comply with all of the railway safety rules for planning and delivering your works safely, then make sure your builders have the correct PTS and safety gear ( you will need to provide more men to give you your look outs etc than if they were at home), then arrange your material deliveries which may have to come by train as the site cant be accessed by lorry (unlike your driveway) then make sure your tools are all appropriate to work under live OHLE ( pitch limited machines, insulated ladders etc) or run up the costs of an isolation, hire in your RRV and operators, then you will need to provide illumination, messing facilities etc, then you have to re plan your work site at the last minute because the next site along needs another ballast train at the last moment which means you cant, quite finish all the work so you need another possession and so on.

That’s is before you factor in weather, machine failure, cable strikes, train delays 200 miles away etc etc etc

Yes it is expensive but it is a very different environment to domestic construction. It is still too expensive and that needs to be brought down but the safe environment, rightly, demanded on the railway costs money. So do the short time windows the TOCS will agree to.

I've worked freight only rail tracks and on container terminal crane rails with straddle carriers the size of houses running around. Not comparable to a 125mph line or anything but we somehow needed twice as much PPE on the rail tracks.

 

[jon0844]

Eg now, to hang a CIS monitor off a brick station building wall you would need to get all sorts of reports on whether the wall could take it, involving complex calculations, drilling core holes etc. along with precise drawings showing where it goes and how it is hung etc., plus ergonomic reports that it was properly visible etc. When all this is done checked, audited submitted to clients and approved, then someone is allowed to install it. Then all sorts of audits are done to ensure it is installed properly.

Despite this, you get the situation where you put in a help point on a platform complete with CCTV to monitor said point - then later allow a 'portacabin style' coffee kiosk to be put in front of the help point, with a pipe that drains into the platform drain.. and that's not deemed a concern by anyone.

Again, I speak about Hatfield station. FCC said they'd look into it about a year ago, but never did anything. I assume they thought it's okay that the kiosk creates a wonderful place for someone to hide at night, which is - ironically - where the help point is!

I bet in the old days, if we had help points, someone local would have spotted this in an instant and got it sorted. Either moving the camera, or the help point, or not allowing the kiosk to be positioned there.

The only way it will be fixed is when the new station building is opened and the kiosk presumably goes.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

That reasoning presumes a reasonably free market, with lots of companies that could do such work (in terms of having both the technical expertise and the expertise in communicating with NR to arrange the work)? Is that really the case?

They choose Network Rail because then they don't have manage approvals, NR does it internally. I can't begin to imagine how long it would take to get a completely accepted scheme as a totally independant third party!

 

[northwichcat]

While I take your point about a bridge, surely the need to purchase land and apply for planning permission is no different from any new-build house, so that in itself doesn't seem valid as a reason for rail costs being so much higher (although obviously various people have given a lot of other reasons that are valid).

Hypothetically if the platforms at Knutsford needed to be extended in the Northwich direction to allow 8 car trains (very unlikely) then the first obstacle would be the A50 bridge, then as soon as you get to the other side of the bridge you've got an industrial estate right up against the line so you'd need to purchase some of the land off the landowner. What if he doesn't want to sell it? Then you need to get a compulsory land order purchase and compensate the land owner who in turn will need to terminate the lease of at least one long standing business and compensate them appropriately.

 

[Taunton]

Then you need to get a compulsory land order purchase and compensate the land owner .

Having worked on many an infrastructure project I can tell you that the vast majority of any required land is obtained by normal negotiation, with Compulsory Purchase, although available, very much a last-ditch approach, and in fact rarely used.

 

[thealexweb]

Can anyone provide a rough estimate for the restoration of the Wigan bound platforms at Lostock station. They would be required to be six cars in length to match Platforms 1 and 2. This project nearly happened in 2008 but the congestion charge was thrown out resulting in no funding being made available. It is currently on TfGM's list of approved schemes so has a good chance of going ahead if funding is found.

 

[Tom B]

Contractors make a killing, especially when they are "approved" or used on a "retained" basis.

For example, company employs facilities firm to look after their large building. They charge £X per annum for the contract, plus a certain number of hours per week to do routine jobs. Anything not on the list they will happily do, as an extra.
Which is how people end up paying £500 to hang a picture on a wall - because they can only use the retained contractor to do it, so they can name their price.

 

[BestWestern]

Can anyone provide a rough estimate for the restoration of the Wigan bound platforms at Lostock station. They would be required to be six cars in length to match Platforms 1 and 2. This project nearly happened in 2008 but the congestion charge was thrown out resulting in no funding being made available. It is currently on TfGM's list of approved schemes so has a good chance of going ahead if funding is found.

