Waterford Station closes after landslide!

Jamie2k9

end of the road wrote: »

it's as good as in fairness.

Well certain people have been fighting it's corner.

Had IE had there way it would never had a link to the new station but it will now. Hopefully the NTA order IE to maintain it for a further 5-10 years from 2020. Not heard if that's the case.

GM228

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Well certain people have been fighting it's corner.

Had IE had there way it would never had a link to the new station but it will now. Hopefully the NTA order IE to maintain it for a further 5-10 years from 2020. Not heard if that's the case.

The NTA don't have the authority to do so.

GM228

L1011 wrote: »

An Irish Times article from 2003 has The Footplate (and BnM) as being "owned" by Tom Mythen; who was the manager of Network Catering so it was still there then.


The end result still is that CIE got out of catering entirely, getting rid of both Network Catering and the "Dubel" company they had for the Enterprise - and CIE Property will willingly rent space out to private operators; even building new spaces where required. If nobody wants to put a bar or restaurant in Waterford it isn't CIEs problem - and is a pretty good indication that the old ones weren't viable.

Both restaurants were owned by CIE and run by NC under contract on their behalf, Tom Mythen didn't own them, however he was a director of Dubel Catering Ltd which was a wholly owned subsidiary of IE based in NI, (it is worth noting that NC was not a company per se, it was a commercial division of IE).

Dubel was an interesting company, in 1992 IE won a tendered contract to provide catering services to NIR so they set up Dubel. As part of the Dubel contract NC provided a management team (who incidentally came directly from BnM as opposed to coming from NC directly) to oversee Dublin operations when the Enterprise started in 1997.

Dubel was probably the last company based outside the state which IE/CIE controlled.

Jamie2k9

GM228 wrote: »

The NTA don't have the authority to do so.

Who does DoT?

GM228

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Who does DoT?

No one has the authority to order it.

Del.Monte

GM228 wrote: »

No one has the authority to order it.

Not even the Minister for Stepaside Garda Station?

Working class heroes

GM228 wrote: »

No one has the authority to order it.

Could I possibly word the question slightly different. If IE decided to completely abandon the line has anyone the power to stop them?

GM228

Del.Monte wrote: »

Not even the Minister for Stepaside Garda Station?

Working class heroes wrote: »

Could I possibly word the question slightly different. If IE decided to completely abandon the line has anyone the power to stop them?

When a line is closed the railway still has a statutory obligation to maintain bridges and crossings in a safe condition, there is no obligation to keep the railway itself in an operational condition.

When services ceased on the line the NTA and IE agreed a contractual 10 year obligation to maintain the line in a minimum workable condition, once that time is up the only requirement is to keep bridges and crossings in a safe condition.

If the railway is abandoned IE has the option to cease to be responsible for any maintenance on the line after a set timeframe, IE has the power to issue an abandonment order under S21 of the Transport Act 1950.

Del.Monte

Presumably the Fishguard & Rosslare Railways & Harbours Company still have some say in the matter?

GM228

Del.Monte wrote: »

Presumably the Fishguard & Rosslare Railways & Harbours Company still have some say in the matter?

Yes, technically the order would come from the F&RR&H, IE and Stena own F&RR&H 50/50, however IE have 100% control of the company.

Jamie2k9

Don't see IE seeking an order to abandon the railway line. There would be a huge backlash and while NTA and various political representatives have no power they do have influence.

Guess we will have to wait and see if IE decide to run over the line or not in 2020.

road_high

Working class heroes wrote: »

District manager, 2 admin staff and a safety liason.
There are other staff located there but they are IMO staff (DTE’s)

Edit: technically the line to Rosslare ain’t closed, yet.

Wouldn’t be surprised to see that disappear and centralised in Heuston.

Working class heroes

road_high wrote: »

Wouldn’t be surprised to see that disappear and centralised in Heuston.

Yep, makes sense alright. Has been hinted at many times.
However it’s a good spot to keep certain assets at arms length.

