Poulton to Fleetwood reopening ?

[swanhill41]

Cost a fortune to reconnect

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Cost a fortune to reconnect

But that isn't the same is impossible - just deeply unlikely. Nothing that has been done precludes reinstatement.

 

[PR1Berske]

But that isn't the same is impossible - just deeply unlikely. Nothing that has been done precludes reinstatement.

Though Network Rail were quite insistent on severing the link during the initial track works, an attitude which disappointed the Heritage group wanting to use the line with the distant possibility of linking to Poulton at some point.

Honestly, I mean no disrespect, but I'm reminded of the Colne-Skipton plans, ones I used to enthusiastically support myself. The thread on here about that link taught me a lot about the actual costs of reopening a line, and how the passage of time turns plans once written in pen to dreams drawn in crayon. It's quite similar here: linking Fleetwood back to Poulton may once have been possible and affordable; I doubt that either of those factors are true today.

The junction from Poulton was clearly, and deliberately, cut by Network Rail. They've no economic reason to undo that. Maybe, just maybe, Fleetwood-Poulton is West Lancashire's Skipton-Colne.

 

[swanhill41]

The line was cut so as to allow line to be re laid as to provide a better ride and speed through that area....Driver who works for Northern confirms it has changed the ride etc through the area beyond his expectations....The line in question will never be resurrected,as the economics in real terms do not stack up....My feelings are that NR will sell off the line,although to whom I am at a loss who...That's unless the local group are able to raise the money ??

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Though Network Rail were quite insistent on severing the link during the initial track works, an attitude which disappointed the Heritage group wanting to use the line with the distant possibility of linking to Poulton at some point.

Honestly, I mean no disrespect, but I'm reminded of the Colne-Skipton plans, ones I used to enthusiastically support myself. The thread on here about that link taught me a lot about the actual costs of reopening a line, and how the passage of time turns plans once written in pen to dreams drawn in crayon. It's quite similar here: linking Fleetwood back to Poulton may once have been possible and affordable; I doubt that either of those factors are true today.

The junction from Poulton was clearly, and deliberately, cut by Network Rail. They've no economic reason to undo that. Maybe, just maybe, Fleetwood-Poulton is West Lancashire's Skipton-Colne.

It had to be removed (the junction) to achieve the improvements in journey time required to help justify the improvements on the PBN line as a whole; compromising this to retain a lavish and unused connection (which would have to have been resignalled as well) makes no economic sense. It will have undergone the same discussion, justification and consultation process that Salwick Loop, Burnden Loops, Friday Street GF and others went through. All that any prospective promoter of the re-opening has to do is find the money that NR / DfT have saved by not replacing it (presumably supported by the Business Case that NR couldn't make work to DfT).

P.s. Final closure of the line in law isn't NR's to decide - you will be able to object during the process to extinguish the Act, if such a thing ever occurs.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

When I looked at a 60's traffic density map, Fleetwood had a fair amount of traffic. Whether closing the terminus by the ferry terminal had an influence or just traffic dropped for other reasons.
Would keeping connections to the National Network be a good long term strategy, to enable attracting business needing rail access to locate in the area, which has been vacated by a previous industry (ICI). These sites must be getting more and more rare.
Moving forward, imo the way forward could be convert to a tramway and link to the Fleetwood tramway for access the Town.
If I lived in Fleetwood /Thornton Cleveleys, I would either take a bus or taxi to Poulton station.
Petition 'Commission a Study for the Fleetwood rail line. https://www.change.org/p/commission-a-study-for-the-fleetwood-rail-line/nftexp/ex43/v2/422458938?recruiter=422458938&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish.nafta_milestone_share_ask_1.72_hour_ask&utm_term=autopublish.nafta_milestone_share_ask_1.72_hour_ask&utm_content=ex43:v2
Second use could be a cycleway. I'm sure that a siding could be found for a heritage railway.

 

[jonesy3001]

Think these guys might say something about it,
https://www.google.com.mt/url?sa=t&...ww.pwrs.org/&usg=AOvVaw1x6xEF9GYqqy-K8N6lSty_

 

[swanhill41]

Noticeable by their silence !

 

[swanhill41]

Though Network Rail were quite insistent on severing the link during the initial track works, an attitude which disappointed the Heritage group wanting to use the line with the distant possibility of linking to Poulton at some point.

