Housing Development driven reopening suggestions

[Tobbes]

This seems to me to be "how can the economy fit around the way that enthusiasts want the railway to expand", rather than "how can the railway fit around the needs of the economy".

I've no problem with changing the railway to reflect changing demands - I'd much rather that we invested in lines to "new towns" where large number of people live, rather than only focussing on rural villages that lost their station in the 1960s - but this thread sounds like an excuse to make some ancient lines viable (some people feel that building tens of thousands of new houses is a price worth paying if it justifies their favourite old line re-opening)

Actually, it's in response to a challenge I had from someone in MHCLG, and subsequently, this IEA competition. Fear not, this proposal has no chance of winning because it is full of state intervention that the IEA will hate, but it's an interesting thought challenge for me. What it isn't is "let's undo Beeching for the sake of it", but if we're serious about significantly increasing housing supply, it will be much easier to do it through new towns than in agglomeration on existing settlements.

I think this is less about "growth" and more about "bringing back old railways by whatever means necessary

No, not at all. The corridors I selected at the beginning were selected in areas of high employment and housing demand, lots of green space, and where former railways had run. The key to the former railways bit is that it means that someone has surveyed the topography and found it suitable for a railway, providing a useful shortcut as a first cut on whether a proposal is credible.

Politicians like to blame immigration for the destruction of the green belt etc, but one of the main reasons we need so many additional homes is pensioners. We've around ten million people over the age of 65 (over ten thousand people in the UK are over one hundred) - many of these people still live in the family home that they have lived in for decades

Spot on - the average household size has fallen to 2.4 people, meaning that me need more houses. And strictly, only some (disreputable) politicians!

 

[xotGD]

Ratcliffe power station is due to close in the next few years. You could build a load of househouses on the site, which would have East Midlands Parkway on their doorstep.

 

[Tobbes]

Thanks very much, @xotGD

 

[61653 HTAFC]

A slight variation on the question is Ravensthorpe: a station with poor usage on a congested route that somehow gained an extra tph at the last timetable change despite there being nothing there. If the wasteground surrounding the station ever had housing built on it (A radical suggestion would be some social housing perhaps, rather than yet more executive 4-bedroom "Barratt Boxes") it might go someway to justify the extra service and the fact that the station survived when so many were axed in the 1960s.

 

[B&I]

That is a blatant contradiction. Many of the towns are run down because they have lost their reason to exist (closed mines, lost industry, etc), ergo nobody is going to want to move to them so nobody is going to build large housing developments.

Brilliant idea. Let's flatten what remains of the north of England and everyone can live in tents in a field near Hemel Hempstead. Did you read the first half of my post ?

 

[B&I]

Without growth you stagnate? And how do you reduce the population, go all China and limit the amount of kids people have?

On a worldwide scale, perhaps. The premise of this thread ignores a number of issues which might better solve the housing crisis eg better distribution of economic activity and population through the country, changing work patterns and workplaces to reduce commuting volumes, addressing vacant and under-occupied housing, better development of brownfield land (in particular the prairies of undeveloped space which dominate much of inner city Britain). However, all of these are matters largely remote from issues of railway development.

 

[B&I]

This seems to me to be "how can the economy fit around the way that enthusiasts want the railway to expand", rather than "how can the railway fit around the needs of the economy".

I've no problem with changing the railway to reflect changing demands - I'd much rather that we invested in lines to "new towns" where large number of people live, rather than only focussing on rural villages that lost their station in the 1960s - but this thread sounds like an excuse to make some ancient lines viable (some people feel that building tens of thousands of new houses is a price worth paying if it justifies their favourite old line re-opening)



I think this is less about "growth" and more about "bringing back old railways by whatever means necessary

But what if the best place to build new housing is alongside the formation of an old railway ? Would your oft-stated phobia about re-opening anything cause you to oppose that ?

 

[B&I]

@B&I thanks, interesting, and I'm grateful for a non-SE example. I know nothing about the housing market in the NW, how much unmet demand exists?

Following the approach of the last couple of governments of creating mini-Londons, rather than promoting any proper regional development, the best place to build in the north west is anywhere linkable to central Manchester. On similar lines, I would suggest re-opening / returning to the national network Bury to Accrington, Bolton to Middleton Junction, and Ditton to Altrincham, though all these routes would now be physically difficult to restore.