Jamie2k9

For a long time Waterford was bundled in with Connolly (Eastern and South Eastern) as it wasn't considered part of the Southern and Western routes at Heuston (according to customer service). The end result was it was impossible to get any issues resolved. They fobbed you off saying they would forward this to management in Heuston who usually didn't do much and then those in Connolly didn't really follow up. Neither side were responsible and problems were just ignored. This was particularly prevalent with capacity planning.

Some changes in recent years. From a passenger prospective the district manager in Waterford wasn't good but probably down to the crowd in Dublin. Others across the country click there fingers and things get resolved quickly.

The extra evening Sunday service, just how long its taken them to react. You could see this happening 6 months ago but they waited a further 2 months to see if passengers would take alternative transport instead of the train.

Apart from a bit of staff admin and a few passenger query's hard to justify such staffing there unless they do other work.

Working class heroes

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

For a long time Waterford was bundled in with Connolly (Eastern and South Eastern) as it wasn't considered part of the Southern and Western routes at Heuston (according to customer service). The end result was it was impossible to get any issues resolved. They fobbed you off saying they would forward this to management in Heuston who usually didn't do much and then those in Connolly didn't really follow up. Neither side were responsible and problems were just ignored. This was particularly prevalent with capacity planning.

Some changes in recent years. From a passenger prospective the district manager in Waterford wasn't good but probably down to the crowd in Dublin. Others across the country click there fingers and things get resolved quickly.

The extra evening Sunday service, just how long its taken them to react. You could see this happening 6 months ago but they waited a further 2 months to see if passengers would take alternative transport instead of the train.

Apart from a bit of staff admin and a few passenger query's hard to justify such staffing there unless they do other work.

All admin duties for RU staff on Rosslare as well as Waterford to Athy.

A lot of staff have transferred to the new IMO department, particularly on the Lim Junction line. Makes sense now more than ever to move the Rosslare line to Connolly and the Waterford line to Heuston, imo.

end of the road

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

For a long time Waterford was bundled in with Connolly (Eastern and South Eastern) as it wasn't considered part of the Southern and Western routes at Heuston (according to customer service). The end result was it was impossible to get any issues resolved. They fobbed you off saying they would forward this to management in Heuston who usually didn't do much and then those in Connolly didn't really follow up. Neither side were responsible and problems were just ignored. This was particularly prevalent with capacity planning.

interesting, wasn't aware of that but in hind sight it explains a lot about issues on the waterford line.

tabbey

Working class heroes wrote: »

All admin duties for RU staff on Rosslare as well as Waterford to Athy.

A lot of staff have transferred to the new IMO department, particularly on the Lim Junction line. Makes sense now more than ever to move the Rosslare line to Connolly and the Waterford line to Heuston, imo.

RU and IMO, please explain these acronyms.

GM228

tabbey wrote: »

RU and IMO, please explain these acronyms.

It's RU and IM (not IMO), a European requirement to split railways as follows under the European Railway Safety Directive -

Railway undertakings: public or private companies involved in the supply of goods and/or passenger transport services by rail.

Infrastructure managers: bodies or companies responsible, in particular for establishing, building and maintaining infrastructure or a part of it, and safety.

Working class heroes

tabbey wrote: »

RU and IMO, please explain these acronyms.

Sorry. RU is the Railway Undertaking department. This covers staff like ticket inspectors, customer service both on board and station based. Platform/station staff and drivers.
IMO is the Infrastructure Manager Operations. This covers Signalers, gatekeepers, the newly formed Mobile Rapid Response Team. Also any other staff involved in degraded works, e.g pilotworking.

These two departments were the one entity up to about 5 years ago but had to be split, something to do with EU rules on state aid.

Hope that makes sense.

Working class heroes

GM228 wrote: »

It's RU and IM (not IMO), a European requirement to split railways as follows under the European Railway Safety Directive -

Railway undertakings: public or private companies involved in the supply of goods and/or passenger transport services by rail.