Honestly, I mean no disrespect, but I'm reminded of the Colne-Skipton plans, ones I used to enthusiastically support myself. The thread on here about that link taught me a lot about the actual costs of reopening a line, and how the passage of time turns plans once written in pen to dreams drawn in crayon. It's quite similar here: linking Fleetwood back to Poulton may once have been possible and affordable; I doubt that either of those factors are true today.

The junction from Poulton was clearly, and deliberately, cut by Network Rail. They've no economic reason to undo that. Maybe, just maybe, Fleetwood-Poulton is West Lancashire's Skipton-Colne.

Reason was that the lines best profile was to move the line over to give best speed and wear and tear ..The junction was relaid about 10 years ago because it was cheaper to do that than go all through the paperwork and god knows what ....And it will not be reinstated whatever happens as the costs viz the revenue will never,never pan out under any economic formula....And a railway will never transform Fleetwood....It grew up as a port,as well as a fishing port both of which have long gone....Whatever happens to Fleetwood,retail and tourism will be in part be upmarket and car borne....There is also an element of coach borne customers,but they are coach borne as per their profile,low income OAPS....And that is an economic fact ,not a case of running them down .....All types of people make up the mix and it is that you need to consider rather than there should be a railway, without sensible consideration of the facts of the argument.

 

[seasidersfan]

Tram makes most sense to me. Will get far more usage simply because of the higher number of stops and the fact that it could connect directly into the existing system and run to the end of Fleetwood.

 

[Elecman]

Tram makes most sense to me. Will get far more usage simply because of the higher number of stops and the fact that it could connect directly into the existing system and run to the end of Fleetwood.

o

My thoughts exactly, plus it makes the level crossings easier

 

[Busaholic]

Is Poulton within Blackpool Borough?

 

[Elecman]

No it’s Wyre Council not Blackpool

 

[Chester1]

Tram makes most sense to me. Will get far more usage simply because of the higher number of stops and the fact that it could connect directly into the existing system and run to the end of Fleetwood.

Cleveleys tram stop straight down the B5412 to Thornton and then using the line from there to Poulton would make sense. That would still leave the rest of the line for potential heritage use.

 

[seasidersfan]

Cleveleys tram stop straight down the B5412 to Thornton and then using the line from there to Poulton would make sense. That would still leave the rest of the line for potential heritage use.

Having a street track of that length would be hugely more expensive than just connecting up to the line all the way.

 

[Elecman]

I’d connect it at Copse Road

 

[Chester1]

Having a street track of that length would be hugely more expensive than just connecting up to the line all the way.

It would also serve a much larger number of people. There is insufficient demand for two lines into Fleetwood and I suspect the Blackpool North tram link will kill off any prospects of reopening the line.

 

[Dave P]

It would also serve a much larger number of people. There is insufficient demand for two lines into Fleetwood and I suspect the Blackpool North tram link will kill off any prospects of reopening the line.

If you mean there would be insufficient demand for a tram line from Fleetwood to Poulton, I would agree, as it would be rather slow due to frequent stops. However there would be plenty of demand for a relatively fast rail link to the national rail network, as has been found in previous studies. Looking at the 1968 timetable, Poulton to Fleetwood (Wyre Dock) by train took a mere 12 minutes whereas today a similar bus journey would take about 50 minutes, which is tragic for a distance of about 7 miles.

I think the Blackpool North tram extension is a separate issue from the rail line, as they serve different purposes, i.e. local vs longer distance journeys. The fact that the future tram service plans seem to focus on taking visitors from North station to the hotels and attractions in Blackpool, but not on to Fleetwood, does, IMHO, back up that impression.

This interesting local newspaper article gives more information on the thinking behind the current campaign for reopening the rail line.

https://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/...od-s-railway-line-to-be-reconnected-1-8929908

Note the link to the rail petition is : https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/207834

 

[seasidersfan]

If you mean there would be insufficient demand for a tram line from Fleetwood to Poulton, I would agree, as it would be rather slow due to frequent stops. However there would be plenty of demand for a relatively fast rail link to the national rail network, as has been found in previous studies. Looking at the 1968 timetable, Poulton to Fleetwood (Wyre Dock) by train took a mere 12 minutes whereas today a similar bus journey would take about 50 minutes, which is tragic for a distance of about 7 miles.

