Next 50 Bids for reopenings

[A0]

The more general point is that the only rail routes out of East Anglia are via London or via Ely.
Another, more direct route would be very useful.
To get to Birmingham, for example, is just not practical by rail. You can drive it in half the time, and by rail going via either route takes the same amount of time.

I call bull**** on the "drive it in half the time" claim.

It's 160 miles from Norwich to Birmingham - to drive Google Maps is reckoning just under 3 hours - so an average of about 50mph which given the roads in question is probably about right.

The train is just over 4 hours via London with some padding to allow the change to the tube and cross to Euston or 4h 20m via Ely with a 45 min wait at Ely for connection.

The fact is it's a longish distance over cross country roads or rail links - both of which have lower average speeds than motorways / main lines - and also serve the purpose of linking alot of other places en route.

 

[Starmill]

My bad. The LNER extension every two hours (normally) which alternates with the Northern service confused me (not, admittedly, difficult). Treat those as extras and the rest still holds, I think.

The Leeds to Harrogate fast trains run all day leaving Leeds at xx15, the London to Harrogate trains leave Leeds at about xx50 in most odd hours. So there would only be another Leeds to Harrogate every 2 hours to extend to Ripon... Unless someone's going to find another 800.

 

[trebor79]

I call bull**** on the "drive it in half the time" claim.

It's 160 miles from Norwich to Birmingham - to drive Google Maps is reckoning just under 3 hours - so an average of about 50mph which given the roads in question is probably about right.

The train is just over 4 hours via London with some padding to allow the change to the tube and cross to Euston or 4h 20m via Ely with a 45 min wait at Ely for connection.

The fact is it's a longish distance over cross country roads or rail links - both of which have lower average speeds than motorways / main lines - and also serve the purpose of linking alot of other places en route.

I live a bit South of Norwich. Drive to Birmingham New Street is 2.5 hours. Train is a little over 4. But I'd have to get to the station first and allow a little bit of time to collect tickets and back over the level crossing before the barriers come down, so it's getting on for 4.5 hours.
The drive is very nearly half the time. Plus coming back it avoids having to wait at Birmingham for the next departure, and the connection at Ely isn't so favourable on the way back, so the journey time differential is greater still.
I wish it wasn't so, but it is.
It's a bit ridiculous that it's time neutral to get a train to London, schlep across to Euston and train to Birmingham than it is to go cross country.

 

[Ianno87]

I live a bit South of Norwich. Drive to Birmingham New Street is 2.5 hours. Train is a little over 4. But I'd have to get to the station first and allow a little bit of time to collect tickets and back over the level crossing before the barriers come down, so it's getting on for 4.5 hours.
The drive is very nearly half the time. Plus coming back it avoids having to wait at Birmingham for the next departure, and the connection at Ely isn't so favourable on the way back, so the journey time differential is greater still.
I wish it wasn't so, but it is.
It's a bit ridiculous that it's time neutral to get a train to London, schlep across to Euston and train to Birmingham than it is to go cross country.

I regularly do Cambridge-Birmingham. 2 hours by road (in decent traffic - not always the case), 2.75 hours by train.

I choose the train as it's productive work time the whole way, and is a consistently reliable journey time.

 

[A0]

It's a bit ridiculous that it's time neutral to get a train to London, schlep across to Euston and train to Birmingham than it is to go cross country.

Except it isn't "ridiculous" at all - the reality is London and Birmingham and London and Norwich are connected by, relatively, high speed lines 125 in parts of the former and 100 mph in the case of the latter. Both with limited stop train services as part of that - whereas the cross country services are on slower lines - 75-90 between Norwich and Ely for example with 4 or 5 stops en route for that section alone.

 

[trebor79]

I regularly do Cambridge-Birmingham. 2 hours by road (in decent traffic - not always the case), 2.75 hours by train.

I choose the train as it's productive work time the whole way, and is a consistently reliable journey time.

Agree with you there. Before lockdown I was commuting once a week to Sleaford. I took the train every so that I could get work done and not risk death due to lunatics on the A17. The journey time by train or car was identical.
It only went badly wrong once, when the 158 back from Sleaford caught fire at Spalding. I think I was and hour late to Sleaford on one occasion too. But more reliable and productive than driving, for sure.