Hmm. I reckon about £412 million

 

[Andyjs247]

How much did it cost to build Warwick Parkway? Didn't Chiltern basically do it themselves because they could do it cheaper than Network Rail / Railtrack.

 

[Tomnick]

Contractors make a killing, especially when they are "approved" or used on a "retained" basis.

On a similar theme, consider a cracked window pane in a signal box. The nearest suitable and approved contractor attends, to measure up, travelling from 50 miles to the south. The nearest approved glazing supplier is 80 miles further north, so he then heads there. It's too late to do the job now, so he returns home - 130 miles or so - to return the next day (100 mile round trip) to finish off. Two days and 360 miles, just for a small pane of single glazed glass in a wooden frame - there's got to be a better way?

 

[21C101]

On a similar theme, consider a cracked window pane in a signal box. The nearest suitable and approved contractor attends, to measure up, travelling from 50 miles to the south. The nearest approved glazing supplier is 80 miles further north, so he then heads there. It's too late to do the job now, so he returns home - 130 miles or so - to return the next day (100 mile round trip) to finish off. Two days and 360 miles, just for a small pane of single glazed glass in a wooden frame - there's got to be a better way?

The alternative is to have direct labour staff. Then you just have an annual budget for the direct labour staff and no cost for what they do.

Had the old BR days continued I suspect the T of S&T technicians would have been trained to do basic IT tasks like swapping a PC mouse in a signalbox.

BR also employed in house glaziers, plumbers and electricians.

 

[mrmatt]

How much did it cost to build Warwick Parkway? Didn't Chiltern basically do it themselves because they could do it cheaper than Network Rail / Railtrack.

The managing director of Chiltern Trains, on BBC's Panorama, had asked Network Rail to quote for a new station for Warwick Parkway. Network Rail said it would cost £13 million. The managing director thought this was a lot of money. He went to the train companies and the station was built for £5.5 million.

Read more: http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co....tory-15077024-detail/story.html#ixzz3BJMu2In0

 

[21C101]

The managing director of Chiltern Trains, on BBC's Panorama, had asked Network Rail to quote for a new station for Warwick Parkway. Network Rail said it would cost £13 million. The managing director thought this was a lot of money. He went to the train companies and the station was built for £5.5 million.

Read more: http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co....tory-15077024-detail/story.html#ixzz3BJMu2In0

Interesting. If you apply the difference to the supposed £150 million it would cost NR to reopen the Uckfield - Lewes line, then you get a cost of £63 million, which is not a million miles (including inflation) from the amount BR thought it would cost 25 years ago of approx £23 million (£50 million in 2013 money).

 

[Tomnick]

The alternative is to have direct labour staff. Then you just have an annual budget for the direct labour staff and no cost for what they do.

Had the old BR days continued I suspect the T of S&T technicians would have been trained to do basic IT tasks like swapping a PC mouse in a signalbox.

BR also employed in house glaziers, plumbers and electricians.

I can understand the need for approved contractors (though I'm not convinced that it'd be cheaper than a directly employed member of staff who could do all these little jobs, in some cases), but why the need to use an approved glazing supplier 70 miles away when the contractor could have obtained exactly the same from the local supplier two miles away. Negotiating bulk discounts is all well and good, but in this case the additional costs far outweighed the small saving!

 

[Bald Rick]

Interesting. If you apply the difference to the supposed £150 million it would cost NR to reopen the Uckfield - Lewes line, then you get a cost of £63 million, which is not a million miles (including inflation) from the amount BR thought it would cost 25 years ago of approx £23 million (£50 million in 2013 money).

Excellent! Suggest someone goes and does it then.

Meanwhile in the real world, didn't the Scottish Government - very forward thinking with regards to railway re openings - find out the hard way that doing work itself was a bit tricky after Stirling-Alloa. So did a u-turn and asked NR (rather sheepishly) if it wouldn't mind awfully delivering Airdrie-Bathgate and the Waverley line?

Warwick Parkway was in the days when Railtrack, frankly, didn't have a clue how to do these things in the timescales Chiltern wanted. I was in Midlands Zone at the time. Note that even if the station really did cost £5.5m - it didn't - that the cost for adding 222 car park spaces onto the existing 737 cost £2.5m. NR had no involvement. For a whole load of reasons, infrastructure costs more now than it did 20 years ago, and not just on railways.

 

[dysonsphere]

Because accountants run everything now and it makes it easy for them 1 account rather than many local ones.

 

[21C101]

Excellent! Suggest someone goes and does it then.

Meanwhile in the real world, didn't the Scottish Government - very forward thinking with regards to railway re openings - find out the hard way that doing work itself was a bit tricky after Stirling-Alloa. So did a u-turn and asked NR (rather sheepishly) if it wouldn't mind awfully delivering Airdrie-Bathgate and the Waverley line?