I think the Blackpool North tram extension is a separate issue from the rail line, as they serve different purposes, i.e. local vs longer distance journeys. The fact that the future tram service plans seem to focus on taking visitors from North station to the hotels and attractions in Blackpool, but not on to Fleetwood, does, IMHO, back up that impression.

This interesting local newspaper article gives more information on the thinking behind the current campaign for reopening the rail line.

https://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/...od-s-railway-line-to-be-reconnected-1-8929908

Note the link to the rail petition is : https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/207834

I disagree. The larger number of stops would be precisely the reason a tram link could be more viable. The Blackpool tramway actually has more usage than all the railway stations on the Fylde Coast combined. Plus a rail station at Fleetwood couldn't possibly be in an ideal location due to everything that's been built in the way.

 

[Dave P]

I'm sorry, but the idea of re-opening the railway is to provide a quicker link to the rail network than the existing tramway or a new tram line with some street running and lots of stops. Trains could provide a journey time of about 15-20 minutes from Fleetwood to Poulton, whereas a tram journey could easily take at least twice as long, depending on what route is chosen for any street sections. The thinking behind the rail option seems to be to open up education and employment opportunities for people in Fleetwood in nearby places like Preston (or beyond) and to allow visitors from outside easy access to Fleetwood by rail. The reduced journey time by train would make it worthwhile for longer distance rather than local journeys.

As far as viability is concerned, there have been two studies into re-opening the Fleetwood branch as a rail line that came up with benefit to cost ratios of between 1.74 (passenger use) and 2.43 (passenger and freight use) - anything over 1.00 is considered worth investing public funds. One was conducted by a consultancy firm for Wyre BC in about 2005/6, and went into considerable depth about the practicality of reinstatement (spoiler - not an issue), the service patterns and operational costs and whether it would make sense to rebuild (another spoiler - yes it made sense). ATOC listed Fleetwood as one of the projects with the greatest business cases when they looked at reopening lines in general in 2009.

Wyre BC report 2006
http://www.wyre.gov.uk/download/dow...ood_railway_line_-_stage_one_final_report.pdf

ATOC Re-opening report 2009
https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/component/arkhive/?task=file.download&id=469773500

Obviously there would need to be an updated feasibility study as a first step towards re-opening, but looking at google maps there doesn't seem to be any major obstacles to re-instatement. Worst case is if you may have to demolish a few properties if they are in the way - that is standard in any transport project. A plus factor is since 2005/6 the site of the original ferry station, which was used as lorry parking for the ferry service to Northern Ireland, is now not required, and the port owner are looking to redevelop the port area and appear to be favourable to the restoration of the railway. Based on that I could possibly see two stations for Fleetwood - Freeport/Dock Street and Fleetwood Ferry (which could be a park and ride station akin to Tweedbank on the Borders railway. Both would be within walking distance of the tramway and town centre.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Yes, it has always been viewed as providing a rail link to Preston and beyond, rather than being a local-only service. Having had some minor historical contact with this one, the Halcrow estimates seem low (and seemed low at the time). I suspect that any increase in benefits since 2006 has not exceeded increased scheme costs - they suggest that Hilly Laid LC could be retained when current risk assessment approaches suggest it needs closing. In my view, I suggest the scheme is sat at "barely 1.0" as at today.

 

[Dave P]

Interesting point about the LC. That's one reason why the idea needs looking at again now. On the plus side, if there is now a more realistic possibility of having a station on or near the original site than there was when the Halcrow report was written, wouldn't that provide a boost for businesses at the north end of Fleetwood, such as the cafes, North Euston hotel and Knott End ferry? And possible re-development of the port area may also provide extra benefits which could help the case for re-instatement.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

The main problem with conversion to a tramway seems to be that the main local passenger flow on the Thornton corridor is towards Blackpool rather than Poulton - the excellent bus service, running at a 12min headway, travels direct via Carleton Crossing. In addition, the old railway diverges significantly away from the main road and settlements at various points, making it less attractive for potential customers. A high-frequency, multi-stop tramway to just Poulton is not likely to be a viable proposition or offer much competition to the bus service.

