Steventon Bridge is falling down?

[Dai Corner]

Remember Steventon bridge in Oxfordshire, which Network Rail wanted to replace as part of the GWML electrification? They decided not to after local objections and ended up with a 110mph speed restriction instead.

Well, it appears the bridge is in poor condition and the local authority face repairing or replacing it at their own expense. They're probably regretting their previous objections now.

Steventon Bridge: Limits on Grade II bridge saved last year

Oxfordshire County Council, which owns the bridge, puts limits on it after it reviewed its capacity.

www.bbc.co.uk

Traffic restrictions are in place on a Grade II listed railway bridge after it showed "signs of deterioration".
Steventon Bridge was saved from demolition in April 2020 after Network Rail agreed it could stay despite electrification work.
It is owned by Oxfordshire County Council, which has narrowed High Street after a review of its capacity.
The bridge is thought to have been built in about 1839 by Isambard Kingdom Brunel and was listed in 1988.
The council said an inspection will be carried as soon as engineers can access the railway below to review the condition of its brickwork.
It said further restrictions might be needed until the bridge "can be strengthened or replaced".

IMAGE SOURCE, STEVE DANIELS
Image caption,
Steventon Bridge is thought to have been built in 1839 by Isambard Kingdom Brunel
Councillor Tim Bearder, cabinet member for highways maintenance, said: "It is always difficult when these vital pieces of infrastructure begin to deteriorate but inaction is not an option."
The authority said it had also carried out work to see why there are dips in the road at the northern end of the bridge.
Network Rail had initially wanted to replace the bridge so overhead wires could pass underneath it safely as part of electrification of the Great Western Mainline.
But last year it said tests had found the wires could be used with the existing bridge if the line speed was reduced from 125mph to 110mph.
Steventon Parish Council had objected to the demolition since 2016 and said it was "pleased and relieved" with that decision.

 

[a_c_skinner]

It looks a pretty undistinguished structure from the photos. Could someone explain why it is a listed building. This is the English madness, object to change simply as something to object to.

 

[Elecman]

Remember Steventon bridge in Oxfordshire, which Network Rail wanted to replace as part of the GWML electrification? They decided not to after local objections and ended up with a 110mph speed restriction instead.

Well, it appears the bridge is in poor condition and the local authority face repairing or replacing it at their own expense. They're probably regretting their previous objections now.

Steventon Bridge: Limits on Grade II bridge saved last year

Oxfordshire County Council, which owns the bridge, puts limits on it after it reviewed its capacity.

www.bbc.co.uk

Oh dear how sad, like the saying goes be careful what you wish for, now the line is eelectrified any repairs will be very expensive in Line Blockage and Isolation costs

 

[zwk500]

It looks a pretty undistinguished structure from the photos. Could someone explain why it is a listed building. This is the English madness, object to change simply as something to object to.

According to the official listing, there seems to be no particular reason it's listed at all: https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1284749?section=official-listing
Although half of Steventon appears to have been listed, so I suspect there's just 1 very concerned person who's gone and applied for listing for everything so that their village is always just the way they like it.

 

[swt_passenger]

It looks a pretty undistinguished structure from the photos. Could someone explain why it is a listed building. This is the English madness, object to change simply as something to object to.

It looks to be in fairly poor condition as shown on Google Streetview, which is presumably quite recent as it includes the safety fencing added for electrification. There’s quite an obvious dip at the north end, and cracks all over the road surface.

Listing it? Seems there must be a hitherto unknown category for “utilitarian”, or “bog standard” structures…

 

[Stewart2887]

Indeed. There are some similar but more impressive bridges further towards Swindon in better condition-and equally limited clearances for the wires, but nobody makes a fuss about these. Lots of cracks in the parapets at Steventon (sprayed white in the photos). Something will need done. Working from home removes my need to use it now.

 

[Mollman]

Listing appears to have been done as it is thought to be the original bridge, seems the Parish Council like to preserve things and aren't a fan of electrification.

In a statement, Steventon Parish Council said: "The electrification project that led to decimation of our countryside and national heritage was started by Network Rail with no detailed design and rigorous technical evaluation.
"It is our hope that going forward, much more of our national Railway Heritage can be retained as Network Rail progress electrification throughout the UK."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-52425866

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Oh dear how sad, like the saying goes be careful what you wish for, now the line is eelectrified any repairs will be very expensive in Line Blockage and Isolation costs

Yep. Exactly

 

[edwin_m]

Indeed. There are some similar but more impressive bridges further towards Swindon in better condition-and equally limited clearances for the wires, but nobody makes a fuss about these. Lots of cracks in the parapets at Steventon (sprayed white in the photos). Something will need done. Working from home removes my need to use it now.