Warwick Parkway was in the days when Railtrack, frankly, didn't have a clue how to do these things in the timescales Chiltern wanted. I was in Midlands Zone at the time. Note that even if the station really did cost £5.5m - it didn't - that the cost for adding 222 car park spaces onto the existing 737 cost £2.5m. NR had no involvement. For a whole load of reasons, infrastructure costs more now than it did 20 years ago, and not just on railways.

The obvious people to do it would be East Sussex Council but I don't think they want to. Devon County Council are far more proactive in this way and are busy buying all the trackbed between Tavistock and Bere Alston.

I suspect Devon c.c. will own the new railway and build it in association with Bovis, in the same way that TfL own and control the East London line although part of the "national" network.

Cornwall c.c. have similarly taken the bull by the horns and took over the design and build of the A30 dualling of the notorious three mile section of trunk road across Bodmin Moor. They redesigned the highways agency plans and cut the HA cost of £80-120 million to £60 million. As a result it is happening ten years sooner than it otherwise would of:

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk...0-bottleneck/story-15694099-detail/story.html

That said NR have turned round things a lot since Railtrack and are pretty good at large projects like reading for example. However because they are geared up for huge schemes, "minor works" like short reopenings and new minor stations and end up expensive.

They can also react fast as at Dawlish. Compare and contrast with the A3066 tunnel parapet collapse at Beaminster which Dorset took a year to reopen and even held a consultation on what to do. If it had been a railway tunnel Network Rail would have sorted it in weeks.

 

[SF-02]

If you ask a local builder to build a house working only for 4 hours overnight and on Sundays, the cost might be different.

Recent platform lengthening work I've seen had staff working 9-5 in the day. They may have done some late night/Sunday work (though I didn't see much of it when nearby or travelling through which I do frequently). The vast majority was done alongside the running railway and there seemed no problems with that for most of the construction.

It took an age though with staff disappearing for weeks at a time. It didn't seem as though that was due to needing closures as I observed it happening as a daily traveler, and when workers returned they carried on working 9-5 with no possessions in between. Inefficient working and high consultancy fees seem more likely to push up costs.

I've seen on this forum people link to platform work carried out on the continent which was completed at a far lower cost than equivalents in the UK, and those were on well used lines. Reports have highlighted NR inefficiency for years too havn't they? Why does this persist - some vested interest must be doing well out of it.

 

[CockneySparrow]

I can understand the need for approved contractors (though I'm not convinced that it'd be cheaper than a directly employed member of staff who could do all these little jobs, in some cases), but why the need to use an approved glazing supplier 70 miles away when the contractor could have obtained exactly the same from the local supplier two miles away. Negotiating bulk discounts is all well and good, but in this case the additional costs far outweighed the small saving!

I think alot of work us in the pipeline for a long time before work commences, and is issued as part of a tender hence why there aren't several local suppliers as one would like

The tender process will detail several months if not years of work that is required to be done, sometimes it gets really silly, I remember several years ago contractors painted the fence at the crossing on the A47 in Wisbech even though the last train passed some years before and nature had taken over the tracks

 

[NotATrainspott]

Excellent! Suggest someone goes and does it then.

Meanwhile in the real world, didn't the Scottish Government - very forward thinking with regards to railway re openings - find out the hard way that doing work itself was a bit tricky after Stirling-Alloa. So did a u-turn and asked NR (rather sheepishly) if it wouldn't mind awfully delivering Airdrie-Bathgate and the Waverley line?

Warwick Parkway was in the days when Railtrack, frankly, didn't have a clue how to do these things in the timescales Chiltern wanted. I was in Midlands Zone at the time. Note that even if the station really did cost £5.5m - it didn't - that the cost for adding 222 car park spaces onto the existing 737 cost £2.5m. NR had no involvement. For a whole load of reasons, infrastructure costs more now than it did 20 years ago, and not just on railways.

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine was Transport Initiatives Edinburgh, of Trams fame. I've heard that the Edinburgh Fastlink guided busway that preceded the trams had a great number of problems by the time it was closed for conversion. The Cambridgeshire Guided Busway scheme also shows that when you leave inexperienced local politicians in charge of a scheme it can all end in tears. There is no intrinsic reason why councils should be so incapable of doing these things but it's just because they've lost the necessary skills and talent over time - as they weren't allowed to do things - that makes it difficult to return. If it's going to happen then you'll need organisations like Transport for London to help with the set up equivalents across the country, and then helping them over time to build up experience and the ability to work on their own.

