Should 'Combined Authorities' be allowed to build stations on the UK rail network ?

Halifaxlad · 9 Aug 2026

With the news that WYCA is developing plans to build a new station East of Leeds on the highly congested section of line between it and Micklefield, also with Great British Railways supposed to be the one central body for the benefit of the rail network, should combined authorities be allowed to build stations wherever they want or should the rail infrastructure be left to Network Rail/GBR ?

RailUK Forums

The Mercian · 9 Aug 2026

Halifaxlad said:
With the news that WYCA is developing plans to build a new station East of Leeds on the highly congested section of line between it and Micklefield, also with Great British Railways supposed to be the one central body for the benefit of the rail network, should combined authorities be allowed to build stations wherever they want or should the rail infrastructure be left to Network Rail/GBR ?

It shouldn’t be either/or it should be both. I personally can’t foresee a situation where a Mayoral CombAuth would be in dispute about new station openings, surely this is work they do together anyway subject to all the usual caveats of funding, business cases etc etc.

Halifaxlad · 9 Aug 2026

The Mercian said:
It shouldn’t be either/or it should be both. I personally can’t foresee a situation where a Mayoral CombAuth would be in dispute about new station openings, surely this is work they do together anyway subject to all the usual caveats of funding, business cases etc etc.

Because combined authorities have lack of understanding in rail, they will propose to build stations without consideration or understanding of the impact upon the existing network.

Look at Cottingley for example, a station that now has to shut as there isn't the capacity to serve that and the new White Rose station according to WYCA.

Look at Kirkstall Forge and Apperley Bridge, Kirkstall Forge was built to serve the adjacent redevelopment that hasn't been completed albeit one office block. As a result of both of three stations services now take longer between Leeds & Shipley.

Ironically Bradford Council under Labour were claiming that Bradford needs a new line to Leeds because the existing line takes too long. Apperley bridge was probably worth it but Kirkstall Forge certainly is questionable.

Magdalia · 9 Aug 2026

The government set out some initial proposals on 31 July see here:

Rewiring the State – Cabinet Statement

This publication sets out this government's plan to fundamentally rewire the state by shifting power, funding and accountability from Whitehall to local leaders

www.gov.uk

Policy paper

Rewiring the State – Cabinet Statement
This publication sets out this government's plan to fundamentally rewire the state by shifting power, funding and accountability from Whitehall to local leaders

The document is a linked pdf/html and says this on transport:

In respect of transport, we will support mayors to take public control of buses more rapidly and implement fully integrated ticketing systems, alongside our work with local leaders to support active travel options. We will give local leaders more control over commuter rail services, with the most established mayors working in much deeper partnership with Great British Railways. As we introduce new accountability arrangements, we will also remove the need for government approval of locally funded transport schemes for places with integrated settlements, except those that interact with the national network. We will immediately raise the approval threshold to £500 million and work with mayors to replace the concept of “retained schemes” with Local Transport Infrastructure Partnerships. We will also reform our approach to working in partnership with the most strategically significant or complex local projects, drawing on the experience of delivering the Elizabeth Line.

Mayors will be able to work in partnership with Great British Railways, but, as new stations "interact with the national network", my reading is that they will still need government approval.

Zomboid · 9 Aug 2026

They should be able to propose them and fund them, obviously. But they need to employ people (or engage NR/ GBR) who can understand and explain the impact on the wider rail network to ensure that what they spend money on is more than crayoning.

GRALISTAIR · 9 Aug 2026

Zomboid said:
They should be able to propose them and fund them, obviously. But they need to employ people (or engage NR/ GBR) who can understand and explain the impact on the wider rail network to ensure that what they spend money on is more than crayoning.

This. +1

The exile · 9 Aug 2026

Halifaxlad said:
should combined authorities be allowed to build stations wherever they want

Someone’s bound to say it, so let it be me! They would at least be well advised to stick to sites next to railway lines….

Jim the Jim · 9 Aug 2026

It would be a bit pointless building a station without Network Rail backing, they're the ones who run the infrastructure that would be required for any trains to stop there!

