Sydney Gardens - paling into insignificance

horace · Post by **horace** » Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:17 am

The OHLE will be no closer to the top of the wall than it is to the platform at any station. The wall is about platform height and is actually further from the rail than any platform. Have a look at my photograph taken at wall height and it will show how low the wall is, it is below platform level compared to to the passing train. Once the track is lowered it will I would suggest be at platform level. It is as you can see considerably further from the track than any platform. Get your clearance tables out and you will see it will be well away from the OHLE

I get the feeling that people are determined to have a safety fence or wall put here the amount of things they are coming up with to give Network rail the reason to have one here. This is the sort of talk network rail love as it can be used in applications for a barrier. Start looking at all the reasons for not putting a barrier or soon you will have one.

I can see network rails application now. It will be stating people have raised concerns about people standing on top of the wet wall. People are concerned that at the new rail depot a safety barrier was installed but we do not have one in Sydney gardens.

horace · Post by **horace** » Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:48 am

The OHLE is 16'-0" above track level and a minimum of 7'-8" horizontally from any structure on the side. So even if you are at the same height as the wire you only have to be 1'-4" further away than the minimum required to meet the safety standards.
The wall at Sydney Gardens is not at minimum clearance, remember all of these structures were built to meet the clearance for 7'-0" gauge and in many places the tracks are further apart than needed. As it stands at the moment one could be 20'-0" tall and standing on top of the wall and would still be 9'-0" from the OHLE.
But as I stated before during construction different rules apply. Red zones, Green zones etc. etc. the fence is for that.

What people seem to be forgetting is that the OHLE support columns will actually be inside the wall. so how can the wall be infringing on the safety zone, or so would the columns.

horace · Post by **horace** » Sun Jul 29, 2012 11:05 am

Before anyone comes back and tells me my figures are wrong because of the stagger in the OHLE, the stagger is in total 230mm, that is 10", so 5" each side of centre, so again so long as the face of the wall is more than 1'-9" further than minimum from the rails we are still safe. Again remember the columns, so long as they are inside the wall the wall is safe. OK we may end up with some ugly stuff around the column to prevent nutters climbing them but that should be at the column only.

horace · Post by **horace** » Sun Jul 29, 2012 12:12 pm

Is the top of the wall at Sydney Gardens going to be closer to the OHLE than this??

http://www.flickr.com/photos/crashcalloway/1259934503/

APW · Post by **APW** » Sun Jul 29, 2012 1:27 pm

horace wrote:Is the top of the wall at Sydney Gardens going to be closer to the OHLE than this??

I have no idea. I'll find a plastic tape measure and get back to you.

APW · Post by **APW** » Sun Jul 29, 2012 2:30 pm

In the late 1980Ã†s, during electrification if the ECML, York station and the Royal Border Bridge (both Grade 1 listed buildings) received special attention to the installation of OHLE. The proposals were scrutinised by the Royal Fine Arts Commission. Installation of the OHLE was never in doubt, even though it involved drilling holes and bolting stuff to the structures. No one expected OHLE to be refused thus causing the passengers to get off the train at one end of the bridge/station, push the train across/through, and then get back on the train at the other end.

The OHLE support columns on the Royal Border Bridge were deliberately positioned in line with the bridge legs in order to be aesthetically pleasing, and were of 'light weight design' to be as visually unobtrusive as possible:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Border_Bridge

Perhaps the bridges along Sidney Gardens can be used to hide the OHLE support columns, perhaps even remove the need for them altogether.

I very much doubt that a tight twisting Victorian railway will be in use through Bath 500 years from now - it will be replaced by something, somehow.

My point is, change is inevitable - you canÃ†t stop it, especially with a major railway route. I just hope that the changes to this viewing spot are very sympathetic.

horace · Post by **horace** » Sun Jul 29, 2012 2:31 pm

I will throw one more comment into to this thread before retiring from it knowing that Sydney gardens is safe.
Level Crossings, how many people have been electrocuted going over level crossings under OHLE. None that I know of. Usually in this situation the OHLE is raised by a small amount (up to 2'-0") to give extra clearance so that no restrictions are needed. If the top of the wall in Sydney gardens is considered such a huge safety consideration as some here seem to think, the wires could be raised tight to the underside of the bridge with adequate insulation measure in place. yes it does happen, through the Simplon tunnel there are no wires on the OHLE, it is a overhead rail system to get over various problems.

horace · Post by **horace** » Sun Jul 29, 2012 2:33 pm

APW wrote:In the late 1980Ã†s, during electrification if the ECML, York station and the Royal Border Bridge (both Grade 1 listed buildings) received special attention to the installation of OHLE. The proposals were scrutinised by the Royal Fine Arts Commission. Installation of the OHLE was never in doubt, even though it involved drilling holes and bolting stuff to the structures. No one expected OHLE to be refused thus causing the passengers to get off the train at one end of the bridge/station, push the train across/through, and then get back on the train at the other end.

