The discovery that high voltage electricity cables impinge on the planned site for Tweedbank Station may mean that the site of the new station is moved. More in this article and this one from the Border Telegraph.
NEWS BLOG
6 thoughts on “Tweedbank Station may be moved (slightly)”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
David Spaven says:
What a shoddily written piece by the Border Telegraph -if there is a problem already with speeding traffic through Tweedbank village, this can be readily tackled by Scottish Borders Council with engineering, enforcement and awareness-raising measures. It’s crass to start blaming the forthcoming railway, particularly as it will reduce road deaths and injuries through people switching from car to a much safer mode of transport.
John Liddle says:
Yet another hurdle in place for the Borders Railway, surely the surveyors should have seen this or are they all blind? No wonder the costs keep going up! The longer this drags on, the more convinced I am that the rebuilding will never take place, too many hurdles etc, someone in a very high place doesn’t want this railway to happen, after all, the Royal Assent was granted for this railway before that of the Airdrie to Bathgate line, yet that will be open in the next 3 months, now we are told that the Borders line will not now be open for another 4 years! If the Borders Railway ever does reopen, then I for one will definitely travel on it, I never had the chance to before 1969.
David Spaven says:
On the face of it, it does seem amazing that this issue wasn’t spotted, but there may be other relevant factors which are not yet in the public domain.
In fairness, Airdrie-Bathgate did not have anything like as many objectors – and the line of route had been preserved as a right of way (a cycle path).
In contrast, the Scottish Office and local authorities conspicuously failed through the 1970s, 1980s, and even the early 1990s, to protect the solum of the Waverley Route.
The cost of re-opening does indeed keep going up – the privatisation of the rail system and an over-the-top approach to railway safety have both played a part in this. However, the Borders is the only region of Britain without a rail service, and with climate change and ‘Peak Oil’ becoming ever mure crucial, there is a strong argument for regional justice and ‘resilience’ in completing the railway to Tweedbank.
One can only regret that this was not done in the era of public ownership of the railway – in 1975 BR quoted a price of £2.1m to reinstate a single-line railway to Galashiels – bargain basement, even allowing for inflation!
I still feel very confident that the new Borders Railway will be delivered by Transport Scotland.
Geoff Ruderham says:
I may have some news fairly soon about realignment work due to start at the north end of Millerhill yard.
This is to be undertaken either by or on behalf of Network Rail in order to facilitate the Borders Railway.
Please watch here, as soon as I have any thing concrete I’ll let Bill know.
Geoff Ruderham says:
The Above story by my self seemed to be a bit premature and from what my “freinds on the inside” tell me it won’t happen till after the year.
If I find out different, you will be the second person to know
David Munro says:
Re John Liddle’s comment about “No wonder the costs keep going up”.
I fear you may have fallen for the oppostion to the lines usual stating whatever they wish as being fact.
The cost implications of changing the postioning of Tweedbank station may be neutral, higher or lower.
Whatever impact will undoubtedly be minimal.
As an aside, given the shambles of the Edinburgh tram project, might it be an idea to make the line tramcar operated and, thus, enable an easier extension to Melrose and Hawick?
Just a thought.