DOCSLIB.ORG

Document No. 028 Network Rail HS2 Requirements 13-0409 Appendix

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Document No. 028 Network Rail HS2 Requirements 13-0409 Appendix APPENDIX 1 – REQUIREMENTS Appendix 1.1: Document no. 028 Network Rail HS2 Requirements 13-0409 Appendix 1.2: HS2’s Project Definition Statement (PDS) C241 – Calvert East-West Rail C241-PBR-DS-STA-020-000001 revision P08 Appendix 1.3: Client Requirements Document for the East West Rail Phase 2 project HS2-EWR Integration GRIP 2 Feasibility Report 148476-NWR-REP-MPM-000003 Page 61 of 357 Appendix 1.3: Client Requirements Document for the East West Rail Phase 2 project HS2-EWR Integration GRIP 2 Feasibility Report 148476-NWR-REP-MPM-000003 Page 145 of 357 Client Requirements Document- OP133735 EAST WEST NetworkRail RAIL PHASE 2 -&~ Client Requirements Document OP133735 EAST WEST RAIL PHASE 2 Client Requirements Document Template: ref: NR/PSE/FRM/0239, Issue 02, 10th December 2013 Prepared by : Senior Programme Development ·• :'.,er /i!!.il:fli. {late" t N:! o' 'f Bernmtfffulland Checked by : Programme Development Manager ~ate :oLt/os /L::> r 4 Approved by: Lead Strategic Planner ;iPJ:~~ Date S 3 z.._c l'-r Z{ Tony Rudge Accepted by : Senior Programme Developme~t ~~e r B~ Date s/$1'-oll-f This document is the property of Network Rail. It shall not be reproduced in whole or in part, nor disclosed to a third party without prior written permission. Copyright 2014 Network Rail Document Ref: Issue: 1 CRD Date: 25 February 2014 Page: 1 of 33 Client Requirements Document – OP133735 EAST WEST RAIL PHASE 2 Document History Issue Date Originator Modification 1 25 February Bernard First draft for comment 2014 Hulland 2 3 February Bernard Final Version 2014 Hulland Document Ref: Issue: 1 CRD Date: 25 February 2014 Page: 2 of 33 Client Requirements Document – OP133735 EAST WEST RAIL PHASE 2 Contents 1 Purpose ........................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Background Information ............................................................................................... 4 1.2 Stakeholders ................................................................................................................ 5 2 General Description of the Scheme................................................................................. 6 2.1 Business Objectives (Aspirations)................................................................................ 6 2.2 Scheme Definition ........................................................................................................ 7 2.3 Boundaries and Relationships ..................................................................................... 7 2.4 Assumptions, Dependencies, Constraints & Risks ...................................................... 7 2.4.1 Assumptions ......................................................................................................... 7 2.4.2 Dependencies ....................................................................................................... 8 2.4.3 Constraints............................................................................................................ 8 2.4.4 Risks ................................................................................................................... 11 2.5 Whole Life Cost Strategy ........................................................................................... 11 2.6 Scheme Key Milestones and Configuration States .................................................... 12 2.7 Scheme Acceptance Strategy.................................................................................... 12 3 Scheme Requirements .................................................................................................. 14 3.1 Safety Strategy - Requirements ................................................................................. 14 3.2 General Scheme - Requirements............................................................................... 14 3.3 Performance Aspiration - Requirements .................................................................... 15 3.4 Maintenance Strategy - Requirements....................................................................... 18 Appendix A - Deliverables..................................................................................................... 19 Appendix B - References ...................................................................................................... 33 Appendix C - Glossary .......................................................................................................... 