Under the standard rules the OLE at Steventon couldn't slope up quickly enough (or the track slope down or some combination) to provide the appropriate headroom at a nearby level crossing. So it couldn't be dealt with by lowering the track, as was presumably done at those other bridges. Network Rail accepted a moderate speed restriction and a steeper than standard wire gradient, which may lead to greater maintenance in future.

 

[AndrewE]

According to the official listing, there seems to be no particular reason it's listed at all: https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1284749?section=official-listing

It looks to be in fairly poor condition as shown on Google Streetview, which is presumably quite recent as it includes the safety fencing added for electrification. There’s quite an obvious dip at the north end, and cracks all over the road surface.
Listing it? Seems there must be a hitherto unknown category for “utilitarian”, or “bog standard” structures…

Listing appears to have been done as it is thought to be the original bridge, seems the Parish Council like to preserve things and aren't a fan of electrification.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-52425866

This could be a candidate for inclusion in the "[Fake] reasons people offer against electrification" thread. As I said there, we seem to have a part of the population who seem determined to obstruct almost any railway development if they can find a way.

 

[seagull]

"In a statement, Steventon Parish Council said: "The electrification project that led to decimation of our countryside and national heritage..."

Good grief. Decimation, so one tenth of the countryside and heritage has been destroyed? With such exaggeration, I feel this bridge episode is richly deserved.

 

[ABB125]

[Conspiracy alert]
Perhaps Network Rail "accidentally" hit the bridge with a digger in a few strategic locations during the electrification works, to hurry along the bridge's demise, thus enabling them to have electrification and a 125mph speed limit?

[/conspiracy]

 

[Dunfanaghy Rd]

So, Option 1: The Council repair the bridge and suck up Network Rails's charges for accommodating 3rd party work (eye-watering, I imagine);

Or, Option 2: Network rail take the problem off the Council's hands, and build the bridge they wanted in the first place.

Pat

 

[diffident]

So, Option 1: The Council repair the bridge and suck up Network Rails's charges for accommodating 3rd party work (eye-watering, I imagine);
Or, Option 2: Network rail take the problem off the Council's hands, and build the bridge they wanted in the first place.
Pat

I'm not sure if Option 2 flies though, unless the council also compensated NR for replacing the new wiring that they've only recently installed, with the stuff to run at 125mph?

 

[zwk500]

So, Option 1: The Council repair the bridge and suck up Network Rails's charges for accommodating 3rd party work (eye-watering, I imagine);
Or, Option 2: Network rail take the problem off the Council's hands, and build the bridge they wanted in the first place.
Pat

NR won't take on any additional financial risk now, they've got a situation that works for them. Option 1 may not be as expensive as it could be if the work can be integrated into planned blocks. If they need an additional block it will get very dear, very quickly. Bear in mind engineering works for the next 2 years or so have already been agreed with GWR and the Freight Companies.

 

[hwl]

So, Option 1: The Council repair the bridge and suck up Network Rails's charges for accommodating 3rd party work (eye-watering, I imagine);
Or, Option 2: Network rail take the problem off the Council's hands, and build the bridge they wanted in the first place.
Pat

Option 2b: and council significantly fund as well.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 31 Dec 2021 ==

I'm not sure if Option 2 flies though, unless the council also compensated NR for replacing the new wiring that they've only recently installed, with the stuff to run at 125mph?

Raising the wire height is cheap.

 

[Dai Corner]

Let's hope the bridge isn't found to be in such a condition that an emergency line closure is necessary.

 

[The Planner]

NR won't take on any additional financial risk now, they've got a situation that works for them. Option 1 may not be as expensive as it could be if the work can be integrated into planned blocks. If they need an additional block it will get very dear, very quickly. Bear in mind engineering works for the next 2 years or so have already been agreed with GWR and the Freight Companies.

Integration still makes it very expensive for them. Only 2022 is put to bed, version 2 of the EAS for 2023 isnt out yet (though this would never make it in) and version 4 is still a little while off.

 

[a_c_skinner]

hitherto unknown category for “utilitarian”, or “bog standard” structures

I'm glad my architectural appreciation remains undimmed. Objecting to everything really is the English disease.

 

[zwk500]

Integration still makes it very expensive for them. Only 2022 is put to bed, version 2 of the EAS for 2023 isnt out yet (though this would never make it in) and version 4 is still a little while off.