Infrastructure managers: bodies or companies responsible, in particular for establishing, building and maintaining infrastructure or a part of it, and safety.

IMO is a department within the IM department.....

See my previous post.

Jamie2k9

The funding for the move now confirmed.
https://twitter.com/waterfordcounci/status/1326125773128921088?s=21

Del.Monte

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

The funding for the move now confirmed.
https://twitter.com/waterfordcounci/status/1326125773128921088?s=21

What's the plan for the station - a couple of bus shelters and one platform should be good enough once the Greenway wipes out the Rosslare Strand/Waterford section and CIE close the line up to Limerick Junction.

Losty Dublin

Del.Monte wrote: »

What's the plan for the station - a couple of bus shelters and one platform should be good enough once the Greenway wipes out the Rosslare Strand/Waterford section and CIE close the line up to Limerick Junction.

Anything but, sorry to say! It'll be a covered 2 platform through station that will have the city and long distance bus station on site, with a foot bridge linking directly across the river to the city. To be honest it's actually a fairly good plan and should do the city some good.

Some diagrams towards the end of the below link

https://www.waterfordcouncil.ie/media/projects/public-consultations/sdz-transport-hub/190911%20CE%20Report%20Transport%20Hub.pdf

Del.Monte

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Anything but, sorry to say! It'll be a covered 2 platform through station that will have the city and long distance bus station on site, with a foot bridge linking directly across the river to the city. To be honest it's actually a fairly good plan and should do the city some good.

Some diagrams towards the end of the below link

https://www.waterfordcouncil.ie/media/projects/public-consultations/sdz-transport-hub/190911%20CE%20Report%20Transport%20Hub.pdf

Very slow to load so I gave up. Why not a bay platform and a through platform thereby doing away with the need for lifts and foot bridges. I'll be back if the file downloads.

Losty Dublin

Del.Monte wrote: »

Very slow to load so I gave up. Why not a bay platform and a through platform thereby doing away with the need for lifts and foot bridges. I'll be back if the file downloads.

Such points are answered in the linked document. It is slow to upload but just bear with it; you should be well enough used to waiting for answers from CIE by now :pac:

dowlingm

There is a Q and A mid document which seems to say that track layout is not set in stone but will be the subject of a separate process.

Am I reading it right that BE will continue to operate a depot at the site and not merely a stop? That seems like a waste of developable land to me if an office tower or some other anchor development could be put there and land for the depot found elsewhere.

andrewfaulk

Good to see that POW made a submission about securing rail freight to and from the port during the works.

May turn out to have been a very wise move

91wx763

andrewfaulk wrote: »

Good to see that POW made a submission about securing rail freight to and from the port during the works.

May turn out to have been a very wise move

Definitely. IÉ were alleged to have to had no plan for what happened during the building works particularly in the light of the new XPO flow coming at the same time as the development starting !!!

91wx763

There's been nothing on here for ages but big rockface works are going on the moment. A railwayman told me the bill will be up to €6 million when its finished. Rumours on the local radio were that the "new" station is doomed and IÉ are readying the long currently disused platform for service again so full length trains can operate on the line with reduced shunting to Sallypark yard needed.

Jamie2k9

WCC awareded the works to Cumnor Construction Ltd and Suir Plant Ltd and 9 months timeframe.

"The main works will include the installation of measures such as rock bolts, active and passive rockfall protection netting, reinforced earth berms and rock traps; and drainage system involving horizontal drains, interceptor ditch, chute pipe and intake, an energy dissipation manhole, manholes and buried drainage. The work will include a combination of works from the ground level and abseiling works."

An Bord Pleanala are due to rule on this flood scheme for Sallypark and the station. It was reported back in Jan a decision was due in April but not happened AFAIK.

https://www.waterfordcouncil.ie/projects/public-consultations/expired/2021/flood-defence-west.htm

https://www.waterfordcouncil.ie/media/projects/public-consultations/flood-defence-west/EIAR%20Vol%201%20NonTechnical%20Summary.pdf]