Manutd1999 · 9 Aug 2026

Personally I’d devolve the day to day running and upkeep of all stations (excluding track and signalling) to Combined Authorities immediately, alongside a small starter grant for refurbs. Reduce admin for GBR, introduce some local branding and give a bit of overdue attention on run down stations - an easy win IMO even if it doesn't change anything with the actual services.

Longer term, powers to build new stations should probably be combined with some form of devolved control of surburban services. There’s a few ways this could work, my preference would be for Combined Authorities to take full commercial risk/reward and “procure” the service pattern they want from GBR (subject to timetabling constraints). GBR keeps responsibility for rolling stock, employing drivers/guards, track maintenance etc.

Dr Day · 9 Aug 2026

As the value of a station is intrinsically linked to the services that call there, I would say the ex-TOC side of GBR/TfW/Scotrail are rather critical to the process…

NCT · 9 Aug 2026

It’s not a question of being allowed or not, but one of being willing and able to fund.

biggerisbetter · 9 Aug 2026

Halifaxlad said:
Look at Kirkstall Forge and Apperley Bridge, Kirkstall Forge was built to serve the adjacent redevelopment that hasn't been completed albeit one office block. As a result of both of three stations services now take longer between Leeds & Shipley.

Ironically Bradford Council under Labour were claiming that Bradford needs a new line to Leeds because the existing line takes too long. Apperley bridge was probably worth it but Kirkstall Forge certainly is questionable.

With 378,822 people using Kirkstall Forge before the completion of the remainder of the office park and 456,000 using Apperley Bridge, I would say both have been a success and entirely justified.

The new Thorpe Park station proposed is East Leeds in my view will also be positive with the number of people who work there now, plus the future jobs, delivery of new homes in the area and the new Thorpe Park College. I presume the electrification of the line between Leeds and York will also provide the potential for more services to stop or for an additional station call to be added to existing services without causing congestion issues.

Dr Hoo · 9 Aug 2026

In the past various Passenger Transport Executives and related bodies drove through new stations rather than BR. These were often for interchange purposes.

E.g. Heworth (Tyne-Wear), Partick (Glasgow), Liverpool South Parkway (Merseyside), Horwich Parkway (Greater Manchester), Smethwick Galton Bridge (West Midlands), Edinburgh Gateway, Meadowhall (South Yorkshire).

E.

fishwomp · 9 Aug 2026

Halifaxlad said:
With the news that WYCA is developing plans to build a new station East of Leeds on the highly congested section of line between it and Micklefield, also with Great British Railways supposed to be the one central body for the benefit of the rail network, should combined authorities be allowed to build stations wherever they want or should the rail infrastructure be left to Network Rail/GBR ?

Shouldn't they have to prove that they can build one station before allowing them to progress to their second.. White Rose is asking.

YorksLad12 · 9 Aug 2026

In my experience... no.

Should they be allowed to fund them? Absolutely! What White Rose teaches us is that despite Network Rail constantly delivering late, they do have the relationships with contractors. And they understand the railway (you'd hope). And how costs have increased. White Rose is the first big rail infrastructure project failure in West Yorkshire, I think - given that everything else was funded by the PTE, which only looked at transport, I can see where the problem might be...

Bald Rick · 9 Aug 2026

Halifaxlad said:
With the news that WYCA is developing plans to build a new station East of Leeds on the highly congested section of line between it and Micklefield, also with Great British Railways supposed to be the one central body for the benefit of the rail network, should combined authorities be allowed to build stations wherever they want or should the rail infrastructure be left to Network Rail/GBR ?

anybody - Combined authority / local authority / developer / wealthy benefactor can build a station wherever they like, as long as they have the money, follow the correct planning processes (land use planning and railway access planning) and comply with the relevant engineering standards.

If they also want trains to call there, which one assumes they do, they will need agreement of the relevant railway authorities.

This has been the case for as long as I can remember.

Ken X · 10 Aug 2026

Bald Rick said:
anybody - Combined authority / local authority / developer / wealthy benefactor can build a station wherever they like, as long as they have the money, follow the correct planning processes (land use planning and railway access planning) and comply with the relevant engineering standards.