Heavy-rail, however, would offer Fleetwood a fast 15 minute link with Poulton, with connections to Preston and beyond. Fleetwood after all is quite large (26000 pop), and enjoyed a peak through service to and from Manchester Victoria right to the end. Travelling to Fleetwood via Blackpool North today incurs at least a 1 hour time penalty - the tram extension to North Station is not going to make much difference, with only a disappointing 20min interval service to Bispham proposed. The missing infrastucture at the Fleetwood end does not appear to be insurmoutable either - there is plenty of brownfield land at Wyre Dock to create a new alignment. ABP, the dock's owners, have proposed a large redevelopment of the whole area and are supportive of tying this in with the railway. I also struggle to see what any heritage railway would offer - there are no scenic attractions or major structures and the station buildings have long gone. I would have thought they would be best throwing their lot in with the Ribble Steam Railway at Preston Docks.

 

[uww11x]

Won't happen.

 

[Dave P]

Won't happen.

It could happen ... if enough people support it. It's a sensible thing to do and it's a relatively small project compared to some. I do think it is now or never though, as the opportunity to tie in with the port re-development won't be there forever. 2018 could be a critical year, I think.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It had to be removed (the junction) to achieve the improvements in journey time required to help justify the improvements on the PBN line as a whole;

That puzzles me because the junction is right next to Poulton station - wouldn't almost all trains stop there anyway, which would imply they'd be travelling very slowly at that point of the line, junction or no junction?

I don't doubt that Network Rail would have saved quite a bit of money by disconnecting the branch when renewing the track, I'm just struggling to see that it could give much journey time saving.

 

[seasidersfan]

I still don't see how when you have a junction that's just been disconnected, a very challenging route to an ideal station without ripping up roads and properties, and a successful tramway with more usage than all the railway stations in the area, that the railway option beats the tram option.

On any new railway there would be three stops: Fleetwood (where? Who knows!), Burn Naze and Thornton. Now there are many hundreds of properties along that line which are no where near those stations and I know if I was one of them I'd likely prefer to drive in that case. Throw in a tram route and you have huge flexibility of stops, maybe double or triple the number, making it far more accessible and attractive. Yes there'd be a modal change at Poulton and a longer journey time but the number who would use the service goes up hugely.

The other factor is that with a tramway you have a lot more flexibility to cross over roads and could easily take a direct service onto Fleetwood's high street (Lord St), benefitting those businesses and residents.

Referring to feasibility studies mentioned they are completely outdated and from before the updated tramway was even considered a factor (from 2012 onwards), so we can't trust any old data until a new one is commissioned.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I agree with those arguing that it should be heavy rail, not tram.

The tram basically provides a glorified bus route. It's great at that, and no doubt being a tram and having the greater comfort levels associated with a tram, it does attract a fair few people who would not use an actual bus. But in terms of market, the tram is very good short journeys with lots of stops, and is going to be too slow for anyone travelling a large distance. Any proposal to run a 2nd tram from Fleetwood to Poulton is basically going to serve much the same kind of market, albeit with different actual journeys. The point of a train is rather that it opens Fleetwood to the national rail network for longer journeys, most obviously to Preston. And between them, Fleetwood and Thornton definitely have enough population to ensure that if the line hadn't closed in the first place, it would today be seen as viable and thriving.

At the risk of going all crayonista-y, how would this work for a possible re-opening. Connects to the tram at Heathfield Road, so no need to build into the town itself, and as far as I can see on Google Maps, there wouldn't be any insurmountable engineering challenges.

 

[seasidersfan]

Well I should expect that on this forum heavy rail would be preferred. But my expectations are that if and when a feasibility study is done tram will come out on top for reasons I've gone into. Could be proven wrong but that's my opinion until we hear more.

DynamicSpirit my point still stands that if I'm on a heavy rail route between two stops I'm likely going to find an alternative but if there was a tram I'd use it even for longer journeys. If the route was complete countryside between Fleetwood and Poulton heavy rail is a no brainer but it's not.

 

[Codville]

You'd have to bridge over Amounderness Way or go under it because a level crossing on that road would be a nightmare, I think it would likely cost as much to convert the line to tram as it would to reopen the line to heavy rail traffic.