Yep it's going to cost a fortune either way, though of course there'll be no holding to account of the councillors who've ended up costing the taxpayer far more than if they'd just let NR upgrade the bridge, given it's complete lack of architectural, historic or cultural significance.
V2 of the 2023 EAS takes us up to May '23 doesn't it? Better hope the bridge doesn't get worse in the next year and a half.

 

[The Planner]

V2 of the 2023 EAS takes us up to May '23 doesn't it? Better hope the bridge doesn't get worse in the next year and a half.

Yes, though if it becomes a safety issue then it goes out the window anyway and you take the block.

 

[zwk500]

Yes, though if it becomes a safety issue then it goes out the window anyway and you take the block.

Indeed. Late-notice blocks don't come cheap either, nor do emergency bridge builders, as I'm assuming the road can't really just be left closed indefinitely. I hope Steventon Parish Council have begun saving! (Although presumably it'll all come from Westminster in the end, so we'll all end up on the hook for their little indulgence when it could have been far cheaper. Joy).

 

[Cantab26]

According to the official listing, there seems to be no particular reason it's listed at all:

The relevant listing selection guide states that:

Most pre-1850 bridges, where substantially intact, will warrant serious consideration for listing. Where they have been subsequently altered or modified they may still merit serious consideration where the modifications reflect the evolution and development of a particular route, but the extent of alteration and intrinsic interest will require careful analysis. Monumental bridges, or bridges that display significant technological innovation, may warrant listing in a higher grade.

As such, the Grade II listing for this bridge would appear appropriate (assuming that it is the original Brunel erection).

 

[gc4946]

If push coves to shove with the condition of the bridge I won't be surprised that it's replaced or the deck raised

 

[a_c_skinner]

The relevant listing selection guide states that:




As such, the Grade II listing for this bridge would appear appropriate (assuming that it is the original Brunel erection).

Good heavens.

 

[rob.rjt]

Indeed. Late-notice blocks don't come cheap either, nor do emergency bridge builders, as I'm assuming the road can't really just be left closed indefinitely. I hope Steventon Parish Council have begun saving! (Although presumably it'll all come from Westminster in the end, so we'll all end up on the hook for their little indulgence when it could have been far cheaper. Joy).

Steventon Parish Council wanted the bridge to remain as is, but it is Oxfordshire County Council who are on the hook for the rebuilding costs. I can't remember from the saga whether Oxfordshire backed Steventon in the end when NR wanted to rebuild previously. As Steventon wanted it kept, then they should pat, but I fear that won't happen.

 

[AndrewE]

Yep it's going to cost a fortune either way, though of course there'll be no holding to account of the councillors who've ended up costing the taxpayer far more than if they'd just let NR upgrade the bridge, given it's complete lack of architectural, historic or cultural significance.

As there's no station close by I guess they are immune from sanctions. Mind you, a speed limit of 110 mph would be welcomed across most of the rest of the country...

Majority of officials who downgraded northern rail plans don’t live there

Only a quarter of those who wrote Integrated Rail Plan rely on north of England’s sub-par services

www.theguardian.com

says

Only a quarter of the government officials responsible for cancelling HS2 to Yorkshire and downgrading plans for Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR) actually live in the north of England and rely on the region’s sub-par trains, the Guardian has learned.

Of the 24 officials in the Department for Transport (DfT) responsible for writing the Integrated Rail Plan (IRP), just six live in the north, the DfT admitted in response to a freedom of information (FoI) request.
The government was accused of “betraying” the north in November, when the long-awaited IRP ignored recommendations from Transport for the North, a statutory body set up to advise the government on the region’s transport needs. That organisation, which brings together all the political and business leaders of the north, had asked for HS2 to reach Leeds and for NPR to run right across the country, including a stop in Bradford.

 

[swt_passenger]

Steventon Parish Council wanted the bridge to remain as is, but it is Oxfordshire County Council who are on the hook for the rebuilding costs. I can't remember from the saga whether Oxfordshire backed Steventon in the end when NR wanted to rebuild previously. As Steventon wanted it kept, then they should pat, but I fear that won't happen.

Parish councils just don’t have a budget or delegated authority for this type of repair. Oxford county council will be the real decision makers.

 

[zwk500]

The relevant listing selection guide states that:

As such, the Grade II listing for this bridge would appear appropriate (assuming that it is the original Brunel erection).

Thanks for the info. That does seem rather over the top to permit listing of any bridge that hasn't been rebuilt in 170 years.

 

[Elecman]

Yes, though if it becomes a safety issue then it goes out the window anyway and you take the block.

indeed and becomes a Very very expensive issue for the funder