The time it takes to design, approve & build infrastructure projects

[richieb1971]

That's very good. But it doesn't answer if EWR did or did not conform to this practice. It may be on this occasion it was as efficient as possible under the grip protocol as bald Rick is implying. There should be a time limit for each grip number that somebody reviews the situation. The EWR website should be updated with this information. I know this information came up in other places but if you don't know key words to search you cannot find it.

 

[B&I]

Exactly a three year build taking 13 years to complete. That just seems, on the face of it, questionable. I'm not expecting 36 months from idea to opening of course but the balance seems lost. I suspect is the British obsession with paperwork to protect those involved from accusations of impropriety, little more. I spent my career in the NHS, tolerably high up from time to time. NHS does it all the time, iteration after iteration of paperwork and discussions, not changing things, but there if anyone asks how a decision was made. The Grenfell Tower business shows our national obsession with process - it was more important to sign off materials than chose and instal wisely. Better to have a public enquiry and consultations for years (and it will be years) than take the only and obvious step of banning flammable materials from housing. I am corrected (truly) that the delay shares between numerous agencies but it is still la vice anglais.

Exactly. No one doubts that it DOES take a long time to.get a new railway open, and that there are numerous stages whichhave to be gone through. The question is whether it SHOULD. And it seems to me that, while the people who do this sort of thing for a living feel compelled to defend the status quo, presumably because they see any criticism of it as a criticism of them, the delays do not really arise in their part of the process. The major eliminable delay seems to me to be the years lost to political vacillation and unreliable funding which results from this.

 

[DarloRich]

That's very good. But it doesn't answer if EWR did or did not conform to this practice. It may be on this occasion it was as efficient as possible under the grip protocol as bald Rick is implying. There should be a time limit for each grip number that somebody reviews the situation. The EWR website should be updated with this information. I know this information came up in other places but if you don't know key words to search you cannot find it.

Firstly what has been described by bald rick is one part of one grip stage. Google cam help you a great deal here. For some projects you might roll a coulle of stages together but not for one this big. One this big takes each stage as it comes and works through it step by step

Secondly projects are subject to constant review. I know this as I run the reviews! I don't let the project pass to the next stage before it has finished all of the work needed to compete that stage Why? Because you will pay double for any short cuts especially on scope and consents.

Just to be clear E-W is absolutely nothing to do with me but the process is the same

Exactly. No one doubts that it DOES take a long time to.get a new railway open, and that there are numerous stages whichhave to be gone through. The question is whether it SHOULD. And it seems to me that, while the people who do this sort of thing for a living feel compelled to defend the status quo, presumably because they see any criticism of it as a criticism of them, the delays do not really arise in their part of the process. The major eliminable delay seems to me to be the years lost to political vacillation and unreliable funding which results from this.

the final sentence is spot on. It is worth noting that the money to pay for this line is our money. It comes from our wages. I want that spent in the best possible way. I do not want it wasted.

 

[Bald Rick]

That's very good. But it doesn't answer if EWR did or did not conform to this practice. It may be on this occasion it was as efficient as possible under the grip protocol as bald Rick is implying. There should be a time limit for each grip number that somebody reviews the situation. The EWR website should be updated with this information. I know this information came up in other places but if you don't know key words to search you cannot find it.

From this I would say that your issue is actually with the quality of the communications provided by the EWR project, rather than with project progress itself. I should point out that project comms are usually at the discretion of the person paying for it, and the DfT is reasonably shy when it comes to progress.

Exactly. No one doubts that it DOES take a long time to.get a new railway open, and that there are numerous stages whichhave to be gone through. The question is whether it SHOULD. And it seems to me that, while the people who do this sort of thing for a living feel compelled to defend the status quo, presumably because they see any criticism of it as a criticism of them, the delays do not really arise in their part of the process. The major eliminable delay seems to me to be the years lost to political vacillation and unreliable funding which results from this.

There is some truth in that. However some projects - HS2 being the best recent example - have been blessed with very little political vacillation and very reliable funding. It has also pushed the bounds of the process. But it has still taken more than 10 years to get from initial studies to construction starting.