33 Document Ref: Issue: 1 CRD Date: 25 February 2014 Page: 3 of 33 Client Requirements Document – OP133735 EAST WEST RAIL PHASE 2 1 Purpose 1.1 Background Information The “East West Rail” (EWR) project proposes the introduction of direct rail passenger services between Oxford, Milton Keynes and Bedford, and also between London (Marylebone) and Milton Keynes (via Aylesbury), by reconstructing and upgrading the partially-disused Oxford – Bicester – Bletchley – Bedford, and Princes Risborough - Aylesbury – Claydon Junction routes. The project was promoted for a number of years by the East West Rail Consortium, formed by a partnership of Local Authorities along the line of route, who commissioned a series of studies culminating in 2009 in the issuing of a Project Prospectus, supported by a feasibility report, roughly equivalent to GRIP 3, produced by Atkins. These documents reflected an output specification which delivered a basic pattern of regular passenger services between the main centres served by the EWR route, together with some additional capacity for new freight and inter-regional passenger services, which is referred to today as the “core” scheme. In 2012, the “core” EWR scheme was included in the High Level Output Statement (HLOS) for Control Period 5 (CP5) issued by the Department for Transport (DfT). Subsequently, in recognition of the potential of the reconstructed routes to exploit new markets, the DfT proposed an enhanced output specification, including additional capacity, higher line speeds, and enhanced route availability and loading gauge. The Oxford – Bletchley - Bedford section was also identified as an integral part of the “Electric Spine” proposal to create an electrified network to create additional capacity, primarily for freight, between the south coast and the East and West Midlands. The section of the route between Oxford and Bicester was also proposed for substantial reconstruction under the “Evergreen 3” project, promoted and developed by Chiltern Railways. Following inclusion of the EWR project in the CP5 HLOS, and in order to secure efficiencies in delivery, the works required for both schemes were combined into a composite project as “East West Rail Phase 1”, to be delivered by Network Rail in accordance with timescales dictated by Chiltern’s franchise commitment to start the new Oxford – London service in March 2016. Construction of Phase 1 started in September 2012, and work is now progressing on site. Owing to the enhanced specification now proposed by DfT and the potential need to integrate electrification, the remainder of the EWR project east of Bicester is, at the time of writing, at a much earlier stage of development (about mid-GRIP2), and much work remains to finalise the definitive output specification and secure funding for design and construction. To progress project development, an Industry Plan Group has been convened to secure, by March 2014, support across the industry for enhanced route capabilities. Following this, it is intended that the options identified will be developed and costed, with a view to securing funding for the project in the Final Determination in March 2015. The current programme includes a final completion date of March 2019 to comply with Network Rail’s commitment to deliver the project within CP5, but both the DfT and the EWR Consortium support earlier introduction of the new services by December 2017 if this can be realistically achieved. Document Ref: Issue: 1 CRD Date: 25 February 2014 Page: 4 of 33 Client Requirements Document – OP133735 EAST WEST RAIL PHASE 2 The new EWR route intersects the proposed alignment of High Speed 2 (HS2) near Steeple Claydon, where a major construction site (later to become the main HS2 Infrastructure maintenance Depot) is to be built, and both vertical and horizontal realignment of the Bicester - Bletchley and Aylesbury – Claydon will be necessary. These alterations are included in the HS2 hybrid bill submitted in December 2013 which is planned to receive royal assent in Summer 2015. The HS2 programme assumes that the EWR route will be available for disposal of spoil by rail from West London during 2018, and subsequently HS2 construction traffic between 2020 and 2026. These considerations may result in further enhancement of the EWR output specification, and will influence the EWR delivery programme. 1.2 Stakeholders The following stakeholders have been identified: Name Role Contact Network Rail Paul Plummer Group Strategy Director Paul.plummer @networkrail.co.uk Jo Kaye Director, Strategy & [email protected] Planning (LNW & LNE) David Golding Principal Strategic [email protected]. Planner, LNW Route uk Graham Botham Principal Strategic [email protected] Planner, LNE & EM Route Chris Aldridge Principal Strategic [email protected] Planner, Western Route Bernard Hulland Senior Programme [email protected] Development Manager, East West Rail Francis McGarry Programme Manager, [email protected]
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rf LTW Chiltern Response
    campaigning by the Railway Development Society Limited Development of Train Services for Chiltern Routes Response from Railfuture 1. Introduction Railfuture is pleased to respond to the London TravelWatch document regarding the Development of Train Services for Chiltern Routes. Our comments will be brief and to the point. Railfuture is the campaigning name of the Railway Development Society Limited, a (not for profit) Limited Company organised in England as twelve regional branches plus two national branches in Scotland and Wales. This coordinated response has been compiled by Railfuture London & South East, and has been agreed with Railfuture Thames Valley for those sections of line in their area (Amersham to Aylesbury and West Ruislip to Bicester North). 