What Couldn't Be Built Today?

[tbtc]

Due to modern healthy/ safety/ restrictions, what current infrastructure couldn't be built today?

Platform on too much of a gradient, too curvy, too many steps etc...

 

[pendolino]

Maybe not what you had in mind, but when I went for a walk earlier this year that took in Ouse Valley Viaduct, I couldn't help thinking that if it were proposed today, there is a strong chance it wouldn't be built due to the outrage it would provoke: a huge brick viaduct in open countryside in an AONB. As with HS2, there would be an outcry from the CPRE and all sorts of other pressure groups. Yet Ouse Valley Viaduct is venerated today as an engineering marvel and given listed status.

 

[tbtc]

Maybe not what you had in mind, but when I went for a walk earlier this year that took in Ouse Valley Viaduct, I couldn't help thinking that if it were proposed today, there is a strong chance it wouldn't be built due to the outrage it would provoke: a huge brick viaduct in open countryside in an AONB. As with HS2, there would be an outcry from the CPRE and all sorts of other pressure groups. Yet Ouse Valley Viaduct is venerated today as an engineering marvel and given listed status.

Fair point - try getting the Royal Border Bridge built over the Tweed nowadays, or the Welwyn Viaduct... no chance!

The same people who campaign for their quaint/small towns to get the direct London service that they "deserve" nowadays wouldn't have wanted a railway anywhere near their "back yard" if the railways were being built from scratch nowadays!

 

[pendolino]

Fair point - try getting the Royal Border Bridge built over the Tweed nowadays, or the Welwyn Viaduct... no chance!

The same people who campaign for their quaint/small towns to get the direct London service that they "deserve" nowadays wouldn't have wanted a railway anywhere near their "back yard" if the railways were being built from scratch nowadays!

I suppose there is the historical context to consider though. Back in the boom days of railway building, the coming of the railway opened up the country to many people whose world until then was probably limited to a few miles from their home, so they would perhaps have welcomed it, whereas today the response would probably be 'why do I need a railway? I go everywhere in my car!'.

Then again, I imagine many of those affected by the building of a railway had no say in the matter whatsoever - for example the forced slum clearances in Somers Town to allow the railway into St Pancras to be constructed.

 

[imagination]

Maybe not what you had in mind, but when I went for a walk earlier this year that took in Ouse Valley Viaduct, I couldn't help thinking that if it were proposed today, there is a strong chance it wouldn't be built due to the outrage it would provoke: a huge brick viaduct in open countryside in an AONB. As with HS2, there would be an outcry from the CPRE and all sorts of other pressure groups. Yet Ouse Valley Viaduct is venerated today as an engineering marvel and given listed status.

Ribblehead is a similar case.

 

[pendolino]

Ribblehead is a similar case.

Absolutely, and probably several hundred other similar structures in AONBs/National Parks etc etc. that were built before we had a statutory planning system.

 

[Trog]

Old viaducts built of the local stone, or from bricks made on site from the local clay. The spans generally being simple arches, with the proportions of the structure and its detailing done with a eye making a pleasing whole.

Somewhat different to today, where you would get the cheapest possible reinforced concrete design, and bugger what it looks like.

 

[exile]

There was a lot of opposition to railways being built but it was usually overcome by offering landowners sufficiently large sums of money. Opposition from those with no property eg tenants living in buildings to be demolished was generally ignored. By the turn of the century railway companies were obliged to rehouse displaced tenants, and the Great Central faced opposition to building their line adjacent to Lord's cricket ground. Early motorways seemed to be built without much dissent but they also now face considerable difficulties - but the difference is that a motorway is likely to be used by locals to some extent, a high speed rail line benefits people living in major cities where the proposed service stops whilst providing locals with the attendant noise and vibration from trains that don't stop.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

They would have probably made the constructors of the Glenfinnan Viaduct rescue the horse instead of leaving it in one of the supports...

 

[tbtc]

There was a lot of opposition to railways being built but it was usually overcome by offering landowners sufficiently large sums of money. Opposition from those with no property eg tenants living in buildings to be demolished was generally ignored

I guess thats the big difference - there weren't as many "stakeholders" back then, so you could push through new railway lines (inc vladucts etc) a lot easier.

You'd never be able to build the London Underground in 2011 - given the mess of other things under central London, plus the need for everything to be Disabled Access (etc), meaning the labyrinth of stairs wouldn't be acceptable.

And imagine how ugly a 21st century Forth Bridge would be...

 

[krus_aragon]

Due to modern healthy/ safety/ restrictions, what current infrastructure couldn't be built today?

An electrified railway with the power supplied at ground level?

Other than extending existing systems, you'd never be allowed to set up a brand new third rail system with 650V rails where people can step on them.

(The DLR was a new system, but has the conductor rail shrouded away.)

 

[142094]

It will be good to see in the next 50 years how many of the structures and stations built recently will still be there. Look at some of the stuff built in the 60s and 70s - many have already been demolished. However quite a lot of the buildings built by the Victorians are still around.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

The Great Western where it runs along the coast at Dawlish.
- would be fun if they were ever to electrify that stretch.

