Bordesley railway station proposed closure

[TransportHub]

That would make some sense. In that case, the immediate issue would be, making sure that the design of the chords allows for passive provision for a new station. (Which probably means, deciding now where the station would be if it's later decided to actually build it).

The best option is to ensure the next phase of the Eastside tram extension is funded and built, this would directly serve the football stadium and more of Digbeth. All while not extracting any capacity from the heavy rail services, and almost certainly with a better frequency than WMT ever could.

 

[zwk500]

That would make some sense. In that case, the immediate issue would be, making sure that the design of the chords allows for passive provision for a new station. (Which probably means, deciding now where the station would be if it's later decided to actually build it).

But then consider that 1. There will be a tram line serving the area and 2. The additional stop would create issues for services going outside the area of capacity and performance and ask yourself if thats really the right solution for the residents of the area and the railway network generally.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

But then consider that 1. There will be a tram line serving the area and 2. The additional stop would create issues for services going outside the area of capacity and performance and ask yourself if thats really the right solution for the residents of the area and the railway network generally.

Looking at the map, the Eastside Tram extension doesn't actually go that near Bordesley station. It also doesn't have a particularly good rail interchange at Moor Street. It does have a reasonable interchange at New Street but only after going round the houses quite a bit. So I can't see it being that useful other than for journeys where the destination is the city centre. The train would serve a very different market. That's all fine with the current state of development of the area but not much good if the Bordesley area does get developed properly in the future.

I'm also not convinced that an additional stop placed where I've suggested it just beyond the chords would create issues for existing services: I believe that route currently has 4 local tph plus 1-2tph to Marylebone - so the frequencies aren't great, and the small number of Marylebone trains are the only fast-ish ones that would want a clear run without local trains stopping in their way. If there were plans for massive frequency increases then I could see the problem, but there aren't.

 

[TransportHub]

Looking at the map, the Eastside Tram extension doesn't actually go that near Bordesley station. It also doesn't have a particularly good rail interchange at Moor Street. It does have a reasonable interchange at New Street but only after going round the houses quite a bit. So I can't see it being that useful other than for journeys where the destination is the city centre. The train would serve a very different market. That's all fine with the current state of development of the area but not much good if the Bordesley area does get developed properly in the future.

I'm also not convinced that an additional stop placed where I've suggested it just beyond the chords would create issues for existing services: I believe that route currently has 4 local tph plus 1-2tph to Marylebone - so the frequencies aren't great, and the small number of Marylebone trains are the only fast-ish ones that would want a clear run without local trains stopping in their way. If there were plans for massive frequency increases then I could see the problem, but there aren't.

That's true for phase one, there is a further phase that brings it much closer to the station and right outside the football stadium. This second phase must (in my opinion) be open before Bordesley closes

 

[Palmerston]

I'm also not convinced that an additional stop placed where I've suggested it just beyond the chords would create issues for existing services

Would any new station be either very close to Moor Street or Small Heath, depending on which side you're referring to?

 

[thenorthern]

I must admit Bordesley station is badly named as something like St Andrews Stadium would be a better name to describe the area it serves. It's not like Witton or other stations which are closest to a football ground, Bordesley serves St Andrews and nothing else.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

From posts above it sounds like the station would have to be totally demolished to make room for the chords. So it would be a question of building a brand new station at some future time if development in the area made it worthwhile. As that development isn't certain, it probably isn't worth committing to spend several million on a new station speculatively.

The development in the area has already happened. Probably nigh on 50% of the Digbeth area has been demolished and rebuilt within the past 7-10 years. Must be 10'000 new apartments within a square mile. There is more to come too.

It sits in an area that is close enough to walk to say the Bullring area, but far enough that trams/buses/trains would be used frequently by most living there.

It would probably be wise to consider whether a new station would be feasible and plan that in as part of it rather than a later addition.

 

[centraluser]

Whilst I can't confirm the actual date, I can confirm with authority that it has been for some years now (in excess of 20).