Incidentally I don’t see criticism of the process as criticism of those involved (including me!) and I’m not defending it as such, just explaining what it is.

The process is as designed by Government, and we elect them. All involved would also like the process to be quicker, but (leaving politics aside) I can’t see how it can be significantly improved without riding roughshod over democratic principles and citizens’ rights.

Edited for a massive dose of typos!

 

[richieb1971]

So if its about democratic principles and citizens rights, how long does the project defer for each objection or land rights issue? In the end this project got the green light, which incidentally was a few days after the Werrington project getting the nod as well. One could assume a big pile of paperwork had amounted in someones office and they decided to go through it . A simple tick box diagram with a "Drill down" breakdown of events currently happening would in theory give the kind of transparency to the projects to the public. I mean, its public money after all.. We are not a state of smoke and mirrors.

On another note, since I don't know where this phase 2 sign off is on the net, can someone tell me the scope and utilization of the Marston Vale line in the planning?

Thanks.

 

[swt_passenger]

In the end this project got the green light, which incidentally was a few days after the Werrington project getting the nod as well. One could assume a big pile of paperwork had amounted in someones office and they decided to go through it...

The Werrington TWA order was approved by SofS.
The EWR TWA application was only just sent to DfT, it hasn't been “signed off”.
These are not equivalent stages, EWR is still somewhat behind Werrington.

 

[Bald Rick]

So if its about democratic principles and citizens rights, how long does the project defer for each objection or land rights issue? In the end this project got the green light, which incidentally was a few days after the Werrington project getting the nod as well. One could assume a big pile of paperwork had amounted in someones office and they decided to go through it . A simple tick box diagram with a "Drill down" breakdown of events currently happening would in theory give the kind of transparency to the projects to the public. I mean, its public money after all.. We are not a state of smoke and mirrors.

On another note, since I don't know where this phase 2 sign off is on the net, can someone tell me the scope and utilization of the Marston Vale line in the planning?

Thanks.

As @swt_passenger notes, EWR is at the start of the consents process. Werrington is at the end (of the primary consents, there will still be some conditions to meet, and local permissions to get).

If you look at all the EWR TWA application information, and I strongly recommend that you do, you will see all the consultation that has taken place, the questions raised, and the answers given. You will be able to get a good idea where e objections will arise.

If you look at the Werrington paperwork, you will also see the objections made, and the assessment of each by the Planning Inspector.

There is no ‘smoke and mirrors’. It is all public information for anyone to see; all you have to do is read it.

 

[B&I]

the final sentence is spot on. It is worth noting that the money to pay for this line is our money. It comes from our wages. I want that spent in the best possible way. I do not want it wasted.

No-one sensible does. The way politicians fanny about seems to me to waste a lot of money, even allowing for inflation.

 

[a_c_skinner]

I had hoped that the National Infrastructure Commission would help with all this but its role seems to be - wait for it - to produce reports.

I'm not looking to bypass democracy and lawful rights of property but repeated rounds of business casing or consultation seem to me to offer questionable benefit over fewer rounds done properly.

I'm not the first to mention Yes Minister, but Humphrey's default position of procrastination and the status quo was not as satirical as it seemed.

 

[Tobbes]

I'm not looking to bypass democracy and lawful rights of property but repeated rounds of business casing or consultation seem to me to offer questionable benefit over fewer rounds done properly.

I suppose that there are three points.

First, it probably (certainly) looks different if it's your rights that are under threat.

Second, consultation is done for at least three reasons: (a) to sense check ideas and solicit improvements; (b) to gain public support by being seen to consult and respond to public concerns (either through making changes or explaining why they can't be made); (c) to win bureaucratic fights on the basis that "we've consulted, have you?" (also a major help if you're judicially reviewed). Of these three reasons, the most overlooked one in my experience is (a); consultations do change designs, and usually for either the technical better or for better because of increased public support. I'd place the additional HS2 tunnelling in the Chilterns and in West London that was added when Justine Greening was Transport Secretary. Given that the additional tunnels were clearly not required from an engineering perspective (ie, the original, cheaper, designs would have worked technically), the extra tunnels are not an enhancement in that sense, though they have made it more likely to be built!

