Closed/Under Threat Stations Watchlist

[DarloRich]

The Marston Vale stations are more under threat from EWR than Vivarail's administration. The proposals for rebuilding/moving some stations are still under discussion IIRC.

Until they close my station I would like the train I have paid for to run once in a while.

( AND that idea by EW to close most of the MV station is a stupid idea. Such a reward for putting up with the endless incompetence and unwillingness to run a reliable service. Here is your reward: nowt. Mind how you go.)

 

[zwk500]

Until they close my station I would like the train I have paid for to run once in a while.

It'd be nice.

( AND that idea by EW to close most of the MV station is a stupid idea.

It's not, given the Marston Vale is changing role from quiet backwater branch (with all due respect) to regional commuter link. However putting the new stations in the correct place is a difficult one to get right.

 

[InkyScrolls]

Trains are still calling in the Up direction, with a bus replacement. Problem seemed to start on or shortly before 13 January: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/wennington-station.241952/

13th Jan is correct.

 

[zwk500]

13th Jan is correct.

Ta

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Somewhat of an aside, the DfT list includes Moor Park ('closure' being to main line services, of course, not London Underground). I have been on Chiltern Railways services that called at Moor Park during Underground disruption; presumably the list implies scheduled/planned timetable services rather than any and every use.

Footnote applies: **not a BR station. Estimated date that BR trains ceased to use – precise date not known.
Which would suggest that, if Weymouth Quay were a non BR station, then it should also feature on the list, but as @zwk500 points out, there are errors to be found.

I don't have the original FOI question or related correspondence, I guess I found the document on the DfT website (pre .gov.uk?) in their 'list of responses to FOI requests' page.

 

[SargeNpton]

But it was served seasonally by National Rail trains and featured in the annual usage statistics between 2011/12 and 2020/21. So it falls into the awkward 'privately owned stations served by public passenger services' pigeonhole like Fishguard Harbour.

Sampford Courtenay: The Sunday services over the Dartmoor Line to Okehampton when it was still a private railway were, I think, sponsored by Devon County Council and not part of the GWR franchise.

That's a different situation to Fishguard Harbour. More akin to trains that SWR runs through to the Swanage Railway.

 

[DarloRich]

It's not, given the Marston Vale is changing role from quiet backwater branch (with all due respect) to regional commuter link. However putting the new stations in the correct place is a difficult one to get right.

my station is in the right place

We have put up with absolute crap on this line for years. We as users want our reward. We don't need or want new, merged, conjoined or any other word stations. We want trains that run when they are supposed to, don't catch fire or conk out and are at least adequate in passenger comfort. We also want the benefits that EW promised us. Funny that those benefits never mentioned closure.

( You wont convince me that closing the station I use is a good idea. It is a stupid idea suggested by stupid people and it stinks.)

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Regarding Weymouth Quay.

Quicks, Railway Passenger Stations in Great Britain: A Chronology and now available on-line states:

However, mongrel lines, such as that to Weymouth Quay did, and do make some use of public roads whilst mostly operating on dedicated track; they are included.

He does not list a closure date (my bold):

W QUAY first used 4 August 1889 (W Gaz 9th) as W LANDING STAGE and thus GW co tt 1932; became W Q 1937 (Brad); last
train to Quay Wednesday, 6 September 1939 (last from 5th) (Cl); used May on for specials (e.g. for refugees), last train 25 July
(H. J. Lucking, Weymouth Harbour Tramway, 1986); fully reop 15 June 1946 (Cl); from end of September 1985 became summer
only; one train each way 1986-7, last train Sunday 27 September 1987 (wtts). Weekly Wednesday excursion from Yeovil 14 July to
1 September (inclusive) 1993. Later only occasional specials – last recorded 2 May 1999. At first in hb as W LANDING STAGE;
W Q NEW PIER added ‘P’ 1892a, with W L S now goods only; same 1895; 1904 to 1938 separate entries, both ‘P’, for L S and
QUAY; 1944a W Q ‘temporarily closed’; 1949a W Q back, W L S ‘closed’; 1956 W Q only.

 

[flitwickbeds]

Trains are still calling in the Up direction, with a bus replacement for the down. Problem seemed to start on or shortly before Started on 13 January: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/wennington-station.241952/

13th Jan is correct.

Ta

Wennington added.

 

[The Planner]

Bordesley is a difficult one as it plays a huge role in football trains. However I've now added it to the list with this noted.