The current practice of stopping some long distance Chiltern Railways services at Bordesley, on match days, was seen as a trial and started on 15 Feb 2025 for the game against Charlton.

Consequentially, the Statutory Notice is displayed at a number of stations operated by Chiltern where it wouldn’t previously have been necessary.

 

[nw1]

I would agree that we should stop kicking the can down the road with "parliamentary" stations. Not necessarily close them all but some such as Polesworth, Barlaston and Wedgwood it's now been more than 20 years since the West Coast Upgrade happened. Realisticaly the government and the TOCs need to stop kicking the can down the road and decide what to do with these stations.

I don't know what the population of Barlaston and Wedgwood is but if it's reasonable, I can see that a stopper along this route (as always existed well beyond Beeching) would have potential.

More generally, in theory development could happen round any of these "dormant" stations so that alone is reason to keep them open, even with just a minimal service.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

More generally, in theory development could happen round any of these "dormant" stations so that alone is reason to keep them open, even with just a minimal service.

The problem with this argument is that all sorts of things could in theory happen. In theory the sun could explode tonight, so should we cancel all trains from start of service tomorrow, just in case?

 

[The exile]

The problem with this argument is that all sorts of things could in theory happen. In theory the sun could explode tonight, so should we cancel all trains from start of service tomorrow, just in case?

There are degrees of likelihood though. Development around IBM and BS Redcar is almost certain; at Polesworth or Pilning quite possible; at Altnabreac or Berney Arms it’s not going to happen (not that I’m advocating closing either). Bordesley is a rare case where closure is proposed because of positive railway development. The emphasis should be on ensuring that alternatives are provided which represent an improvement on the current situation.

 

[zwk500]

I don't know what the population of Barlaston and Wedgwood is but if it's reasonable,

its not, hence the station not reopening.

I can see that a stopper along this route (as always existed well beyond Beeching) would have potential.

theres currently a stopper on this route serving Stone (think it still goes on to Crewe?)

More generally, in theory development could happen round any of these "dormant" stations so that alone is reason to keep them open, even with just a minimal service.

Wedgwood and Barlaston are very close together and would not make sense to keep open as they are. The option is either to close one without replacement, close one and relocate it away from the other, or close both and build a new station in the middle.

My gut feeling is that the most viable answer would be to keep Barlaston, develop around the station, close Wedgewood and build a new station on the southern edge of Stoke.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Feb 2026 ==

The emphasis should be on ensuring that alternatives are provided which represent an improvement on the current situation.

The future tram line will provide far better connectivity for the area than any mainline station ever could, and not having a mainline station improves the options for everybody else who is on the mainline.

Once the tram line is open, theres really no reason to keep the station (especially as BCFC are planning to move anyway)

 

[150219]

The current practice of stopping some long distance Chiltern Railways services at Bordesley, on match days, was seen as a trial and started on 15 Feb 2025 for the game against Charlton.

Consequentially, the Statutory Notice is displayed at a number of stations operated by Chiltern where it wouldn’t previously have been necessary.

What a peculiar distinction. Given that Bordesley stops have been made on Chiltern services for a long time, why a trial dated for one year ago should made a difference appears particularly bureaucratic. But hey, it's the railway!

 

[thenorthern]

I don't know what the population of Barlaston and Wedgwood is but if it's reasonable, I can see that a stopper along this route (as always existed well beyond Beeching) would have potential.

More generally, in theory development could happen round any of these "dormant" stations so that alone is reason to keep them open, even with just a minimal service.

Barlaston has a population of about 3,000. The privatised London Northwestern was supposed to close Wedgwood and reopen Barlaston during the term of their franchise which of course started in 2017 and finished earlier this month. Like a lot of things however that never got done.

I can't see Wedgwood ever reopening. Times have changed a lot since it opened in 1940. Car use has rocketed and the rail lines in Stoke-on-Trent are now limited to one main station and a couple of small suburban halts dotted around the suburbs. Also the line Wedgwood is on was a relatively local line when the station opened it's now a very busy line.