 

[Irascible]

• Population of 10,000+ - Yes, the Newquay area has a population of around 30,000
• 60 minutes (75 at a push) journey time of a major employment centre. Plymouth - Par is about an hour, so if the journey time from Par-Newquay could be dropped to under 30 mins, then we are approaching that, as well as <60 min journey times to St Austell, Bodmin & Truro
• Extant or mainly unobstructed trackbed - Yes, it still exists, but is very poor quality
• Ability to extend an existing service so more terminal capacity is not required - Yes, it would presumably be possible to extend some London or XC Plymouth terminators to Newquay on a regular, rather than summer Sunday, basis, or the back half of some of the 2x5 car splitters. I can also see no capacity limitations to running additional shuttles to Par, though perhaps running them through to St Austell or Truro could be more sensible.
• Regeneration Potential of a deprived area - Yes, Newquay is in the top (bottom) 10% deprived areas in the country. Areas of St Austell, Bodmin, St Blazey and Liskeard are also in this category, which would all also benefit from increased services.

By this metric Barnstaple-Ilfracombe scores pretty high too-

* Pop 11,000 just in Ilfracombe itself.
* Exeter is a major and still growing employment centre about an hour from Barnstaple, so if it's 10-15 mins extra to ilfracombe it'll still be within 75 mins. There's nowhere else to go for work anyway.
* Trackbed is mostly there - lacks a river bridge at the Barnstaple end ( if I were scribbling lines I'd not put it back in the same place - going directly across the river towards Chivenor is both shorter, avoids property development in Barnstaple & can use the handy bridge under the road the council put in for any re-extension to Bideford ), Braunton is a bit of an issue since the line went right through the town - there's actually surprisingly few physical obstructions but I suspect there might be some social ones - but otherwise the route appears more or less clear still.
* Obviously you'd just extend the Tarka line service.
* Regeneration potential - Ilfracombe is currently in the top 1600 of deprived areas of England - there are about 32,000 listed to give some scale - and part of it is the most deprived area in Devon County ( Plymouth & Torbay are their own authorities these days ). I'm not sure if you'd really regenerate any holiday traffic to the rather wonderful beach areas on the way because the line didn't really go *that* near them but as the rather bad local roads can't be improved it's not going to hurt.

But I suspect there's no real will to even consider it. The sticklers would seem to be at the Barnstaple end which this Braunton light rail proposal would have to deal with too. Suspect the bridge is a bit of a killer.

Newquay needs some attention, that's for sure.

 

[BayPaul]

By this metric Barnstaple-Ilfracombe scores pretty high too-

* Pop 11,000 just in Ilfracombe itself.
* Exeter is a major and still growing employment centre about an hour from Barnstaple, so if it's 10-15 mins extra to ilfracombe it'll still be within 75 mins. There's nowhere else to go for work anyway.
* Trackbed is mostly there - lacks a river bridge at the Barnstaple end ( if I were scribbling lines I'd not put it back in the same place - going directly across the river towards Chivenor is both shorter, avoids property development in Barnstaple & can use the handy bridge under the road the council put in for any re-extension to Bideford ), Braunton is a bit of an issue since the line went right through the town but otherwise the route appears more or less clear still.
* Obviously you'd just extend the Tarka line service.
* Regeneration potential - Ilfracombe is currently in the top 1600 of deprived areas of England - there are about 32,000 listed to give some scale - and part of it is the most deprived area in Devon County ( Plymouth & Torbay are their own authorities these days ). I'm not sure if you'd really regenerate any holiday traffic to the rather wonderful beach areas on the way because the line didn't really go *that* near them but as the rather bad local roads can't be improved it's not going to hurt.

But I suspect there's no real will to even consider it. The sticklers would seem to be at the Barnstaple end which this Braunton light rail proposal would have to deal with too. Suspect the bridge is a bit of a killer.

Newquay needs some attention, that's for sure.

I guess Bideford scores much the same, with a population of 14,500, and no bridges needed if you put in a station on the eastern side of the river. I do think that Ilfracombe and Bideford were places where Beeching's calculations were flawed. Either the whole Barnstaple line should have been closed, or the two branches to Bideford and Ilfracombe should have been kept - it seems silly keeping such a long branch to connect a single mid-sized town, when it could have served 3 for not that much more distance. As I understand it, the calculations he used would have assumed that Barnstaple - Exeter was worth keeping, because it included flows from all 3 towns, without the obvious leap that if you cut the branches, you would lose much of that traffic too.