Makes no difference, if the chords are built it will go.

 

[jamieintercity]

What about balmossie, barry links and golf street? All serve 4 trains a day, Monday to Saturdays.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Shouldn't Elton and Orston be on the list?

2 TPD, and weekdays only, I think.

my station is in the right place

We have put up with absolute crap on this line for years. We as users want our reward. We don't need or want new, merged, conjoined or any other word stations. We want trains that run when they are supposed to, don't catch fire or conk out and are at least adequate in passenger comfort. We also want the benefits that EW promised us. Funny that those benefits never mentioned closure.

Not that I often agree with a Darlo man, but I'm 100% on this. When you consider all the grass roots efforts by parents to keep the line open back in the 70s for the school kids - and that was in the bad days of BR - and see all that wasted by plain lack of will and interest today, it's outrageous.

 

[flitwickbeds]

What about balmossie, barry links and golf street? All serve 4 trains a day, Monday to Saturdays.

Thanks, added (now appears to be 3tpd)

 

[swt_passenger]

What about balmossie, barry links and golf street? All serve 4 trains a day, Monday to Saturdays.

If those are included shouldn’t Chathill, Acklington, Widdrington, Pegswood? This could be a long list if we include every limited service shack, even when nobody has mentioned closure at all.

 

[pdeaves]

If those are included shouldn’t Chathill, Acklington, Widdrington, Pegswood? This could be a long list if we include every limited service shack, even when nobody has mentioned closure at all.

And then you get into 'how limited is limited?'. 3tpd? 4tpd? 5tpd?

 

[zwk500]

And then you get into 'how limited is limited?'. 3tpd? 4tpd? 5tpd?

Given the highest service is 6tpd (AFAICS), it appears anything below 1tp2h is grounds for presuming it 'threatened' despite any lack of actual proposals.

 

[flitwickbeds]

Given the highest service is 6tpd (AFAICS), it appears anything below 1tp2h is grounds for presuming it 'threatened' despite any lack of actual proposals.

The only 6tpd entry is Salwick, which is included because the industry it was built to serve no longer exists and therefore it has a high chance of going the same way as other stations originally built for industry which has since closed.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Jan 2023 ==

If those are included shouldn’t Chathill, Acklington, Widdrington, Pegswood? This could be a long list if we include every limited service shack, even when nobody has mentioned closure at all.

Good point. I don't want to bog this list down and want to keep it focused on those which are closed, or have a good chance of/case for closure, either because it has been replaced with another station (eg Sankey), its purpose has since disappeared (eg IBM), or it's operationally inconvenient to serve (eg Denton).

I have therefore removed Barry Links, Balmossie and Golf Street from the list and will not be including Chathill etc.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Is Spondon a suitable candidate for this?

I would have thought Peartree due to its limited nature.

I personally think that Wressle along with Broomfleet, Easington, Ulleskelf, Whitley Bridge, Hensall, Snaith and Rawcliffe would be on the list due to the very limted nature of the services that call there.

The latter four are served by two services to Leeds and one to Goole six days a week - factoring in that Snaith is a town, which by rights should have 10 services a day Monday to Saturday (so every two hours) and six on a Sunday (every three hours), not the current limited mess that's aimed at the traditional 9-5 employee not for someone working a either a 6-2 or 2-10 shift which makes it harder for them to commute by train.

And then you get into 'how limited is limited?'. 3tpd? 4tpd? 5tpd?

I'd regard limited as less then eight trains in each direction per day six days a week, anything less than that are we're talking parliamentry levels.

 

[ainsworth74]

Regarding Weymouth Quay.

Quicks, Railway Passenger Stations in Great Britain: A Chronology and now available on-line states:


He does not list a closure date (my bold):

I'm starting to wonder if it has actually been formally closed

 

[DarloRich]

Not that I often agree with a Darlo man, but I'm 100% on this. When you consider all the grass roots efforts by parents to keep the line open back in the 70s for the school kids - and that was in the bad days of BR - and see all that wasted by plain lack of will and interest today, it's outrageous.

Too kind! I am not against E-W. Far from it. I just don't believe that the local service has to be removed to accommodate it. I think both are possible.

 

[zwk500]

I'm starting to wonder if it has actually been formally closed

What was the formal process like in the 80s?

 

[DelW]

I'd regard limited as less then eight trains in each direction per day six days a week, anything less than that are we're talking parliamentry levels.