 

[Parham Wood]

The consensus seems to be that costs are too high due to poor procurement agreements, poor methods of operating, poor management and poor planning of works. I am not criticising here as I have worked in procurement. It is very easy to get the wrong deal if you do not understand and think about the whole process of doing a piece of work. A good deal on paper may not translate to a good deal in practice. I remember that I was required to set up a framework deal for JCB plant and operators. The theory was that three contractors would be sufficient. This plant was required not only for normal construction projects but also for emergency repairs - it was a water company covering about four mainly rural counties. Yes we could find some big boys who could do this but if you wanted a JCB digger in an emergency at night it would have to come from 60-80 miles away, a long journey for a JCB. In the end we ended up with a looser agreement with a lot of local independent JCB contractors who would turn out at a minutes notice, would work Christmas Day and who were much nearer to the job and were cheaper, even if travel cost were excluded.

I also suspect rails and signalling equipment are a captive market and it would interesting to know how much real competition there is out there. Once you have standardised on equipment from say one supplier you are beholden to them. You need a very smart contract to keep prices down in suceeding years.

I am always surprised at the costs for the Portishead branch opening for passengers. It may not always be the cost of work and equipment that is to blame but the overspecification of signalling, buildings etc. so a rolls royce solution is built when a skoda solution is all that is required. We look to the Government to challenge costs (in all railtway operation) but in my opinion they have no real idea and are not bothered provided they can show they have gone through some procurement process. They do not seem to challenge the fundamentals where real cost savings can be made.

 

[W230]

For a whole load of reasons, infrastructure costs more now than it did 20 years ago, and not just on railways.

Can you give a bit more info on this? I'm genuinely intrigued (I hope it doesn't sound sarcy because it's not supposed to - it's obvious from your posts that you work in the industry and know your stuff!!)

I'm often surprised at the costs suggested to build infrastructure (and as you say road as well as rail). I was surprised that Lea Bridge Road station would be around ~£6.5m (probably more now) though i'm aware that adding things like lifts, PIS, bridges, etc do cost more money. And that an old station at a site doesn't necessarily make it cheaper as you may have to remove it all and start again. It just sounds like so much cash though!

I find myself thinking that the "contractor culture" must be more expensive for companies nowadays than the old style of having a member of staff who just does all the odd jobs or knows who to get to sort a problem when it's out of their expertise. A former colleague used to work for a large department store that had their own 'caretaker' who would repair and sort problems but they let him go after 20 years and now use contractors. He says little jobs always cost big now as a result. I'm also of the opinion that this contractor method ends up costing more but fully accept I know nothing about such things and so assume the people who makes these decisions know what they're doing as it's the same across all industries pretty much now. Hospitals department stores, prisons etc etc...

Maybe they just take it as a whole, say a random example:
24 caretakers across stores x 25k = 600k
Amount spent on contractors across the 24 stores 500k
So 100k saving.

Though i'm sure the little things don't get reported/repaired as often with the contractor scheme. but then maybe that's the point - they don't need to be...

 

[edwin_m]

I would think rules on track worker safety will have significantly increased the cost of most jobs on the live railway. A lot of things that were done "between trains" now require the line to be blocked to trains, and with increasing use of the railway that becomes harder to get especially for a long period.

Also accessibility standards will have increased the cost of stations in particular. A footbridge with lifts or ramps is will cost at least twice as much as one with just steps.

Not that either of these is necessarily a bad thing - just a reflection of the way society is changing.

 

[The Planner]

I am always surprised at the costs for the Portishead branch opening for passengers. It may not always be the cost of work and equipment that is to blame but the overspecification of signalling, buildings etc. so a rolls royce solution is built when a skoda solution is all that is required.

I would disagree with that, I can't recall where a project has got through without being value managed right down to the bare essentials to deliver the output. Portishead will be the same, you are not going to get bells and whistles high capacity signalling and track on that.

 

[Tom B]

I find myself thinking that the "contractor culture" must be more expensive for companies nowadays than the old style of having a member of staff who just does all the odd jobs or knows who to get to sort a problem when it's out of their expertise. A former colleague used to work for a large department store that had their own 'caretaker' who would repair and sort problems but they let him go after 20 years and now use contractors. He says little jobs always cost big now as a result. I'm also of the opinion that this contractor method ends up costing more but fully accept I know nothing about such things and so assume the people who makes these decisions know what they're doing as it's the same across all industries pretty much now. Hospitals department stores, prisons etc etc...

Maybe they just take it as a whole, say a random example:
24 caretakers across stores x 25k = 600k
Amount spent on contractors across the 24 stores 500k
So 100k saving.

Though i'm sure the little things don't get reported/repaired as often with the contractor scheme. but then maybe that's the point - they don't need to be...

Contractors also gauge who they are talking to - if a site caretaker/facilities assistant gets in a contractor to do a job they're unable to, they're likely to get a reasonable price than an office clerk who knows nothing about the job and thus gets quoted a silly price!