 

[MarkyT]

Going back to Stratford, if Sanctus Road was closed and the overbridge removed, perhaps an alternative elevated alignment might be possible to cross the road and roundabout junction. In the particularly confined space immediately south of the roundabout, the new bridge might be carried for a short way above Seven Meadows Road by a number of portal structures with support pillars either side of the road carriageway.

 

[MarkyT]

I guess Bideford scores much the same, with a population of 14,500, and no bridges needed if you put in a station on the eastern side of the river. I do think that Ilfracombe and Bideford were places where Beeching's calculations were flawed. Either the whole Barnstaple line should have been closed, or the two branches to Bideford and Ilfracombe should have been kept - it seems silly keeping such a long branch to connect a single mid-sized town, when it could have served 3 for not that much more distance. As I understand it, the calculations he used would have assumed that Barnstaple - Exeter was worth keeping, because it included flows from all 3 towns, without the obvious leap that if you cut the branches, you would lose much of that traffic too.

Barnstaple works well as a railhead for a wide area but unfortunately for public transport coordination, unlike (say) the excellent facility at Paignton, the train and bus stations for the town are not colocated. This is my proposal for better integration, moving the railway station closer to the town, at one end of the town bridge and relocating the bus station to the other end of the bridge, so an interchange would be around a 200m walk across the bridge: http://www.townend.me/files/barnstaple.pdf

 

[Bald Rick]

Going back to Stratford, if Sanctus Road was closed and the overbridge removed, perhaps an alternative elevated alignment might be possible to cross the road and roundabout junction. In the particularly confined space immediately south of the roundabout, the new bridge might be carried for a short way above Seven Meadows Road by a number of portal structures with support pillars either side of the road carriageway.
View attachment 80317

That would be almost impossible to get through a consents process. Also the embankments would be so narrow it would be better to make it viaduct the whole way. And whilst gradients of 1:50 are ok, it does make things difficult for freight.

As a final point (and not just directed at you Mark), but professional looking representations / drawings like this don’t half put the wind up the locals if they see them, as most non-railway folk won’t be able to tell the difference between speculation and the real thing. Were they to gain any traction locally it risks killing these things off before they’ve even started, based on a false premise.

I know they are appreciated here by some, but a plea: please can anyone doing representations or drawings like this make it clear it is your own work, speculation, and not in any way related to the official proposal for a project.

 

[BayPaul]

Barnstaple works well as a railhead for a wide area but unfortunately for public transport coordination, unlike (say) the excellent facility at Paignton, the train and bus stations for the town are not colocated. This is my proposal for better integration, moving the railway station closer to the town, at one end of the town bridge and relocating the bus station to the other end of the bridge, so an interchange would be around a 200m walk across the bridge: http://www.townend.me/files/barnstaple.pdf

I like that plan. I haven't been to Barnstaple many times, but whenever I have it has struck me what a depressing location the station is in - nowhere near anywhere.

 

[MarkyT]

As a final point (and not just directed at you Mark), but professional looking representations / drawings like this don’t half put the wind up the locals if they see them, as most non-railway folk won’t be able to tell the difference between speculation and the real thing. Were they to gain any traction locally it risks killing these things off before they’ve even started, based on a false premise.

I know they are appreciated here by some, but a plea: please can anyone doing representations or drawings like this make it clear it is your own work, speculation, and not in any way related to the official proposal for a project.

I've added a disclaimer. At least in the speculative section only members can see the content I think.

 

[Ianno87]

Agree with you there. Before lockdown I was commuting once a week to Sleaford. I took the train every so that I could get work done and not risk death due to lunatics on the A17. The journey time by train or car was identical.
It only went badly wrong once, when the 158 back from Sleaford caught fire at Spalding. I think I was and hour late to Sleaford on one occasion too. But more reliable and productive than driving, for sure.

Done it once every week or two for about 2 years up to Covid, and only one Delay Repay-eligible trip.

 

[joebassman]

It looks Maldon to Witham was one that was submitted as well. Is there much chance of this one happening?
It seems most of the trackbed is still there except in Maldon and there's an industrial estate in Witham in the way.
I had a look and Maldon has a population of around 14k

 

[Irascible]

I like that plan. I haven't been to Barnstaple many times, but whenever I have it has struck me what a depressing location the station is in - nowhere near anywhere.

There were three stations in Barnstaple at one point - I think the only decently placed one was the one at the end of the line to Taunton, which was unfortunately a terminus - although the Town station on the riverbank was at least better than the current one. The current station is at least just over the river from the town centre even if it doesn't initially look that well placed. The way the roads link make it unfortunately further away than it need be unless you're walking.