2. General Comments Railfuture welcomes the initiative from LTW to suggest ways of raising standards of service on Chiltern Railways services in London and South East. We note the work that has gone into gathering the detail on network capacity and existing services. Chiltern is unique for a number of reasons: its close working relationship and shared infrastructure with London Underground (LU) on the Aylesbury Line; the close proximity of other LU and London Bus services to many Chiltern ‘metro’ stations on the High Wycombe line; the close mix of short and medium distance commuter traffic and the poor interchange facilities at Marylebone. It is equally unique for the impressive increase in patronage generated by reliable modern rolling stock and infrastructure; the benefits of a long-term franchise agreement and an imaginative customer oriented professional management team. It is also inhibited by many of the factors that make it unique! These range from the poor interchange facilities at Marylebone, to a lack of infrastructure between Wembley and West Ruislip.
    [Show full text]
  • Solent to the Midlands Multimodal Freight Strategy – Phase 1
    OFFICIAL SOLENT TO THE MIDLANDS MULTIMODAL FREIGHT STRATEGY – PHASE 1 JUNE 2021 OFFICIAL TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................................................... 4 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY .......................................................................................................................................................... 9 2. STRATEGIC AND POLICY CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................................... 11 3. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SOLENT TO THE MIDLANDS ROUTE ........................................................................................................ 28 4. THE ROAD ROUTE ............................................................................................................................................................................. 35 5. THE RAIL ROUTE ............................................................................................................................................................................... 40 6. KEY SECTORS .................................................................................................................................................................................... 50 7. FREIGHT BETWEEN THE SOLENT AND THE MIDLANDS ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • East West Rail Western Section Phase 2
    EAST WEST RAIL WESTERN SECTION PHASE 2 CONSULTATION INFORMATION DOCUMENT JUNE 2017 Document Reference 133735-PBR-REP-EEN-000026 Author Network Rail Date June 2017 Date of revision and June 2017 revision number 2.0 The Network Rail (East West Rail Western Section Phase 2) Order Consultation Information Document TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................... 1 2. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Purpose of this consultation ...................................................................... 2 2.2 Structure of this consultation ..................................................................... 2 3. EAST WEST RAIL .............................................................................................. 4 3.1 Background ............................................................................................... 4 3.2 EWR Western Section ............................................................................... 5 4. EAST WEST RAIL WESTERN SECTION PHASE 2 .......................................... 8 4.1 Benefits ..................................................................................................... 8 4.2 Location ..................................................................................................... 8 4.3 Consenting considerations ...................................................................... 11 4.4 Interface with the High Speed
    [Show full text]
  • Consultation Technical Report
    Making Meaningful Connections Consultation Technical Report East West Rail Consultation: 31 March – 9 June 2021 This document contains the full Consultation Technical Report, without the Appendices. To access the Appendices, please visit www.eastwestrail.co.uk 01. Introduction 18 - 26 07. Project Section B: Bletchley and the Marston Vale Line 100 - 229 1.1. Chapter Summary 18 7.1. Chapter Summary 101 1.2. East West Rail 19 7.2. Introduction 104 1.3. The Project 19 7.3. Service Concepts 109 1.4. Consultation 23 7.4. Bletchley Station 141 1.5. Technical Report 26 7.5. Fenny Stratford Additional Track 144 02. The Case for East West Rail 27 - 31 7.6. Level Crossings on the Marston Vale Line 146 2.1. Chapter Summary 27 7.7. Marston Vale Line Infrastructure Upgrade 228 2.2. The overall case for East West Rail 28 08. Project Section C: Bedford 230 - 299 2.3. Benefits of railways over road improvements 31 8.1. Chapter Summary 230 03. Project Objectives 32 - 42 8.2. Introduction 234 3.1. Chapter Summary 32 8.3. Bedford St Johns 238 3.2. Introduction 33 8.4. Bedford Station 250 3.3. Safety 34 8.5. North Bedford 268 3.4. Environment 34 8.6. Conclusion 297 3.5. EWR Services 34 09. Project Section D: Clapham Green to The Eversdens 300 - 371 3.6. Connectivity 36 9.1. Chapter Summary 301 3.7. Customer Experience and Stations 37 9.2. Introduction 303 3.8. Powering EWR Services 38 9.3. Option Development 306 3.9.