 

[gg1]

Redditch is set to grow exponentially under plans to build 10,000s of new homes in the next decade, Redditch station is located in the far North of the (geographically) large town, and the old line to Alcester is already built-up solidly for a good 5 miles down to Studley.

I'd argue that as the area builds up even more, the case for reopening the line at least as far as Studley, with three new stations; Oakenshaw, Woodrow (for the Redditch Hospital) and Studley Parkway (which would draw in drivers from Alcester/Evesham/the wider Worces/Warks border country) is one of the best cases in the country.

You'd have to flatten an awful lot of houses to achieve that.

The only rail related development around Redditch I can see happening is a new 'Redditch North' station between the existing station and Alvechurch. There's already a housing development being built on a greenfield site between the A441 and the railway line, further housing developments in that area would make a new station a viable option.

 

[Tobbes]

@Bald Rick, back in 2012 you very helpfully costed viaducts thus: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/cost-of-viaducts.57905/#post-928422 . Is (inflation adujsted) this still a decent rule of thumb? And would it apply to a new Brackley viaduct - presumably Medway is the best recent similar example?

Many thanks!

 

[LLivery]

The Nene Valley I'd say. Big growth in Northampton, Wellingborough and Peterborough, paralleling the busy A45. It may mirror the EWR in a way, however.

 

[nickswift99]

Ratcliffe power station is due to close in the next few years. You could build a load of househouses on the site, which would have East Midlands Parkway on their doorstep.

Ratcliffe abstracts lots of water from the Soar. When it shuts, the land might return to a significant flood plain. Housing might not be such a great idea.

 

[snowball]

Is (inflation adujsted) this still a decent rule of thumb?

Remember construction industry inflation is always higher than general inflation.

 

[The Ham]

Even where developers want to link into rail they often find that the costs in doing so are too high for them.

What should happen is that government should underwrite some projects where the building of a new development (or a series of developments) would open up a lot of new houses as part of a new village/town.

Such developments are likely to be more rural and so impact fewer people than trying to expand existing towns.

 

[Tobbes]

Even where developers want to link into rail they often find that the costs in doing so are too high for them.

What should happen is that government should underwrite some projects where the building of a new development (or a series of developments) would open up a lot of new houses as part of a new village/town.

Such developments are likely to be more rural and so impact fewer people than trying to expand existing towns.

This is rougly what I'm proposing - it won't win the IEA prize, as they won't like it, but it should make the case to senior politicians.

 

[Mark24]

@Bald Rick, back in 2012 you very helpfully costed viaducts thus: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/cost-of-viaducts.57905/#post-928422 . Is (inflation adujsted) this still a decent rule of thumb? And would it apply to a new Brackley viaduct - presumably Medway is the best recent similar example?

Many thanks!

I have often wondered if an extention line from Aylesbury Parkway to a new Parkway Station to the south of Brackley could be cost effective? With a view to providing commuter traffic from Brackley and Buckingham into London Marylebone. Both are expanding towns with traffic congestion no nearby rail connections.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

I have often wondered if an extention line from Aylesbury Parkway to a new Parkway Station to the south of Brackley could be cost effective? With a view to providing commuter traffic from Brackley and Buckingham into London Marylebone. Both are expanding towns with traffic congestion no nearby rail connections.

Would HS2 affect the cost considering it passes close to the old route of the GCML. I would also extend the line to Brackley Central but has HS2 stopped that from happening. Should passive provision be made in case its extended (or should it be) extended to Daventry/Rugby via Woodford Halse.

Why not reopen the Witney Branch Line with stops at South Leigh and Eynsham (possibly even a new station at Yarnton as well). Both areas are set for new houses. Cowley branch line will be reopened in the new couple of years as well.

