Bristol & North Somerset Railway near Frome - a question

[fromesmissinglinks]

Hello from down here in Frome. We have a question on the Bristol & North Somerset Railway that we hope someone might be able to help us with.

But first the background. As you may know this railway between Radstock and Great Elm (just short of Frome) is no longer in use as a railway, but now carries Sustrans NCN route 24 cycle path in parallel with the old track. It provides a beautiful route for walkers and cyclists through the north Somerset countryside. The problem is that the route stops at Great Elm which is about 2 miles short of Frome. The reason it stops is that the track from then on is an active freight line hauling limestone from Whatley quarry. However there is still space for the cycle path to run alongside this live line as there was enough land purchased to allow dual track on this section. Our plan, which Network Rail and Mendip Rail (the operator on the line) are aware of, is to do just that. Please see http://www.fromesmissinglinks.org.uk for more information.

The problem we hope someone can help with is on the section of the line where the A362 crosses on an over bridge. Here the unused arch has been blocked sometime between 1969 and 1976 when the original steel deck was replaced by concrete lintels. This image shows the problem using photos from Mike VincentÆs excellent book ôThrough Countryside & Coalfieldö to illustrate the point:


We would obviously need to cut through this blocked up arch for the cycle path. Our question is ôDoes anyone know how this arch was blocked and what the fill material is?ö

Thanks for your help.
Chris Green for FromeÆs Missing Links Group

[jules]

Does anyone know how this arch was blocked and what the fill material is?

Given the dates of 1969-75, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the cutting wasn't used as a mini-landfill site. This happened to many disused railway lines that were in cuttings - it seemed at the time any disused hole was good for dumping rubbish in and then capping over.

The local council would have records, as they approved these kind of things ... If you are lucky, the fill material would just be hardcore or spoil or other such inert building waste. If you are unlucky, it could be something more noxious, such as household or industrial waste. In which case, digging it out and finding somewhere to put it would be a challenge ... (Just Google "Imberhorne Cutting" / see http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/blueb ... tprog.html for examples of the problems involved). Don't forget to budget for landfill tax also

A few photos of the site as it is today might also be helpful.

Incidentally, you're a brave person to post this subject on this site Most of us here thoroughly disagree with turning railways over to cycle tracks

[Robin Summerhill]

Incidentally, you're a brave person to post this subject on this site Most of us here thoroughly disagree with turning railways over to cycle tracks

I find no problem with using disused railway formations as cycle tracks rather than just lose the routes altogether.

That said, my views on Sustrans' objections when anyone dares suggest that they be re-used for their original purpose have already been well documented elsewhere, so I won't bother to repeat them here

Don't want to get a "red card" you see

[Robin Summerhill]

The problem is that the route stops at Great Elm which is about 2 miles short of Frome. The reason it stops is that the track from then on is an active freight line hauling limestone from Whatley quarry. However there is still space for the cycle path to run alongside this live line as there was enough land purchased to allow dual track on this section. Our plan, which Network Rail and Mendip Rail (the operator on the line) are aware of, is to do just that.

The problem we hope someone can help with is on the section of the line where the A362 crosses on an over bridge. Here the unused arch has been blocked sometime between 1969 and 1976 when the original steel deck was replaced by concrete lintels.

We would obviously need to cut through this blocked up arch for the cycle path. Our question is ôDoes anyone know how this arch was blocked and what the fill material is?ö

My immediate though when reading this was why not simply take the cycle track up onto the road and back down the other side - such arrangements are a perishing nuisance when they appear on cycle tracks but would be very much cheaper than reopening the bridge.

Then I looked at the area in Google Maps. It seems to me that your whole idea may be unrealistically expensive, because the railway line runs centrally through the cutting and would need slewing over to one side, and also a bulldozer would be needed to shift quite a bit of spoil.

I've no doubt you've already thought of this but I just thought I'd mention it because it is another quite large and expensive practical problem that will need to be overcome

[fromesmissinglinks]

In reply to some of the points raised:

(1) Here is a recent photo of the blocked in arch:


(2) Crossing of the A362 at grade at this point or anywhere near is dicing with death. It is partiiculay bad for children and disabled.

(3) There is space for both the existing track and foot/cycle path. You are right discarded ballast is tipped to one side but we can use that for fill elsewhere.

(4) We've checked with Somerset County Council & Network Rail with no luck

Thanks for the comments.

[jules]

I find no problem with using disused railway formations as cycle tracks rather than just lose the routes altogether.

That said, my views on Sustrans' objections when anyone dares suggest that they be re-used for their original purpose have already been well documented elsewhere, so I won't bother to repeat them here

I agree with both your sentiments completely!

[jules]

(1) Here is a recent photo of the blocked in arch:

Ah! I should have looked at your original photographs a little more carefully. I thought you meant that the whole bridge had been filled in - I didn't take notice of your caption pointing out only one span blocked in - I thought you meant the entire bridge had been blocked in.

I also had no idea that it still had an active railway line running under it ...

So, the good news is that it won't be a 1970s rubbish tip

It is most likely filled with rubble, ballast or some other inert material. My guess is that when the steel deck was replaced (because it was failing) it was cheaper to just block and fill the second span as at the time, there was no prospect of ever laying a second track there.

As to the structural considerations of resinstating such a span, I'll leave that to our Civil Engineering Dept.

I'm sure they will be first to point out though, that the bridge is not and never was an "arch", so the structural considerations of re-instating are going to be considerably different to those of a true arch that has just been in-filled.

It seems to me that your whole idea may be unrealistically expensive, because the railway line runs centrally through the cutting and would need slewing over to one side

Indeed. It is very common practice to centre or othewrwise re-align a single track on what was previously a double track formation. Shifting them back to the original position is time-consuming, disruptive and very expensive!

[madhattie]

Most of the original stonework at the top of the original bridge is missing (replaced with blue engineering bricks) so my guess would be that's what went in the gap.