Bideford has the advantage that it's flat all the way to Barnstaple ( and the road shortcuts the railway somewhat ) - Ilfracombe is the other side of some really fierce geography. It's a pity the clay traffic didn't hold out a few more years, or I think we'd be getting trains to Bideford still ( I remember tripping over the rails in Instow once as a kid & nearly braining myself! ). There've been a few studies about Ilfracombe with the general conclusion ( iirc ) that "there was no way this should have shut" - I suspect it wasn't completely a case of costs. Didn't someone mention 8 level crossings? the rails were still down in 1975, so it obviously wasn't a clear decision.

 

[trebor79]

It looks Maldon to Witham was one that was submitted as well. Is there much chance of this one happening?
It seems most of the trackbed is still there except in Maldon and there's an industrial estate in Witham in the way.
I had a look and Maldon has a population of around 14k

No chance. Aside from the industrial estate, the trackbed on the outskirts of town has been converted to roads. Extending the line from South Woodham Ferrers looks more feasible.

 

[joebassman]

No chance. Aside from the industrial estate, the trackbed on the outskirts of town has been converted to roads. Extending the line from South Woodham Ferrers looks more feasible.

How come they never mention that one in any of the proposals to extend to South Woodham Ferrers?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Barnstaple works well as a railhead for a wide area but unfortunately for public transport coordination, unlike (say) the excellent facility at Paignton, the train and bus stations for the town are not colocated. This is my proposal for better integration, moving the railway station closer to the town, at one end of the town bridge and relocating the bus station to the other end of the bridge, so an interchange would be around a 200m walk across the bridge: http://www.townend.me/files/barnstaple.pdf

I see what you're trying to do there, but doesn't that plan (a) require demolition of the leisure centre, and more seriously, (b) open up the railway to serious risk of flooding? (Barnstaple Flood map shows medium flood risk right next to your proposed station.

 

[MarkyT]

I see what you're trying to do there, but doesn't that plan (a) require demolition of the leisure centre, and more seriously, (b) open up the railway to serious risk of flooding? (Barnstaple Flood map shows medium flood risk right next to your proposed station.

I'd reclaim some land from the river in front of the leisure centre, creating a new bank and earthworks that could lift the new railway out of flooding risk and protect the area behind it to the west. I also suggest a new parkway station after joining the old alignment at the bridge near the A361/A39 roundabout.

 

[Midnight Sun]

As for Stratford upon Avon there is a third way. Simply by following the example set by Rhaetian Railway in Char Switzerland and run the trains over the roundabout and down the road using street running to the next roundabout before rejoining the trackbed. two tracks - one for each side of the road, so the train travels in the same direction as the road traffic . The Rhaetian Railway in Char have been doing this for over a 100 years in normal road traffic with out the need to stop the road traffic. Not just the Swiss that do this.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[daodao]

As for Stratford upon Avon there is a third way. Simply by following the example set by Rhaetian Railway in Char Switzerland and run the trains over the roundabout and down the road using street running to the next roundabout before rejoining the trackbed. two tracks - one for each side of the road, so the train travels in the same direction as the road traffic . The Rhaetian Railway in Char have been doing this for over a 100 years in normal road traffic with out the need to stop the road traffic. Not just the Swiss that do this. ....

There are already quite long trams running on streets in the UK (I passed a 56 metre "double" tram while driving along Hollyhedge Road in Wythenshawe last Sunday), so running tram-trains of similar length along main roads should not be impossible.

 

[Irascible]

What's so sacred about a short stretch of road, anyway? it's a lot easier to reroute road traffic than rail...

 

[DynamicSpirit]

What's so sacred about a short stretch of road, anyway? it's a lot easier to reroute road traffic than rail...

On balance, re-routing road traffic would be my favoured solution. On the upside, it doesn't look like there are any properties that directly front onto the road in question, so in principle it ought to be possible to close that road. On the downside, it means you're going to have to build another road somewhere to replace it - and that is going to add hugely to the expense. Just doing some idle crayonista-ing, this was my first thought - a new Southern/Western by-pass that would allow for the crucial section of the A4390 to be closed. Clearly you couldn't justify all this expense purely in order to build a railway, but possibly you could justify it on the basis that you get the railway AND divert potentially a lot of traffic out of the city and onto the by-pass? Would need to do something about the racecourse though. And you have issues about whether this would actually induce more road traffic.

