Hi All,
Andy,

As for the debacle about the chord surely an easy fix build a bridge instead of severing the line not rocket science is it ?

Geoff.

The bridge on which the track passes over the river to the station is, mainly, the original built by Stephenson and is a Grade I listed structure.

Many other options were considered including what you suggested but it was considered unacceptable as it would impinge too much on the skyline and considerably reduce the speed of the trains whilst climbing the gradient and of course more expensive. Interestingly enough there are now plans to build skyscrapers just across the river from the bridge, so much for skyline then. However, I have since found out the actual connection to the main line from MOSI has only been used about 5 times in the past 10 years.

Are cross-overs no longer acceptable??

I Freedom of Information request made of MOSI.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/withdrawal_of_objections_to_ords

Q1. What compensation, monetary or otherwise, was the Museum of Science
and Industry offered causing them to withdraw their objections to the
construction of the Ordsall Chord rail link?

Prior to the public inquiry held last spring, there had been considerable
consultation between the Museum of Science and Industry and Network Rail
about the alignment and construction of the Ordsall Chord. The Museum
argued, and Network Rail accepted, that the Chord would have a serious
adverse effect on the Museum’s heritage setting and its beautiful listed
buildings. Of particular concern, naturally, was the impact of severing
the world’s oldest surviving passenger rail line: the Liverpool and
Manchester Railway, which opened in 1830. As a national museum, we take
seriously our responsibility to care for and protect our collection for
the benefit of the nation, and we have always considered our unique site
to be part of that collection.

However, at the same time, the Museum has always acknowledged that the
Ordsall Chord link would bring considerable public benefit for Manchester,
for the economic health of the city and for rail users across the North
West and trans Pennine corridor. As corporate citizens of Manchester, we
also have a responsibility to do what is right for the city and its future
generations.

After much discussion with Network Rail on how we might best live up to
both of these responsibilities, we came to an agreement that Network Rail
would support us with a contribution of £3 million, and would work with us
to open up their land on top of the historic viaducts to enhance the
experience of museum visitors. This was not ‘compensation’ but rather an
agreement to support the Museum to offer the public deeper connections
with the history of both the site and the city. We will bring to life
previously untold stories from the early years of the railway: the
excitement of the first passengers, the lives of the early railway workers
and the impact of vast quantities of goods and livestock moving across the
site. As a result of this agreement, visitors will be able to experience a
historic steam train ride, or walk all around the museum site in a
complete loop, on a landscaped walkway offering great views of Manchester
and Salford and a new experience of the heritage buildings on site.

On balance, we believe that these expansions of the site and improvements
will enrich the public’s understanding of the site’s significance far
beyond the quite specific possibilities that a rarely-used mainline rail
connection offered us, and so we agreed to withdraw our objection to the
Ordsall Chord development plan.

Q2. What other propositions from other parties were put forward and
accepted by the Museum of Science and Industry in order that they withdrew
their objections to the Ordsall Chord rail link?

No propositions were received by us from any other party.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Note no mention is made of other solutions that were available.

For those of you who haven’t been following the other threads on this subject, just a little bit of background.

The oldest surviving railway terminal station, listed grade 1, forms part of the MOSI site being one end of the Liverpool and Manchester railway which is hugely significant and holds a number of world firsts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liverpool_and_Manchester_Railway#Grade_I_Listed_building_threat.

At the moment steam engines are able to access this historic site but track alteration plans, the Ordsall Chord, by Network Rail will sever this link. Mosi has always apposed this plan until the new management came in when they made an about face and took what was basically a £3m bribe to drop their opposition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordsall_Chord

Work has started on the Chord, HOWEVER, from Wiki

Progress
Network Rail submitted their Transport and Works Act application to construct the Ordsall Chord in September 2013.[20] The statutory instrument authorising the construction of the Chord was made on 31 March 2015,[21] and preparatory works began in October 2015. In January 2016, Network Rail began work on the foundations and have a planned completion date of late 2017.[22]

Mark Whitby, a civil engineer and former President of the Institution of Civil Engineers, appealed against the decision to approve the construction of the Chord in the High Court. On 14 October 2015, the High Court rejected the appeal and also denied Whitby the right to appeal this decision. However Whitby appealed this refusal and on 11 January 2016, the Court of Appeal granted Leave to Appeal saying “The grounds of appeal raise important points and have real prospects of success”.[23] Whitby wants an alternative for the Chord to be built that does not sever the main-line rail connection to the Museum of Science and Industry nor destroy heritage structures.[24]

So there is still a glimmer of hope.

The Ordsall Chord (with the train on)

[url=https://flic.kr/p/DMBe8g]

And YES that is the oldest passenger terminal station in the world bottom right.
And YES that is the oldest passenger railway line in the world being cut by the Chord.

Also two grade 2 listed bridges are to go.

There are alternative routes, and yes they are more expensive.

