Oswestry Update

With respect neither of these two instances appear to be nearly as significant a rise in road height as this would require, see Saggin' Dragons picture above. Equally it's not me you have to convince to do this. Knowing Highways, and being a member of a Local Authority, I'm just being devils advocate when it comes to assuming that a bridge will be put in

 

Another problem could be that the bridge would be so close to the roundabout that it would create a hazard when northbound traffic queues back from the roundabout, as it frequently does.
The easier solution would be for the railway to bridge the road - paid for by the highways people of course !

Bob.

 

I think the Grantham Canal precedent is less hopeful - the A46 goes over at high level, but the government chose not to raise a nearby bridge despite the cost of doing so being massively increased by the A46 scheme. Meanwhile, the A46 levels also reflect a split level interchange and smoothing of the gradients - not the rise and fall that would be required of the A5.

 

So would that be one very large flyover or two separate ones ? It would work out cheaper & cause less disruption for the railway to bridge the road.

Bob.

 

Just looking at the logistics of a rail bridge over the A5. Being a trunk road there must be a specification for the clear height over the road. It will probable be similar to motorway bridges, i.e. rather high. The earthworks for the ramps would be massive and I believe there are physical constraints on the south side.This all sounds a bit expensive

 

T

They just can't do that. Stop frightening yourself.

 

I think you meant "they can't just do that" - i.e. without going through a proper process.

 

I'd hardly say I'm frightened, but being a local authority member and having worked in politics "they can't do that" is a phrase uttered shortly before "well they just did."

Where there's a will there's a way, and from the sounds of it the LA have the will to see the railway reinstated

 

Fair enough, Roman Britain is not my topic although Chester does make sense.

 

So I take it this scheme to bridge the road is to try & link the 2 sections of the oswestry railway?

Can't remember where abouts the other bit is but think it's a few miles off.

 

Information concerning the railway's TWAO submission are on their website including maps and some slightly enigmatic comments about the two main level crossings only being used with written permission from the ORR - see here http://cambrianrailways.com/twao/documents/

Steve B

 

In pedant's mode I hereby pronounce that both sentences mean the same thing.

 

There is a picture of the level crossing and some views of the line clearance during a recent working party
http://www.cambrianrailways.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=743&sid=112f9fbef6912fd8d118ef3cd6319bc9

 

This crossing would be as safe as any other crossing. It would hold up road traffic but in my view not for an intolerable period. If the road were ever dualled a bridge would be the obvious solution.

 

The crossing in the pictures is that over the Welshpool Road (I forget the A number). It isn't the A5 crossing.

Steve B

 

Streetview pics of the A5 crossing, to the north of Oswestry

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.8...kV6mhx6yL3HNHTFpnhoA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

and the A483 crossing to the south

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.8...lCFTNbyaOu-AiHDCUTYQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

 

The A5 one looks a killer for cyclists.