If they also want trains to call there, which one assumes they do, they will need agreement of the relevant railway authorities.

This has been the case for as long as I can remember.

Indeed, twas ever thus.

When Horsham had its first taste of a new railway line in 1834, namely the "Grand Southern Railway", a Railway Hotel was constructed in anticipation of the new arrival. Sadly the railway never materialised.

In 1848, when a branch off the "London and Brighton Railway" was built to terminate in Horsham, it was located elsewhere so the Railway Hotel never fulfilled it's promise. The building still exists and is currently a church.

zwk500 · 10 Aug 2026

Zomboid said:
They should be able to propose them and fund them, obviously. But they need to employ people (or engage NR/ GBR) who can understand and explain the impact on the wider rail network to ensure that what they spend money on is more than crayoning.

This is *precisely* what currently happens. Just with 'commissioned' rather than 'employed'. It's why you end up with 3 layers of business case.

Central government is usually involved in station proposals because combined authorities require additional central funding to complete them. That won't change unless stations become cheaper or Authorities have more spending powers.

Halifaxlad · 10 Aug 2026

biggerisbetter said:
With 378,822 people using Kirkstall Forge before the completion of the remainder of the office park and 456,000 using Apperley Bridge, I would say both have been a success and entirely justified.

With statistics like that I begin to question how accurate they are...

Apperley bridge certainly is a well used station without a doubt although I do suspect some of the users previously used Harrogate line and Horsforth.

I'm no-where near confident Kirkstall Forge is anywhere near.

fishwomp · 10 Aug 2026

Halifaxlad said:
With statistics like that I begin to question how accurate they are...

Apperley bridge certainly is a well used station without a doubt although I do suspect some of the users previously used Harrogate line and Horsforth.

I'm no-where near confident Kirkstall Forge is anywhere near.

Went past it on the train a few weeks ago and thought - 'wow, that was a fail' - it's as isolated here as it was in the 80s..!

It's very curious - from https://railalefan.co.uk/labs/flowstats/KLF/

1	Kirkstall Forge	Leeds	90857	118949	2287	326	+30.9	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Kirkstall-Forge/Leeds/	NT
2	Kirkstall Forge	Apperley Bridge	10064	12081	232	33	+20.0	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Kirkstall-Forge/Apperley-Bridge/	NT
3	Kirkstall Forge	Bradford Forster Square	8691	10429	200	28	+20.0	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Kirkstall-Forge/Bradford-Forster-Square/	NT
4	Kirkstall Forge	Frizinghall	9527	10285	197	28	+8.0	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Kirkstall-Forge/Frizinghall/	NT
5	Kirkstall Forge	Shipley	5658	6998	134	19	+23.7	https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Kirkstall-Forge/Shipley/	NT

can its second most popular stop really be Apperley Bridge?! Off-peak return £3.40, peak £4.10. That's only 33 people a day. 33 people working in that solitary office block building all living in Apperley Bridge.? well you wouldn't use the bus.. but no, I don't believe it either. I was wondering if there was some donutting of tickets, but that doesnt make sense here either, or some split ticket nonsense.
326 per day to Leeds - the car park isn't big enough and it's a good walk to the nearest bus stop.

Zomboid · 10 Aug 2026

Short faring maybe?

fishwomp · 10 Aug 2026

Zomboid said:
Short faring maybe?

Or a zones thing? It's in Zone 2, next stop north is Apperley Bridge is Zone 3, and next stop south is Leeds Zone 1.
Or just bad data..

Zomboid · 10 Aug 2026

On the other hand, it doesn't tell you a whole lot statistically, but on the day the Google aerial photo was taken, the car parks there were pretty much completely full. So it must be doing some level of business, at least on that day.

bluenoxid · 10 Aug 2026

RE: Kirkstall Forge-Apperley Bridge;

Are these numbers passengers or full fares? Apperley Bridge is next to Woodhouse Grove school, which I understand generates quite a bit of traffic. You aren’t taking your kids in your car that far out through Leeds traffic if you don’t have to.