The on running court case appears to be based on the allegation that the alternatives were not given due consideration.

The MOSI Air & Space Hall is housed in Lower Campfield Market Hall which is owned by the Council and is listed Grade 2.
The Upper part of the market hall is empty and available for lease by tender on a “self repair” basis, and no doubt the terms reflect that.
One of the reasons MOSI gives for moving out of this stunning building is the cost of repairs. This would seem to indicate that they have had the advantage a good terms based on self repair but have not done the repairs.

The Manchester Aviation Art Society (MAvAS) have had a long association with MOSI, 32 years, holding meetings and displays in the Hall in exchange for a modest contribution. They have now been rather summarily turfed out and happily have been able to relocate and welcomed at Manchester City Airport (Barton).

http://www.mavas.co.uk/

http://cityairportandheliport.com/city-airport-welcomes-manchester-aviation-art-society

The new director, Sally MacDonald, is the person behind all the changes and was possibly brought in on condition that objections to the Chord were dropped, if not it is an amazing coincidence.

An interesting interview with her here,

http://www.manchesterconfidential.co.uk/news/mosi-the-ordsall-chord-and-ditching-the-air-space-gallery

In this interview she makes these outstanding statements,

“This is important,” says Macdonald. “We’ve done some research and found that 10% of guests are families with children under five years and we have almost nothing for them. That has to change.”

I wonder what the other 90% come to see.

“We’re talking with Network Rail about using a patch of scrubland at the west of the site as a landscaped area and this will, with the changes in the 1830 warehouse, encourage people to enjoy the whole museum.”

Nothing like a bit of landscaping to increase visitor numbers so who needs visiting live steam engines?

“We lease the old market building that forms the Air and Space Gallery from the council,” says Macdonald. “We’re currently doing some exploratory work on the condition of the roof. It’s a beautiful building and the planes are much loved but it’s impossible to heat and it needs a lot of work to bring it up to scratch. We are looking at a range of options but most of the planes are on loan from the RAF museum and aren’t really part of our story.”

Lets just repeat part of that “…planes…………aren’t really part of our story.”

This is rather strange as Brownsfield Mill is 1.5 miles away from the museum and, of course, the Shackleton couldn’t have been built much closer.

So what is a museum?

The Museum Association agreed a definition in 1998.

‘Museums enable people to explore collections for inspiration, learning and enjoyment. They are institutions that collect, safeguard and make accessible artefacts(sic) and specimens, which they hold in trust for society.’ This definition includes art galleries with collections of works of art, as well as museums with historical collections of objects.

To me MOSI is failing in it’s basic duty in that it has

Failed to defend the sites historical access to the mainline railway.
Failed to maintain a Grade 2 listed building in its care, Lower Campfield Market Hall.
Failing to keep aeroplane artifacts of significant historic interest to Manchester.

Actually she was making a reference to the top secret plan “Spitfire “. I could tell you what this is about but then I would have to kill you. Suffice it to say fellow forumites will be able to deduce how it is possible to make large objects impossible to find just using oiled paper, some timber and a big hole, now known as the Spitfire Syndrome. 😀

+1

In the usual trail of Government Agencies it would appear that the land referred to as Seaplane Square is owned by the HCA, Homes& Community Agency.
I will first remind you that the land referred to as Seaplane Square is allocated in the Gosport Development plan as land of historic interest and is NOT allocated for physical development of the form of building houses or other structures. Although this does not preclude the use of the seaplane hangers for industry.
The latest available statement from HCA uses a lot of references to creating jobs and homes although this DOES NOT apply to Seaplane Square but to the whole Daedalus site.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hovercrafts-at-solent-enterprise-zone.

It would seem that HCA are selling Seaplane Square and possibly it is the finding of a suitable buyer that has produced this flurry of activity.

http://www.leeresidents.org.uk/leeresidents_planning_daedalus.html

The museum has been closed for 2 years whilst repairs are made to the hangers. This has of course put considerable financial strain on the museum, and if you are a cynic one might wonder if this prolonged repair job might also feature in this sad tale after all who owns the hangers? The HCA.

http://www.leeresidents.org.uk/leeresidents_daedalus_hovercraftmuseum.html

Agree with you entirely David.

Update from the Trustees of The Hovercraft Museum.

https://www.change.org/p/homes-and-communities-agency-save-the-princess-anne-the-last-remaining-srn4-hovercraft-for-the-nation/u/15319466?tk=snLIAmiRYl8DWU8jrEZrdakMTLJbwiCoVMgbq33lLJo&utm_source=petition_update&utm_medium=email

It is interesting to note that the HCA are still involved as this would imply that the land has not been sold yet.

This is a golden opportunity to form a Hovercraft and Seaplane museum in historic original buildings basically housing what they were built to house a hundred years ago in an ideal and historic location.

I suppose I can dream.