I think these lines should reopen (mainly all freight lines):

• Burton-on-Trent to Leicester
• Buxton to Matlock (linking Manchester with Derby)
• Shirebrook to Ollerton
• Toton (HS2) to Kirkby
• Wakefield to Barnsley via Royston
• Stratford-Honeybourne
• Ironbridge-Shifnal-Wolverhampton
• Middlewich Line
• Guildford-Horsham
• Horsham-Shoreham
• Northampton-Wellingborough
• Leamington Spa-Rugby-Market Harborough

 

[Ken H]

Redditch is set to grow exponentially under plans to build 10,000s of new homes in the next decade, Redditch station is located in the far North of the (geographically) large town, and the old line to Alcester is already built-up solidly for a good 5 miles down to Studley.

I'd argue that as the area builds up even more, the case for reopening the line at least as far as Studley, with three new stations; Oakenshaw, Woodrow (for the Redditch Hospital) and Studley Parkway (which would draw in drivers from Alcester/Evesham/the wider Worces/Warks border country) is one of the best cases in the country.

Most of the old railway is now the dual carriageway going south from Redditch centre.

 

[The Ham]

With some locations due to increase in size significantly, there's probably a good case for improvements to existing lines/station (re)openings.

For example, Basingstoke is supposedly getting an extra 850 homes per year for the next 50 years. That's going to broadly double the size of it to circa 200,000 people.

Having one central station doesn't really work well when it gets that big, so a new station on the WofE line near Oakley and a new station on the Reading line near Chineham would be a good start.

Likewise building Crossrail 2 which is likely to allow circa 4tph to run to/through Basingstoke wood bea big help.

The Western and Southern Approaches to Heathrow would provide better connectivity as well as increased service frequencies.

Electrification of the WofE line could allow the current Basingstoke stoppers to be extended to Salisbury. This would enable them to call at additional stations (such as near Oakley), increases the frequency of services on the WofE line, provide better connectivity to settlements either side of Basingstoke (freeing up road capacity to facilitate the development which is happening) and makes it more likely that DMU's could be cascaded away from the South East.

On a more out their opinion, reopen the West to North Chord at Frimley junction, paired with a new North to West (grade separated) cord to allow new services to run (at least) Basingstoke to Ascot. Creating new rail opportunities between the two lines, including providing a better interchange for Frimley/Camberley passengers wanting Waterloo (as well as heading to and through Woking) and providing a bypass during engineering works from Woking eastwards (could potentially also remove some freight movements through Woking).

 

[yorksrob]

A slight variation on the question is Ravensthorpe: a station with poor usage on a congested route that somehow gained an extra tph at the last timetable change despite there being nothing there. If the wasteground surrounding the station ever had housing built on it (A radical suggestion would be some social housing perhaps, rather than yet more executive 4-bedroom "Barratt Boxes") it might go someway to justify the extra service and the fact that the station survived when so many were axed in the 1960s.

Yes, how does Ravensthorpe get two trains per hour, when much busier Normanton, which is also on a far less busier line, struggles on with one.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

With some locations due to increase in size significantly, there's probably a good case for improvements to existing lines/station (re)openings.

For example, Basingstoke is supposedly getting an extra 850 homes per year for the next 50 years. That's going to broadly double the size of it to circa 200,000 people.

Having one central station doesn't really work well when it gets that big, so a new station on the WofE line near Oakley and a new station on the Reading line near Chineham would be a good start.

Likewise building Crossrail 2 which is likely to allow circa 4tph to run to/through Basingstoke wood bea big help.

The Western and Southern Approaches to Heathrow would provide better connectivity as well as increased service frequencies.

Electrification of the WofE line could allow the current Basingstoke stoppers to be extended to Salisbury. This would enable them to call at additional stations (such as near Oakley), increases the frequency of services on the WofE line, provide better connectivity to settlements either side of Basingstoke (freeing up road capacity to facilitate the development which is happening) and makes it more likely that DMU's could be cascaded away from the South East.

On a more out their opinion, reopen the West to North Chord at Frimley junction, paired with a new North to West (grade separated) cord to allow new services to run (at least) Basingstoke to Ascot. Creating new rail opportunities between the two lines, including providing a better interchange for Frimley/Camberley passengers wanting Waterloo (as well as heading to and through Woking) and providing a bypass during engineering works from Woking eastwards (could potentially also remove some freight movements through Woking).

How about re-doubling the WoE line between Salisbury and Pinhoe as well as electrification?