Third, I can completely see the point of those who object to schemes that impose costs on them but fail to offer apparent benefits, and consultation (properly conducted, rather than merely pro-forma which is almost always counter-productive) can serve as an educational tool as well as a negotiation. I wonder how many in the Chilterns would have had the same objections if there was a Chilterns station for one change at OOC for Heathrow or Canary Wharf?

 

[a_c_skinner]

Going round and round again doesn't help any of that, it may give an illusion of better engagement but that is all it is. Unlike others I've managed to download the documents. The central section has progressed little more than someone with a map and a crayon might have achieved 20 years ago, admittedly with some figures attached. The engineering assessment seems to have been done by a private company so again they will, if asked (and we always ask experts), assure everyone that the process and detail is essential.

Sorry, I'm back to a project that was conceived 25 years ago, the central section was always going to be the most difficult and costly (there being no railway there already) and the progress is limited to deciding we will need to build about 35km of new railway otherwise journey times will be so long as to make the whole thing pointless.

 

[a_c_skinner]

We are going round in circles. Apologies. Until the rail industry and politicians want to drive change planning any big project will continue to take almost a working lifetime.

 

[DarloRich]

I had hoped that the National Infrastructure Commission would help with all this but its role seems to be - wait for it - to produce reports.

I'm not looking to bypass democracy and lawful rights of property but repeated rounds of business casing or consultation seem to me to offer questionable benefit over fewer rounds done properly.

I'm not the first to mention Yes Minister, but Humphrey's default position of procrastination and the status quo was not as satirical as it seemed.

That seems a decent point. However look at slightly wider.

Would you give me say £100m to spend on an idea or would you, if you liked the idea, give me £3m and tell me to come back with a fully costed proposal for the new railway plus alternatives with risks and benfits?

Would you then say ok here is your £97m crack on or would you say let's have a look at the alternatives and then choose the best one before we start to ask people their views? Here is some more cash but come back with a cock on plan for one option.

Would you then just crack on or say here is a bit more cash to ask the impacted public what they think knowing this might change the design and your cost assessment?

Would you not hand on until the design was clear and the scope locked before spending the majority of the cash?

Remember if you issue all£100m on day one you have a large percentage of that money doing nothing. Might that £97m have been better spent on schools or hospitals or fighter jets?

You also have to consider the region to spend is ultimately a political one. Politicians change thier mind like the weather!

 

[a_c_skinner]

Oh, yes of course. My point was that surely you only need to do the £3M work once. I'm cautious to widen this but hardly a week goes by without a new SELRAP study being launched at significant cost (well not a week, but you know what I mean). Look at the Halton Curve, which was a complete railway when I moved to the area around 1990, was cut by Railtrack in the Runcorn re-furbishment and took huge amounts of work, consultation and delay. It is said (who knows) it will bring new life to the region so why was there no impetus given the project - that didn't need land, new rights or anything, it just needed stuff putting back. It isn't as if this system works well either, costs seem to inflate hugely, targets are missed and even the usefulness of the finished project can be misjudged or am I being hard on the Todmorden Curve? Or Ordsall, which isn't going to be well used for a while?

Apologies for widening beyond E-W rail, but the idea is in there.

 

[DarloRich]

Oh, yes of course. My point was that surely you only need to do the £3M work once. I'm cautious to widen this but hardly a week goes by without a new SELRAP study being launched at significant cost (well not a week, but you know what I mean). Look at the Halton Curve, which was a complete railway when I moved to the area around 1990, was cut by Railtrack in the Runcorn re-furbishment and took huge amounts of work, consultation and delay. It is said (who knows) it will bring new life to the region so why was there no impetus given the project - that didn't need land, new rights or anything, it just needed stuff putting back. It isn't as if this system works well either, costs seem to inflate hugely, targets are missed and even the usefulness of the finished project can be misjudged or am I being hard on the Todmorden Curve? Or Ordsall, which isn't going to be well used for a while?

Apologies for widening beyond E-W rail, but the idea is in there.

I agree entirely you should only do things once but in the real world that doesn't always happen. Politicians are good at talking the talk but not so good at walking the walk when it comes to large sums of money!