    [Show full text]
  • Annex G – Forming & Delivering a Strategy
    Swindon and Wiltshire Rail Study 09/05/2019 Reference number 107523 ANNEX G – FORMING & DELIVERING A STRATEGY SWINDON AND WILTSHIRE RAIL STUDY ANNEX G – FORMING & DELIVERING A STRATEGY IDENTIFICATION TABLE Client/Project owner Swindon and Wiltshire Local Enterprise Partnership Project Swindon and Wiltshire Rail Study Study Annex G – Forming & Delivering a Strategy Type of document Report Date 09/05/2019 File name Framework N/A Reference number 107523 Number of pages 33 APPROVAL Version Name Position Date Modifications Author J Jackson Associate 12/03/2019 Checked A Sykes Associate 13/03/2019 1 by Approved D Bishop Director 15/03/2019 by Author J Jackson Associate 09/05/2019 Checked A Sykes Associate 09/05/2019 2 by Approved A Sykes Associate 09/05/2019 by TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 6 2. IDENTIFYING THE COMPONENTS OF THE STRATEGY 7 3. NETWORK-WIDE INITIATIVES 8 4. GREAT WESTERN MAINLINE 11 RECOMMENDATIONS 11 PHASE 0: 1 TPH WESTBURY – SWINDON 12 PHASE 1: 1 TPH SOUTHAMPTON CENTRAL – SWINDON 13 PHASE 2 & 2A: GREAT WESTERN CONNECT 14 PHASE 3: EXTENSION OF GREAT WESTERN CONNECT 16 DELIVERY OF GREAT WESTERN CONNECT 16 THE SOUTH COTSWOLDS LINE 17 5. BERKS & HANTS ROUTE 18 EXTENSION OF LONDON – BEDWYN SERVICES 18 DEVIZES PARKWAY 19 EXTENSION OF LONDON – WESTBURY SERVICES TO BRISTOL (PEAK ONLY) 19 ENHANCEMENT OF PADDINGTON – EXETER SERVICES TO HOURLY 19 DELIVERING AND ENHANCED BERKS & HANTS SERVICE 19 6. WEST OF ENGLAND LINE 21 SALISBURY – LONDON JOURNEY TIME REDUCTIONS 21 PORTON STATION 22 WILTON STATION 23 ANDOVER – LUDGERSHALL LINE 23 7. TRANS WILTS CORRIDOR 24 ASHTON PARK STATION 25 THE IMPACT OF METRO WEST 25 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Steeple Claydon and Verney Junction EWR Phase 2 Newsletter
    East West Rail Phase Two Project Newsletter Steeple Claydon & Verney Junction, Autumn 2020 Welcome! Enabling works underway Welcome to the Autumn issue of the East West Rail Alliance project newsletter. I wanted to start by thanking everyone who took the time to read and share the last issue of the newsletter. We have seen an increase in the readership of the newsletter and have received feedback on the format with the level of information in the local update sections we introduced in issue two being positive. As you’ll read below, perhaps the most obvious progress we have made since the last newsletter can be seen in Bletchley, where our team has dismantled sections of the Bletchley Flyover ready for it to be rebuilt to modern standards. The dismantling has demanded a meticulous amount of Since the last issue of our newsletter, the Alliance has planning from our team, Network Rail operations, the been preparing many areas across the project footprint for train operating companies, local authorities and our main construction activities to begin. Highways environment agencies and I’m delighted to report all the improvements have been made, with roads widened, lifts were safely completed in line with our programme. passing bays on narrow roads put in place, and access We are now in the process of removing the final points for our site compounds installed. In addition, we elements of the structure that need to be removed have been constructing ‘haul roads’, which will enable before we can start the rebuild process in construction traffic to travel between certain areas of the November/later this year.