The OHLE support columns on the Royal Border Bridge were deliberately positioned in line with the bridge legs in order to be aesthetically pleasing, and were of 'light weight design' to be as visually unobtrusive as possible:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Border_Bridge

Perhaps the bridges along Sidney Gardens can be used to hide the OHLE support columns, perhaps even remove the need for them altogether.

I very much doubt that a tight twisting Victorian railway will be in use through Bath 500 years from now - it will be replaced by something, somehow.

My point is, change is inevitable - you canÃ†t stop it, especially with a major railway route. I just hope that the changes to this viewing spot are very sympathetic.

Agreed, which is where i was coming from, there are ways and means of getting over the problems at Sydney Gardens without changing it to much, especially a wall that is well out of the way.

My last word on this matter.

horace · Post by **horace** » Mon Jul 30, 2012 11:09 am

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-19045675

free2grice · Post by **free2grice** » Mon Jul 30, 2012 1:54 pm

Shame the photograph taken in Sydney Gardens didn't show the new 'temporary' fencing. <BJ>

jules · Post by **jules** » Mon Jul 30, 2012 6:34 pm

Oh dear! I didn't mean to start off a big discussion by my post and questions, which were merely considering the site from a PTS point of view. I added the bit about OHLE as an afterthought ....

I will give you an example of how powerless the rail regulator will be. The A303 past Stonehenge is responsible for multiple deaths every year. The highways agency, transport ministers, prime ministers, and local MP's have promised for years to do something about it.

And they probably haven't achieved anything because firstly, a public road is a lot less controlled environment than a railway (which is "private" property) and secondly deaths on the road seem somehow less objectionable to the public than deaths on the railway. After all, the railway is supposed to be safe and it is kept that way because it is a safety controlled environment more so than a road would be, except maybe motorways. Makes me think that one: you see lots of trespassers on the railway, but how many do you see on the motorways? It's all about the public's (mis-)understandings and perception ...

Anyhow, here's a specific suggestion for Sydney Gardens. If the wall is too close and considered too high a risk (which I'm not saying it is or it isn't), my first answer would be to move it back some feet to line up with the start of the bridges. There is plainly the space to do it and whilst being a change to the site, it wouldn't actually look all that different - it would just keep the public further away.

There would be a bit less park, of course, but the view that everybody wishes to preserve and the ability to take photos would be largely retained.

If you really wanted to deter the trespassers, the answer might be a nice big ditch between the relocated wall and the up running line. You could even fill it with water to discourage all but the most determined!

jules · Post by **jules** » Mon Jul 30, 2012 6:36 pm

Agreed, which is where i was coming from, there are ways and means of getting over the problems at Sydney Gardens without changing it to much, especially a wall that is well out of the way.

Horace, I only just spotted after I'd posted that you had suggested the same idea?

Maybe we've come up with the answer then

Robin Summerhill · Post by **Robin Summerhill** » Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:28 pm

There was an item on BBC Points West tonight about various structures on the line being given listed building status.

The reporter was actually standing next to the fencing in Sydney Gardens but:

1. The fencing wasn't mentioned
2. Does the fact it wasn't mentioned give cause for concern? They were talking about such structures as bridges and the Box tunnel western portal, not walls in Sydney Gardens

Robin Summerhill · Post by **Robin Summerhill** » Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:31 pm

jules wrote: If you really wanted to deter the trespassers, the answer might be a nice big ditch between the relocated wall and the up running line. You could even fill it with water to discourage all but the most determined!

Hmmm - a railway with a moat?

Nah, it'd never work - an MP would want to make a claim for it on expenses

jules · Post by **jules** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 4:04 am

Nah, it'd never work - an MP would want to make a claim for it on expenses

It would look nice with a few duck houses on it