These funding delays are the most obvious reasons for this repetition rbut even then it should just be a refresh to bring your quote ( so to speak) up to today's costs.

The associated problem with that delay is the alteration of your benefit profile and the reduction in the potential viability of your project!

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm cautious to widen this but hardly a week goes by without a new SELRAP study being launched at significant cost (well not a week, but you know what I mean).

I think there’s only 1 SELRAP study, at (comparatively) low cost.

 

[a_c_skinner]

I'll defer to you but I thought it had been going on for years with intermittent reports generated at modest cost to the public purse, but repeatedly. Some may have had their origins in local government. It has certainly been going on for years. Of course it would link East and West...

Here is one: http://www.selrap.org.uk/p1_project...e_Corridor_East_West_Connectivity_Summary.pdf

and here is the next:
https://transportforthenorth.com/fe...mail&utm_term=0_61d7a75deb-34d2417df9-7029031

and this one summarises several:

http://www.selrap.org.uk/p1_project/2013_ARUP_1a.pdf

Apologies if this is a misunderstanding, it isn't meant rudely.

 

[Tobbes]

I'll defer to you but I thought it had been going on for years with intermittent reports generated at modest cost to the public purse, but repeatedly. Some may have had their origins in local government. It has certainly been going on for years. Of course it would link East and West...

Here is one: http://www.selrap.org.uk/p1_project...e_Corridor_East_West_Connectivity_Summary.pdf

and here is the next:
https://transportforthenorth.com/fe...mail&utm_term=0_61d7a75deb-34d2417df9-7029031

and this one summarises several:

http://www.selrap.org.uk/p1_project/2013_ARUP_1a.pdf

Apologies if this is a misunderstanding, it isn't meant rudely.

I think that things are looking up for SELRAP; Andrew Stephenson (the Pendle MP) is in a key Tory-Labour marginal with a majority of only 1,279, and the Government needs to do something to protect his seat - and Skipton to Colne isn't the most expensive project (c£100m for double track?) and crucially, it's a commitment that Labour would have to match, making it much more likely to happen.

Whether a reinstated Skipton to Colne (presumably including redoubling much of the existing Colne line, and if nothing else making loops at all of the stations) actually becomes a major through route (would Leeds - Preston via Skipton be materially faster than the current 90 mins via Halifax?) is probably less important (is SELRAP proposing double track electrification of the whole route to tie in with the Airedale line?), but I'd be delighted to see SELRAP succeed.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'll defer to you but I thought it had been going on for years with intermittent reports generated at modest cost to the public purse, but repeatedly. Some may have had their origins in local government. It has certainly been going on for years. Of course it would link East and West...

Here is one: http://www.selrap.org.uk/p1_project...e_Corridor_East_West_Connectivity_Summary.pdf

and here is the next:
https://transportforthenorth.com/fe...mail&utm_term=0_61d7a75deb-34d2417df9-7029031

and this one summarises several:

http://www.selrap.org.uk/p1_project/2013_ARUP_1a.pdf

Apologies if this is a misunderstanding, it isn't meant rudely.

We are off topic, but to summarise:
The first is about the entire central transpennine corridor, and doesn’t mention SELRAP or even the corridor at all (although it is in SELRAPs interest to announce it as such)

The third was done by SELRAP (who are a campaign group, not a funder), 5 years ago, and summarises two studies done over the previous decade (although it mentions 4 studies, the other two weren’t reopening studies). Neither of the two that were reopening studies seemed to comply with green book guidance, most recent in from 2007. Both grossly underestimated the costs, and even then one said there was no case.

The second is the one that counts, and the one I was referring to.

I think that things are looking up for SELRAP; Andrew Stephenson (the Pendle MP) is in a key Tory-Labour marginal with a majority of only 1,279, and the Government needs to do something to protect his seat - and Skipton to Colne isn't the most expensive project (c£100m for double track?) and crucially, it's a commitment that Labour would have to match, making it much more likely to happen.

Whether a reinstated Skipton to Colne (presumably including redoubling much of the existing Colne line, and if nothing else making loops at all of the stations) actually becomes a major through route (would Leeds - Preston via Skipton be materially faster than the current 90 mins via Halifax?) is probably less important (is SELRAP proposing double track electrification of the whole route to tie in with the Airedale line?), but I'd be delighted to see SELRAP succeed.