(Disclaimer added in response to Bald Rick's earlier point )

 

[Bald Rick]

There are already proposals for a Western / south Western relief road, which heads south of the racecourse. It is linked to housing development in the area. As you can imagine there is already a well organised ‘anti’ group.

However, I don’t think you can close that road. It is the only sensible access from about 150 residential properties into Stratford. Were it to be closed, the owner of each property would have a valid claim for loss of property value.

 

[Dr Day]

Stratford - what is the main problem is that a new connection to Honeybourne would fix? Neat as a Worcestershire/Warwickshire 'Ring' would be, how critical is it to have direct through running from Honeybourne to Wilmcote versus a separate Stratford South station somewhere near the racecourse or a longer route from the south-west approaching the current station from the north - requiring a reversal. Where the railway originally went is largely irrelevant today.

 

[The Ham]

On balance, re-routing road traffic would be my favoured solution. On the upside, it doesn't look like there are any properties that directly front onto the road in question, so in principle it ought to be possible to close that road. On the downside, it means you're going to have to build another road somewhere to replace it - and that is going to add hugely to the expense. Just doing some idle crayonista-ing, this was my first thought - a new Southern/Western by-pass that would allow for the crucial section of the A4390 to be closed. Clearly you couldn't justify all this expense purely in order to build a railway, but possibly you could justify it on the basis that you get the railway AND divert potentially a lot of traffic out of the city and onto the by-pass? Would need to do something about the racecourse though. And you have issues about whether this would actually induce more road traffic.

(Disclaimer added in response to Bald Rick's earlier point )

View attachment 80353

The other option would be to accept that we need to cut our car use is to choose the road.

Given that the railway would provide an alternative to people for their travel, especially if there was a new station at the Southern edge of Stratford (I know that a sub 1 mile between stations isn't great, but would provide an alternative to a walk and would likely offset some/all of the drop in property value).

Provide a decent cycle route centered around the new station with a link to the town centre and you'd probably find that traffic wouldn't be much worse overall.

Whilst more roads generates more traffic, the general outcome that's been observed on closing through routes to motor traffic is that more people switch to walking/cycling and congestion broadly stays the same. This is due to as soon as you reduce capacity those that are using it because it provides then with an easy route then stop using it when there's small amount of extra delay.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Thanks for the list, but the journalistic quality in the headline to suggest that these are certainly going to reopen is frustrating.

Probably done by a 21-year old intern on work experience. Look on the bright side - he/she spelled Beeching correctly.

 

[70014IronDuke]

..... I can think of at least 4 more worthwhile rail re-openings in Yorkshire and the North-East, reconnecting places of greater size and significance to the rail network:
Ashington to Newcastle
Consett via Stanley and Beamish to Newcastle
Guisborough to Nunthorpe (and hence Middlesbrough)
Ripon to Harrogate (and hence Leeds)

I'm surprised Guisborough to Nunthorpe doesn't get talked about more.

I don't think it would be used so much if it the service comprised a Guisboro - Middlesbrough shuttle, but if it were integrated to continue via Durham Coast to Newcastle - or even better, fast to Newcastle via Shillington, it would vastly improve connectivity.

OF course, I think the station would only be on the edge of Guisboro, not the former site. Too built over.

 

[Alfie1014]

How come they never mention that one in any of the proposals to extend to South Woodham Ferrers?

Historically the line to South Woodham Ferrers was the least used of the two routes, hardly surprising as in the those days Woodham Ferres was but a small village and being a branch line off a branch line is hardly an incentive for usage. If and it’s a big if either Route were to reopen Witham has much more commercial potential not least as it would serve Chelmsford where most demand gravitates towards nowadays. Though as has been mentioned problems with subsequent development would hinder reopening, Witham looks especially difficult to solve I do wonder if a new alignment to join up with GEML north of Hatfield Peverel would be the only workable solution but that would still be sub optimal and unless significant grade separation were to be provided to easily access the main line you end up with a shuttle to station with currently no more than an hourly service.

The whole issue is complicated by the (eventual) construction of the new Beaulieu station which may end up being the better railhead for Maldon than the current centrally sited and congested Chelmsford station. Though I believe that car parking at the new station may be limited to avoid too much rail heading from further out on the GEML but perhaps any monies spent on developing a scheme to reopen a line to Maldon would be better directed at a high quality bus link instead?