Brit Valley/Jurassic Coast Railway

Is there any news on this? Or is it now considered dead in the water?

The last mention on this forum was back in November 2007 when it was indicated that it was hoped to go more 'public' with plans in 6 months, but Google doesn't really indicate anything further on the web.

 

Not dead but does not appear to have momentum.
Extract from the minutes of the Bridport Town Council Neighbourhood Plan Working Group

http://www.vision-2030.co.uk/working-groups/transport/transport-meeting-minutes/

QUOTE

VISION 2030 Transport Working Group 17th December 2015

Nigel Ewens representing Jurassic Coast Railways began his presentation with a proposal to reinstate the rail system to link Bridport to the mainline at Maiden Newton.
He felt that the current population of 24,000 (the NP area plus Burton Bradstock and Netherbury) was significantly high, to justify and market lead such a project. It would be involve operating a year–round service, not just a seasonal one, serving in the main, local tourists.

The meeting were shown several maps indicating the route starting at Maiden Newton to encompass the villages of Toller Porcorum, Powerstock, Loders and Bridport, terminating at West Bay.This would be a link of approximately fourteen miles in length, and would be a heavy duty, narrow guage (2ft 6inches) single track, with various dual-tracked passing places.

Essentially, it would be a re-vamping of the original track route from Maiden Newton to the eastern the vicinity of the Town. However due to subsequent historical development(s) (Travis Perkins and the Co-op, etc ) at St. Andrews Road, a proposed, alternative route via Gore Cross, involving a 300 metre tunnel, or alternatively, a northerly route to circumvent the adjacent hill, then southwards via Pymore, through central Bridport, linking to the bus station. The route would pass Skilling to the east, cross the A35 via a new bridge near the Eype flyover, onto Broomhills (where workshops would be sited) and ultimately on to the existing station at West Bay.

The meeting were informed that a total cost of £50m would conclude this project. Steam engines (originally constructed in the UK), would be purchased from the Sri Lankan government at a cost of £7m (an individual £4-500 engine rebuild was expected). Other rolling stock would be of bespoke design, and constructed in the UK, perhaps even locally. Typically, a carriage would convey a maximum of 60 passengers, and a train would consist of up to eight carriages, at a maximum speed of 25mph. There is scope to convey 220,000 passengers per annum.

In addition, more modern rolling stock, similar to the Parry’s People Mover utilised in Stourbridge. The commercialisation of the Parry System is currently enjoying research and implementation funding from a Warwick University based, spin-off company.

This system would employ a 90volt (third rail) power source in places (hills), but in the main it would employ a kinetic flywheel energy storage system, which is activated during the braking process. Rather similar to that of the Kinetic Energy Recovery System, (KERS) charging a battery unit, as utilised in F1 racing cars.

Furthermore, a narrow gauge railway costs one seventh! of a standard gauge system as eg., less land is required, when built from scratch.

Because the existing standard gauge track-bed width will be underutilised with a narrow gauge system, there is scope to employ a parallel cycleway and utilise a hop-on, hop-off system (potential synergy with Sustrans system; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustrans). A park-and-ride system, sited on the periphery of Bridport was also proposed.

Proposed timelines were........(initial work would start at West Bay, then north to Pymore)

Initial engineering; 3 years or less. Initial expenditure of £1.5m would suffice.

Bridport to Pymore link; 18 months

Whole system in operation; 5 years in total.

Comments from NP Transport Group
BD was keen to see this happen, especially comparing the alternative, the erratic bus service. He was aware of three previous, failed attempts to achieve the aim of this proposal. There had been evidence of some resistance from the local community.
IH expressed concern that contributions towards this project could be a significant drain on Section 106 funding. This would restrict expenditure in other (more important) areas.
JC commented that there had been objections to the development of the cycle path by some land owners, and permission had been refused.
NE indicated that his Corporate Body had more inherent clout (than Sustrans), as there was a possibility of compulsory purchase options as a last resort.
MF was concerned that the link, from Maiden Newton, traversing the north of Dorchester, was not geographically viable ?
BD Would an alternative link to Crewkerne be viable ? To be a viable alternative to the bus, were train speeds in excess of 25mph be achievable ?
IH supported the viability of a service, particularly that it would be a source of employment, enhance green criteria by reducing the carbon footprint, with reductions of vehicle numbers in the NP locale.
RF asked about the frequency of the train service as to be a viable competitor to the bus service.
NE replied that a more frequent timetable would be employed between West Bay and Pymore.
MF asked that a dedicated map be generated, highlighting preserved areas would be useful.
IH asked that a map of the proposed route be supplied such that the Land Use Working Group, could assess a potential clash of alternative housing sites, to that of the proposed rail route.
MF asked if NE/CG wanted their proposal put before the Steering Group, and/ or would they independently submit it ?
IH indicated that the Transport Group could support the rail proposal , but could not enforce its inclusion in the NP.
To conclude NE/CG asked that the NP preserve the proposed rail corridor as part of the yet to be evolved NP.

UNQUOTE

 

Or may be it does:
Further extract from the minutes of the Bridport Town Council Neighbourhood Plan Working Group

Sustainable Transport Group

23rd June 2016 at Mountfield

http://www.vision-2030.co.uk/working-groups/transport/transport-meeting-minutes/

QUOTE

It was felt that the proposal by Jurassic Coast Railways be re-investigated. However, it was felt that a modification in that a shorter route from West Bay to (including a park & ride option, be located at Broomhills) Pymore, be considered in the interim. Jurassic Coast Railways would be contacted with this proposal.

UNQUOTE