 

[tiptoptaff]

Bristol - Portishead and the Henbury loop. Both mentioned in the mooted Bristol Metro scheme, and both would be very busy. I envisage some sort of 1tph Portishead - Avonmouth via BTM, and one Portishead - Posrtishead loop via Severn Beach and Henbury Loop (in each direction, crossing at Severn Beach)

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Yes, how does Ravensthorpe get two trains per hour, when much busier Normanton, which is also on a far less busier line, struggles on with one.

To be fair, since the timetable change Ravensthorpe has reverted to 1tph. It is a station where there's plenty of brownfield land nearby which would boost usage if developed for housing.

I agree Normanton could do with a more frequent service though. Does it still get peak calls on some of the "fast" services?

 

[jon0844]

What about Meridian Water (near Angel Road)? The whole area was due to be redeveloped, mostly with housing, but has pretty much fallen flat on its face. The station is still being built, albeit as part of the STAR project. However, I assume the upgrade work was partly justified through this wonderful vision of a Docklands style regeneration, that hasn't or isn't yet happening.

This is in London too, where it's likely a lot easier to justify new stations or lines.

(There's also Lea Bridge station too)

 

[yorksrob]

To be fair, since the timetable change Ravensthorpe has reverted to 1tph. It is a station where there's plenty of brownfield land nearby which would boost usage if developed for housing.

I agree Normanton could do with a more frequent service though. Does it still get peak calls on some of the "fast" services?

It does - although at least one has been omitted since the December change. No substitute for regular half hourly though.

 

[leytongabriel]

Old industrial sites in the Lea Valley being used for housing are the spur for the STAR scheme with the station at Lea Bridge being reopened and Angel Rd being resited to Meridian Water. Now Waltham Forest council have started to focus on a new station at Ruckholt Rd to serve the Leyton Leaside developments as it's next rail infrastructure priority. I don't know about stations being 'easier to open' in London. It took many years of refusals and deferments to get Lea Bridge on the map again. The controversy is more about who the housing is for and how 'affordable' it is.

 

[jon0844]

As with most other developments, we soon know who they're intended for and affordable they won't be - bar a token few to tick a box (which invariably get sublet anyway).

But back to Meridian Water; have any of the new developments begun yet? It all went extremely quiet after such a big build up. The station is obviously a massive improvement over Angel Road and great for Tesco and Ikea though!

 

[daodao]

Ditton to Altrincham

It would now be virtually impossible to restore the line between Sinderland Crossing (about 1 mile east of the location pictured in my moniker) and Skelton Junction/Timperley (remember the latter is now Metrolink only). And to what purpose, other than providing a station for Lymm. The rest of the area is still essentially rural.

 

[billio]

Although this is not necessarily going to result in a new line, I would suggest building more housing in the area around Sherburn-in-Elmet and adjacent villages such as Monk Fryston, Church Fenton, Ulleskelf. The development of a new town in this area would provide additional housing for Leeds, York and other parts of West Yorkshire which would all be in a commutable distance.
This is an area within a few miles of the A1(M), M1 and M62, has an airport and is due to be blighted by HS2.

Although there are existing lines, stations and services for some places there is considerable scope to improve, extend and electrify the services that currently run. For example,
1. Placing additional platforms on the Leeds lines at Ulleskelf so there can be a reasonable service to Leeds and York.
2. Extending services from Sherburn though to Castleford to link the southern parts of West Yorkshire and South Yorkshire direct to York. This requires re-building of the second platform at Castleford.
3. Improve the service through Pontefract Baghill.
4. A new station at Monk Fryston.
5. Electrify Leeds-York, Leeds-Hull, Church Fenton to Gascoigne Wood.

A problem with developing these ideas is that the land is in North Yorkshire and the areas that benefit are in separate authorities, West Yorkshire and York, therefore no coordinated thinking which results in development in Leeds and York away from the railways.

 

[RichJF]

Cuckoo Line:

Eridge - Polegate

Hailsham rapidly expanding
Heathfield undergoing large developments
Horam seeing lots of flats going up
A22 southern end heavily congested with traffic in peak hours

Lots of commuters in this rural area drive to/from T Wells, Haywards Heath & Uckfield to get the trains to London.