    [Show full text]
  • Brunel's Dream
    Global Foresights | Global Trends and Hitachi’s Involvement Brunel’s Dream Kenji Kato Industrial Policy Division, Achieving Comfortable Mobility Government and External Relations Group, Hitachi, Ltd. The design of Paddington Station’s glass roof was infl u- Renowned Engineer Isambard enced by the Crystal Palace building erected as the venue for Kingdom Brunel London’s fi rst Great Exhibition held in 1851. Brunel was also involved in the planning for Crystal Palace, serving on the The resigned sigh that passed my lips on arriving at Heathrow building committee of the Great Exhibition, and acclaimed Airport was prompted by the long queues at immigration. the resulting structure of glass and iron. Being the gateway to London, a city known as a melting pot Rather than pursuing effi ciency in isolation, Brunel’s of races, the arrivals processing area was jammed with travel- approach to constructing the Great Western Railway was to ers from all corners of the world; from Europe of course, but make the railway lines as fl at as possible so that passengers also from the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and North and South could enjoy a pleasant journey while taking in Britain’s won- America. What is normally a one-hour wait can stretch to derful rural scenery. He employed a variety of techniques to two or more hours if you are unfortunate enough to catch a overcome the constraints of the terrain, constructing bridges, busy time of overlapping fl ight arrivals. While this only adds cuttings, and tunnels to achieve this purpose. to the weariness of a long journey, the prospect of comfort Rain, Steam and Speed – The Great Western Railway, a famous awaits you on the other side.
    [Show full text]
  • Britain's Need for an Electrified Railway
    Britain’s need for an electrified railway A paper by Railfuture’s Network Development Team January 2009 www.railfuture.org.uk In 1981, reflecting uncertainty over future energy supplies, a joint British Rail/Department of Transport report established the need for strategic commitment to electrification and called for a rolling programme. In 1982 its findings and recommendations were broadly supported by the Transport Select Committee. However, since 1990, virtually no electrification has taken place. This must change, now! Benefit of Electric Trains Apart from Britain’s first high-speed line, the Heathrow Airport link and now Crossrail, extension of overhead wires has been limited to a diversionary No pollution at point of use; route on the West Coast Mainline, the reopening of a commuter route Quieter, cleaner, less vibration; south of Glasgow and the rebuilding of the Airdrie-Bathgate route. Little Better acceleration; more than 0.1% of the 17,000km network has been electrified since Not locked into source of fuel; privatisation, whilst wires have been erected over thousands of kilometres Regenerative braking; of routes across Europe and, expansion of electrification is continuing. Trains are cheaper and have longer life as fewer moving Lack of progress in the UK rests with successive treasury-dominated parts than diesel trains; governments, which seem resolutely opposed to any capital expenditure Capable of operating for that brings long-term benefits. All these governments have lacked vision. In longer hours as no fuelling the past this has merely affected Britain’s prosperity; now it risks our future. time required; Visible investment (the “Sparks effect”) encourages The need to be ‘green’ increased rail use.