The Glasgow Subway.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

The Great Western where it runs along the coast at Dawlish.
- would be fun if they were ever to electrify that stretch.

No worse than the OHLE at Saltcoats between Kilwinning and Ardrossan / Largs surely?

 

[Mojo]

Warwick Parkway station. Only just made it through I believe, and that was just 11 years ago.

 

[Class172]

Warwick Parkway station. Only just made it through I believe, and that was just 11 years ago.

What's wrong with it?

 

[Mojo]

What's wrong with it?

It's on a corner with a very steep cant leading to a massive gap between train and platform.

 

[yorksrob]

It's on a corner with a very steep cant leading to a massive gap between train and platform.

I suspect the London platforms at Lewes also wouldn't make it through in that case.

 

[mallard]

Somewhat different to today, where you would get the cheapest possible reinforced concrete design, and bugger what it looks like.

I think you'll find that even then they were going for the "cheapest possible" design and didn't really care what it looked like. The only reason old viaducts aren't made out of reinforced concrete is because they were built before it was invented.

Besides, who's to say that reinforced concrete viaducts won't be considered "beautiful" in 100 years time? I'm pretty sure many considered the brick constructions ugly and a blight on the landscape when they were new.

But yes, if modern planning regulations, AONBs, National Parks, NIMBYs, etc. all existed when the railways were being built originally, I think it's fairly safe to say that the vast majority of them wouldn't have been.

Two things really "made" this country; naval supremacy and an entrepreneurial, innovative engineering culture. Sadly, we've clearly lost both.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

No worse than the OHLE at Saltcoats between Kilwinning and Ardrossan / Largs surely?

I was thinking of those times when you see waves crashing over the tracks by Dawlish Warren. Though to be honest have only travelled to Ardrossan on pleasant days and not been there when it's stormy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zK5B2FQkXjE&feature=related


see what you mean now though

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOMuPBHeWa8

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I was thinking of those times when you see waves crashing over the tracks by Dawlish Warren. Though to be honest have only travelled to Ardrossan on pleasant days and not been there when it's stormy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zK5B2FQkXjE&feature=related

Saltcoats:

 

[yorksrob]

Besides, who's to say that reinforced concrete viaducts won't be considered "beautiful" in 100 years time? I'm pretty sure many considered the brick constructions ugly and a blight on the landscape when they were new.

It might not be reinforced, but Cannington viaduct on the Lyme Regis branch is built of Concrete and is already considered rather beautiful.

 

[SWTCommuter]

It might not be reinforced, but Cannington viaduct on the Lyme Regis branch is built of Concrete and is already considered rather beautiful.

The Calstock and Glenfinnan viaducts are further examples.

 

[matchmaker]

The Calstock and Glenfinnan viaducts are further examples.

Glenfinnan Viaduct is a Grade A listed building.

 

[CosherB]

John Ruskin was most voacl against the building of the Midland main line through the Peak District, especially Monsal Head viaduct; "a vale ruined, so that every fool in Buxton can be in Bakewell in twenty minutes, and very fool in Bakewell in Buxton".

Today Monsal Head viaduct is a noted as a beautiful structure that enhances the magnificent natural surroundings. It would look even better if it still had trains running over it!

BTW, doesn't that slating by Ruskin echo the short-sighted nay-saying of HS2 by the Chiltern nimbys... "ruining the countryside to save a few minutes travel time between London and Birmingham"? Like Ruskin, they don't see (or choose not to see) the bigger picture.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

John Ruskin was most voacl against the building of the Midland main line through the Peak District, especially Monsal Head viaduct; "a vale ruined, so that every fool in Buxton can be in Bakewell in twenty minutes, and very fool in Bakewell in Buxton".

Today Monsal Head viaduct is a noted as a beautiful structure that enhances the magnificent natural surroundings. It would look even better if it still had trains running over it!

BTW, doesn't that slating by Ruskin echo the short-sighted nay-saying of HS2 by the Chiltern nimbys... "ruining the countryside to save a few minutes travel time between London and Birmingham"? Like Ruskin, they don't see (or choose not to see) the bigger picture.

Wonder if he is a ancestor of Joe Ruskin of Stop HS2

 

[Yew]

Who says concrete is ugly?

 

[krus_aragon]

Something that wouldn't be built today (rather than couldn't) is tubular railway bridges. Stephenson's Conwy and Britannia bridges were ground-breaking and pioneering when built, but technology soon overtook them, and few other (if any) examples were ever built. Given that the Britannia burnt down and was redesigned, the Conwy bridge is rather unique.

 

[yorksrob]

The Calstock and Glenfinnan viaducts are further examples.

I wish I'd known that about Calstock when I travelled over it a few weeks ago

 

[lancastrian]

Due to modern healthy/ safety/ restrictions, what current infrastructure couldn't be built today?

Platform on too much of a gradient, too curvy, too many steps etc...

Any railway station built on a curve, for example, the old platforms 12/13 at Manchester Victoria. The old East lancashire platforms at Preston. Any railway line through countryside within a 25 mile radius of any 'NIMBYS' house.