As I say it would be nice if the DfT and TOCs stopped kicking the can down the road and finally decided either to reopen the stations or close them permanently.

 

[GoldenGripper]

If anyone wants to see a list of station closures from the Office of Rail and Road since the Railways Act 2005 here is a link.

Closures | Office of Rail and Road

Our role and responsibilities in the ratification of the closure of railway passenger services, stations and passenger networks.

www.orr.gov.uk

Looking at other stations that have closed in the last full year before the 2003 upgrade Etruria was used by 6,566 passengers while Norton Bridge was used by 4,793 passengers which is a small fraction of Bordesley's 29,062, meaning I think it would be much harder to justify closure compared to other recent closures.

But Norton Bridge didn't have any trains calling. All these passengers had been using the replacement bus service between Stafford and Stoke. The reason it continued beyond Stone was that it was also the replacement bus for Barlaston. Since Norton Bridge closed the bus has just run between Stoke and Stone.

 

[thenorthern]

But Norton Bridge didn't have any trains calling. All these passengers had been using the replacement bus service between Stafford and Stoke. The reason it continued beyond Stone was that it was also the replacement bus for Barlaston. Since Norton Bridge closed the bus has just run between Stoke and Stone.

The figures are from 2003 which was the last full year there was a rail service. I can't remember the exact timetable but it wasn't hourly, it may have been every 2 hours.

 

[Kite159]

But Norton Bridge didn't have any trains calling. All these passengers had been using the replacement bus service between Stafford and Stoke. The reason it continued beyond Stone was that it was also the replacement bus for Barlaston. Since Norton Bridge closed the bus has just run between Stoke and Stone.

You are aware that the replacement bus is in fact a regular scheduled service, the D&G route 100 (https://bustimes.org/services/100-hanley-stone) which just happens to accept rail tickets to Barlaston & Wedgwood. Out of the two stations, Barlaston probably is the bigger business case, at least in terms of the platforms. I would imagine if Wedgwood ever saw use again, the wooden platforms would need rebuilding. The biggest issue is probably the lack of car parking available for the station to act as a railhead for the surrounding area.

As for the service frequency, wasn't it an infrequent local stopper using a 153?

(Although I fear this has probably gone off-topic about Bordesley and it getting the axe)

 

[nw1]

The timetable I do remember was from the 80s when it was a two-hourly service (hourly in the peaks) operated by 304s.

Mostly Stafford-Manchester, an extension of an hourly Stoke-Manchester service, but a few worked all the way from Birmingham around the peaks.

Sounds like the best plan could be to reopen Barlaston and forget Wedgwood? Presumably the latter mostly served the pottery works which (IIRC) have now gone?

In the same area Etruria is another interesting one, that got IIRC 2tph in the 80s (the aforementioned hourly 304 and the Crewe-Derby DMU). Presumably few people used it despite its regular service? Another stop mostly intended for local works, IIRC.

 

[thenorthern]

When was Bordesley last regularly served other than football specials? Wikipedia mentions 2007 but I don't know if that is true.

Looking at the 2003 timetable, I noticed that there were 3 early morning trains towards Moor Street and one early evening train from Moor Street to Shirley.

You are aware that the replacement bus is in fact a regular scheduled service, the D&G route 100 (https://bustimes.org/services/100-hanley-stone) which just happens to accept rail tickets to Barlaston & Wedgwood. Out of the two stations, Barlaston probably is the bigger business case, at least in terms of the platforms. I would imagine if Wedgwood ever saw use again, the wooden platforms would need rebuilding. The biggest issue is probably the lack of car parking available for the station to act as a railhead for the surrounding area.

As for the service frequency, wasn't it an infrequent local stopper using a 153?

(Although I fear this has probably gone off-topic about Bordesley and it getting the axe)

It was normally a 153 but I do remember a 156 operating it as well.