The list would become very unwieldy at that level - for instance it would have to include the entirety of the Heart of Wales line, even after the recent improvements in its timetable. That's a lot of stations!

 

[The exile]

What was the formal process like in the 80s?

Hearing (TUCC?) if closure proposals were objected to. I don’t know whether there was access to/from the boat trains other than from the ferries, but if there wasn’t, maybe no objections were received/ deemed valid.

 

[The Quincunx]

Re Weymouth Quay: there was no closure proposal under the old legislation. By the time the relevant bits of the 1993 Act came into force (1/4/94), it had slipped through the cracks: as there had not been any regular, scheduled services for more than 5 years, the new closure provisions did not apply [see e.g. s39(1)(b)]. There are no provisions for retrospective closure but if there were, in the absence of any associated purpose (the ferry), I can't see there being any good - economic - argument for keeping/restoring it.

Coming back to the present, I doubt that there is any appetite for wholesale closures being pursued. Apart from the political considerations, they take up a lot of time and effort (but surprisingly little obviously additional expense, except for the cost of publishing notices in national and local newspapers) for, frankly, little benefit as would be the case for most of those mentioned above. The only real benefit of a closure is if it paves the way for something else, e.g. where a better station at a nearby but different location is being provided, or a big project like Thameslink 2000 (as was).

 

[trainmania100]

I'd say Newhaven Harbour is under threat. Don't think anything's official but recently services had been cut, most daytime services no longer call there and the place is a bit of an eyesore despite the lovely posters on the walls.
Used occasionally by residents, it has no purpose for the harbour in a passenger's sense. Yes there are some houses nearby but for what its worth, what good is a train service from harbour now when many services cut and no direct service to london. Lets not forget there are buses just a short walk to town station which is closest for passengers for the ferry.

 

[zwk500]

I'd say Newhaven Harbour is under threat. Don't think anything's official but recently services had been cut, most daytime services no longer call there and the place is a bit of an eyesore despite the lovely posters on the walls.
Used occasionally by residents, it has no purpose for the harbour in a passenger's sense. Yes there are some houses nearby but for what its worth, what good is a train service from harbour now when many services cut and no direct service to london. Lets not forget there are buses just a short walk to town station which is closest for passengers for the ferry.

At the same time closing it provides no real benefit to other passengers and the station itself isn't costing much in maintenance, so it will stay on for a good while yet.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

At the same time closing it provides no real benefit to other passengers and the station itself isn't costing much in maintenance, so it will stay on for a good while yet.

The fact that the station called Harbour isn't the best station for catching a ferry does "stick in the craw" a bit, though in this day and age it isn't beyond most people to do a few minutes of research before buying a ticket. Renaming stations does cost more than leaving it as is, but if the budget is there it would be worth doing. If Town became "Newhaven Town & Ferryport" then the current Harbour could be closed, or mothballed until some redevelopment in the area gives it a new purpose. "Newhaven Waterfront" could work in that event.

 

[zwk500]

The fact that the station called Harbour isn't the best station for catching a ferry does "stick in the craw" a bit, though in this day and age it isn't beyond most people to do a few minutes of research before buying a ticket. Renaming stations does cost more than leaving it as is, but if the budget is there it would be worth doing. If Town became "Newhaven Town & Ferryport" then the current Harbour could be closed, or mothballed until some redevelopment in the area gives it a new purpose. "Newhaven Waterfront" could work in that event.

Only to those bothered about 'being correct'. Functionally, the ferry company tells you to get off at Newhaven Town and when your train gets to town you can't really miss the big ferry terminal. Even if you still miss it, the walk up from Harbour to the level crossing isn't unduly long.

The only thing worth doing, if anything, is to put an 'Alight here for Dieppe Ferries' under the Newhaven Town nameboard.

The budget isn't there either way, but Newhaven Town & Ferryport would be a horrific name. I'd keep Newhaven Town but rename Harbour to Newhaven Beach Road.

 

[geoffk]

Pilning is in the same situation as Polesworth - no footbridge - so perhaps that should be mentioned.

Unlikely that Pontefract Baghill would close as long as the limited Sheffield - York service still runs. Is a walking route actually signposted from the other two stations?

Fairly local to me, Portsmouth Arms and Chapelton if only to speed up the service a bit, but there will be others in the same category.

 

[rapmastaj]

On the Brigg line, Gainsborough Central could also be at risk.