Halifaxlad · 10 Aug 2026

fishwomp said:
Went past it on the train a few weeks ago and thought - 'wow, that was a fail' - it's as isolated here as it was in the 80s..!

It's very curious - from https://railalefan.co.uk/labs/flowstats/KLF/

1 Kirkstall Forge Leeds 90857 118949 2287 326 +30.9 https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Kirkstall-Forge/Leeds/ NT
2 Kirkstall Forge Apperley Bridge 10064 12081 232 33 +20.0 https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Kirkstall-Forge/Apperley-Bridge/ NT
3 Kirkstall Forge Bradford Forster Square 8691 10429 200 28 +20.0 https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Kirkstall-Forge/Bradford-Forster-Square/ NT
4 Kirkstall Forge Frizinghall 9527 10285 197 28 +8.0 https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Kirkstall-Forge/Frizinghall/ NT
5 Kirkstall Forge Shipley 5658 6998 134 19 +23.7 https://live-departures.info/rail/timetable/Kirkstall-Forge/Shipley/ NT

can its second most popular stop really be Apperley Bridge?! Off-peak return £3.40, peak £4.10. That's only 33 people a day. 33 people working in that solitary office block building all living in Apperley Bridge.? well you wouldn't use the bus.. but no, I don't believe it either. I was wondering if there was some donutting of tickets, but that doesnt make sense here either, or some split ticket nonsense.
326 per day to Leeds - the car park isn't big enough and it's a good walk to the nearest bus stop.

Apperley bridge is clearly a popular station especially at peak times the amount of people getting off the train is impressive!

NCT · 10 Aug 2026

zwk500 said:
This is *precisely* what currently happens. Just with 'commissioned' rather than 'employed'. It's why you end up with 3 layers of business case.

Central government is usually involved in station proposals because combined authorities require additional central funding to complete them. That won't change unless stations become cheaper or Authorities have more spending powers.

Or we have a proper federalised structure with devolved governments taking meaningful fiscal responsibilities and risks (not just spending but revenue raising).

YorksLad12 · 10 Aug 2026

Halifaxlad said:
Apperley bridge certainly is a well used station without a doubt although I do suspect some of the users previously used Harrogate line and Horsforth.

It really is! I happened to catch it last December after a medical appointment at Eccleshill. Lots of passengers boarding and alighting, and the car park was busy as well. The 290-ish spots will all be taken during a normal working week, I reckon.

Halifaxlad said:
I'm no-where near confident Kirkstall Forge is anywhere near.

Anecdotal evidence from someone at the consultation event last year was that people use it as a start/end point when walking or cycling via the canal. Butler’s Wharf (the coffee shop) does good business from them. It’s also a small P&R site for the locals.

Kite159 · 11 Aug 2026

Zomboid said:
Short faring maybe?

Especially as Northern runs pairs of 331s on selected services, popular for those who think correct payment is optional aiming for the front unit hoping there isn't a second member of staff doing tickets.

Anyhow, as for new stations, as long as the business cases work and there is capacity to stop at extra stations (so not a case of closing Cottingley to replace it with the White Rose Business Park forcing locals to walk a lot further)

Tio Terry · 11 Aug 2026

It needs to be a combined approach.

Understandably, the "Combined Authority" will have aims to satisfy their Tax Payers, but this may well clash with other similar Authorities who want to run more services on a particular lines, so GBR will need to adjudicate in such circumstances - only GBR will know the capacity of the line from end to end.

Also, it's unlikely that such Authorities will have the knowledge necessary to undertake the kind of detailed Engineering Analysis needed to progress any such Projects.

Zomboid · 11 Aug 2026

zwk500 said:
This is *precisely* what currently happens. Just with 'commissioned' rather than 'employed'. It's why you end up with 3 layers of business case.

Buying it in is what I meant by "employ", it'd be daft for most local authorities to have such expertise on their payroll.

Should 'Combined Authorities' be allowed to build stations on the UK rail network ?

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Rewiring the State – Cabinet Statement​

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Rewiring the State – Cabinet Statement