 

[Sprinter107]

Yes, it was around 2007, that would be about right, The one evening service called and there was just one regular passenger by then. A bloke with a pushbike who got off at Shirley. It was rare to see anyone else. When the new timetable came out, and that train no longer called, he was waiting on the platform and I recall him raising his arms in disbelief as the train approached, and he realised it wasn't stopping.

 

[thenorthern]

Looking at the timetable from 1982 it was served hourly.

Just a question I know the entrance to the station is from the underpass underneath the station which by the looks of it is permanently lit. Obviously the gate to the station is locked except when the blues are playing or for the saturdays only train. Who unlocks the gate? Do West Midlands Railway sent someone to the station every Saturday to unlock the gate for that short period of time?

 

[Sprinter107]

Looking at the timetable from 1982 it was served hourly.

Just a question I know the entrance to the station is from the underpass underneath the station which by the looks of it is permanently lit. Obviously the gate to the station is locked except when the blues are playing or for the saturdays only train. Who unlocks the gate? Do West Midlands Railway sent someone to the station every Saturday to unlock the gate for that short period of time?

Yes, somebody is sent to open the station, and then lock it back up again for another week. Im not sure who does that. That's not one of my trains, so I don't happen to notice who's there.

 

[Mikey C]

Would I be right in assuming that most football related passengers using Bordesley are using it from the suburbs, rather than just going from the centre of Birmingham?

I assume they'll have to use Small Heath instead?

 

[The exile]

Would I be right in assuming that most football related passengers using Bordesley are using it from the suburbs, rather than just going from the centre of Birmingham?

I assume they'll have to use Small Heath instead?

Not much further to walk into Moor Street, I’d have thought.

 

[Kite159]

Not much further to walk into Moor Street, I’d have thought.

But using Moor Street means they have to buy tickets

 

[Cross City]

I'd reckon most people use it are coming from the suburbs, mostly from the Solihull/Shirley direction but there is a healthy amount of fans on the other side of the Snow Hill lines too so the trains are always busy heading from town before the game and towards town afterwards anyway.

The club lay on free shuttle busses to the back of New St Station now too and that takes some of the strain off the trains.

I'd still say most people who do go back into the city centre just walk however, it's 20-25 minutes.

 

[Haywain]

Would I be right in assuming that most football related passengers using Bordesley are using it from the suburbs, rather than just going from the centre of Birmingham?

I've used it several times to get to and from Snow Hill.

 

[6Gman]

I'm also in the "do something" camp. For the majority of the stations we're talking about, closure would have pretty much zero negative impact, but would save money and simplify training and driver routes. There are a handful which I would save for future potential reopening - mostly the recently-mothballed ones like IBM - but otherwise what's the point in keeping a one-train-in-one-direction-only service like Polesworth?

Sort the list of stations into "close immediately", "introduce a regular service again", or "mothball for potential future use" piles, then just get on with it. If usage doesn't improve at the stations in the middle pile, then close them.

Having used Polesworth I'd place it in the "introduce a regular service again" category by sorting out the access issues.

 

[trundlewagon]

Would I be right in assuming that most football related passengers using Bordesley are using it from the suburbs, rather than just going from the centre of Birmingham?

Yes because for the past 18 months or so, only trains towards Birmingham have stopped pre-match and away from Birmingham post-match. The club have been running shuttle buses from the city centre to the ground instead for anyone who doesn't fancy the walk.

 

[Mikey C]

Yes because for the past 18 months or so, only trains towards Birmingham have stopped pre-match and away from Birmingham post-match. The club have been running shuttle buses from the city centre to the ground instead for anyone who doesn't fancy the walk.

As an away fan, I've always walked from the centre to St Andrews.

South Bermondsey (for visiting Millwall FC) has been mentioned as a similar station. Apart from having a much better frequency, it's also a key part of how away fans are brought to and from the ground. The last thing the police want is away fans, after a hostile game, walking with the home fans outside the ground...