    [Show full text]
  • 8. Portishead to Portbury Dock Junction Overview 17 9
    Ref: GS2/140569 Version: 1.00 Date: July 2014 Contents 1. Executive Summary 1 2. Introduction 3 3. Business Objective 6 4. Business Case 9 5. Project Scope 11 6. Deliverables 12 7. Options Considered 13 8. Portishead to Portbury Dock Junction Overview 17 9. Engineering Options 19 10. Bathampton Turnback 52 11. Constructability and Access Strategy 53 12. Cost Estimates 56 13. Project Risks and Assumptions 57 14. High level business case appraisal against whole life costings 58 15. Project Schedule 59 16. Capacity/Route Runner Modelling 60 17. Interface with other Projects 61 18. Impact on Existing Customers, Operators and Maintenance Practice 62 19. Consents Strategy 63 20. Environmental Appraisal 64 21. Common Safety Method for Risk Evaluation Assessment (CSM) 65 22. Contracting Strategy 66 23. Concept Design Deliverables 67 24. Conclusion and Recommendations 68 References 70 Formal Acceptance of Selected Option by Client, Funders and Stakeholders 71 GRIP Stage 2 Governance for Railway Investment Projects Ref: GS2/140569 Version: 1.00 Date: July 2014 Appendices A Drawings B Cost Estimate C Qualitative Cost Risk Analysis D Capacity Modelling E Environmental Appraisal F Signalling Appraisal G Photograph Gallery H Track Bed Investigation (Factual, Interpretative and Hazardous Classification) I Visualisations (Galingaleway and Sheepway Gate Farm) J Interdisciplinary Design Certificate K Portishead Station Options Appraisal Report (produced by North Somerset Council) GRIP Stage 2 Governance for Railway Investment Projects Ref: GS2/140569 Version: 1.00 Date: July 2014 Issue Record Issue No Brief History Of Amendment Date of Issue 0.01 First Draft 30 May 2014 0.02 Second Draft updated to include comments 13 June 2014 1.00 Report Issued 18 July 2014 Distribution List Name Organisation Issue No.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Item 8: West Coast Main Line Released Capacity
    East West Rail Consortium 13th March 2019 Agenda Item 8: West Coast Main Line Released Capacity Recommendation: It is recommended that the meeting: a) Note the update on the West Coast Main Line Released Capacity study b) Endorse the strategic issues identified in paragraph 2.6 that have been identified by England’s Economic Heartland as needing to be considered by the study c) Note that England’s Economic Heartland has established a working group of representative interests, working on a ‘task and finish’ basis to support the EEH Business Unit d) Note the update on the Old Oak Common: Future Chiltern Capacity 1. Context 1.1. The East West Rail Consortium has previously identified the strategic importance of developing rail services along the Northampton – Milton Keynes – Aylesbury – High Wycombe – Old Oak Common axis. 1.2. The opportunity to realise this occurs through a combination of the opening of East West Rail and the opening of the first stage of HS2. 1.3. The Chiltern and East West Rail Route Strategy was published by Network Rail in 2017 and identified the potential and need to develop this north- south axis, partly in response to limitations elsewhere on the network and partly in response to the potential for further passenger growth as a result of planned growth set out in locally. 1.4. Realising the potential to develop services on this north-south axis has been a long-standing strategic priority for England’s Economic Heartland and was included within the submission to the 2018 Budget. 1.5. Over and above the on-going work being taken forward by the East West Rail Company to deliver East West Rail, there are two pieces of work underway that are pertinent to realising the opportunity to deliver services on the north-south axis: London North West South CMSP – Released Capacity WCML South Old Oak Common Station: Future Chiltern Capacity 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Quainton Parish Neighbourhood Plan 2015 – 2033