You are more positive than I am. It will be over £400m, probably more. Note the caveat that ‘to be successful, schemes must unlock housing and growth, ease crowded routes, meet future demand and offer good value for money’.

Let’s leave this diversion here, I can sense mods’ fingers twitching.

 

[jimm]

Andrew Stephenson (the Pendle MP) is in a key Tory-Labour marginal with a majority of only 1,279, and the Government needs to do something to protect his seat - and Skipton to Colne isn't the most expensive project (c£100m for double track?) and crucially, it's a commitment that Labour would have to match, making it much more likely to happen. Skipton to Colne isn't the most expensive project (c£100m for double track?) and crucially, it's a commitment that Labour would have to match, making it much more likely to happen.

You're joking, aren't you? It cost £67m to redouble 20 miles of the Cotswold Line at 2011 prices, on an existing operational route, as opposed to 12 miles of trackbed, bridges, cuttings and embankments that haven't seen a train for almost 50 years.

If marginal Parliamentary seats were a justification for pledging bucketloads of taxpayers' money for local projects to buy votes, then East West Rail would win hands down, with Labour and Conservatives trying to outbid each other. The Conservatives have a majority of 1,725 in MK South and 1,915 in MK North, and Labour hold Bedford by all of 789 votes. Not that it matters, as both parties support East West anyway.

 

[Tobbes]

You're joking, aren't you? It cost £67m to redouble 20 miles of the Cotswold Line at 2011 prices, on an existing operational route, as opposed to 12 miles of trackbed, bridges, cuttings and embankments that haven't seen a train for almost 50 years.

Fair enough, I was going on an £80m figure cited from 2012(?) and applied a 25% uplift - hence the question mark. Presmably the new study will come up with some credible costs.

 

[Bald Rick]

Fair enough, I was going on an £80m figure cited from 2012(?) and applied a 25% uplift - hence the question mark. Presmably the new study will come up with some credible costs.

I doubt it. It is a very high level study. There might be a large range.

 

[Tobbes]

I doubt it. It is a very high level study. There might be a large range.

Thanks as ever, @Bald Rick - but presumably it will say £400m +/- 25% rather than £100m? Not any order of magnitude, I appreciate, but a "this, not that" would be quite helpful. (Though Skipton - Colne is clearly in the "political rationale" rather than "pure BCR" pot for me.)

 

[Bald Rick]

Thanks as ever, @Bald Rick - but presumably it will say £400m +/- 25% rather than £100m? Not any order of magnitude, I appreciate, but a "this, not that" would be quite helpful. (Though Skipton - Colne is clearly in the "political rationale" rather than "pure BCR" pot for me.)

Depends who does it. Ranged estimates are in vogue now. I’d expect a range, with a mid point and then 66% on top.

 

[Tobbes]

Depends who does it. Ranged estimates are in vogue now. I’d expect a range, with a mid point and then 66% on top.

Thanks very much - well, we'll wait and see. In the meantime, I've got a twin bore tunnel in Cambridgeshire for you to dig for me....

 

[GRALISTAIR]

EWR for me is a project which says "North south isn't the only way traffic goes anymore". For me, EWR is the spear head project which will allow easier connectivity to anywhere by rail. I can't say if EWR is deserved of government funding above all else, but in the grand scheme of things its a project sitting on the back burner for years and years. The original website stated that EWR would open early 2020's if I'm not mistaken (don't shoot me I'm only trying to recollect in my memory banks).

I do agree with you about points on the East West strategy.
As you say we have GWML sparks - so that is good.
We need EWR as you say.
IMHO we also desperately need F2N though I would add in Norwich and also Nuneaton to Birm NS via Water Orton.
We also must in my opinion have Transpennine upgrade + mainly sparks.

In Scotland they are doing it in spades - 4 routes between Edinburgh and Glasgow.

 

[InOban]

I've no axe to grind on Skipton to Colne, but it is much cheaper to work on a disused track, where you have access 24/7, than it is to redouble a single track line such as the Cotswolds while it is still in operation and access is intermittent.