    Quainton Parish Neighbourhood Plan 2015 – 2033 Pre-Submission Consultation Document March 2020 v3 Contents Foreword . 4 1 Policies of the Quainton Neighbourhood Plan (re-named) . 6 1 1. Re-named Policies . 6 2 Introduction and Background . 6 2 1. Neighbourhood Plan Designation . 6 2 .2 Neighbourhood Plan Making . 7 3 The Neighbourhood Area . 7 3.1 Parish and Village Profile . 7 3 .2 A Brief History . 8 3 .3 Special Historic and Landscape Character . 9 3 .4 Quainton Conservation Area . .. 10 3 .5 Green Infrastructure . 12 3 .6 Community Facilities . 14 4 Planning Policy Context . 15 4 1. The Aylesbury Vale Local Plan (AVDLP) . 15 4 .2 The Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (VALP) . 15 4 .3 Recent Planning Issues . 16 4 .4 . Housing Allocations and Commitments . 16 5 Community Engagement on Planning Issues . 17 5 1. The Made Neighbourhood Plan Consultations . 17 6 Development Management . 19 6 1. Housing Growth . 19 6 .2 Housing Location . 19 6 .3 Types of Housing . 19 6 .4 Affordable Housing . 20 6 .5 Sustainable Development. 20 2 QUAINTON NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 7 Vision, Objectives and Monitoring . 21 7 1. Vision for Quainton . 21 7 .2 Objectives. 22 7 .3 Monitoring and Review . 22 8 Land Use Planning Policies . 23 Policy QP1: Quainton Settlement Boundary . 23 Policy QP2: Design in the Conservation Areas and its Setting . 26 Policy QP3: Design beyond the Conservation Areas . 26 Policy QP4: Housing Mix . 28 Policy QP5: Business Enterprise and Local Employment . 28 Policy QP6: Community Facilities . 29 Policy QP7: Parking Provision and Traffic . 30 Policy QP8: Local Green Spaces .
    [Show full text]
  • Donkey 150 September 2015.Indd
    Edition Contents: The Return of the GWR The Marlow Donkey - Early Days A Connecticut Yankee in September 2015 King Arthur’s Court The Magazine of the Marlow & District Railway Society President: Sir William McAlpine Bt Vice-President: Mark Hopwood Chairman: Tim Speechley. 5 Sunningdale Close, Booker, High Wycombe HP12 4EN Tel.: 01494 638090 email: [email protected] Vice-Chairman Mike Hyde. 11 Forty Green Drive, Marlow, Bucks., SL7 2JX. Tel.: 01628 485474 email: [email protected] Treasurer: Peter Robins. 95 Broome Hill, Cookham, Berks., SL6 9LJ. Tel.: 01628 527870 email: [email protected] Secretary: Vincent Caldwell. Moses Plat Farm, Speen, Princes Risborough, HP27 0SD. Tel.: 01494 488283 email: [email protected] Webmaster: Dave Woodhead. 7 Larkspur Close, Wokingham, Berks., RG41 3NA Tel.: 0118 979 1621 email: [email protected] Outings Organiser: Julian Heard. 58 Chalklands, Bourne End, Bucks., SL8 5TJ. Tel.: 01628 527005 email: [email protected] Archivist: Malcolm Margetts. 4 Lodge Close, Marlow, Bucks., SL7 1RB. Tel.: 01628 486433 email: [email protected] Brian Hopkinson. 158 Marlow Bottom, Marlow, SL7 3PP Tel.: 01628 298520 email: [email protected] Donkey Editor: Mike Walker, Solgarth, Marlow Road, Little Marlow, Marlow, Bucks., SL7 3RS. Tel.: 01628 483899 email: [email protected] Website: www.mdrs.org.uk The contents of the Marlow Donkey represent the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Society TIMETABLE - Forthcoming meetings Page 2 CHAIRMAN'S NOTES Tim Speechley 2 SOCIETY & LOCAL NEWS 3 THE RETURN OF THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY 5 BI-OX: OUR NEW RAILWAY Mike Walker 6 IN THE BLOOD Tony Caton 11 THE MARLOW DONKEY - EARLY DAYS Malcolm Margetts 13 TRACTORS, CHOPPERS & TUG IN CUMBRIA Mike Walker 17 A CONNECTICUT YANKEE IN KING ARTHUR’s COURT Don Woodworth 19 THE MIDLAND JUBILEE 23 FRONT COVER PHOTOGRAPHS Top: First of the Turbos to appear in GWR green was 166204 in late July seen arriving at Reading minus branding.
    [Show full text]