DarloRich
Veteran Member
Follow the correct process and close them. Don't invent a back door method. No one is going to care. Most of these stations are pointless.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
IBM (Halt) Closure & Possible Re-opening
- Thread starter Esker-pades
- Start date
- Status
Follow the correct process and close them. Don't invent a back door method. No one is going to care. Most of these stations are pointless.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Considering I was thinking along similar lines you may be able to explain how we are being "naive" ?
I would suggest that evidence of this is required, and even then an explanation of why the the formal closure procedure has not been invoked is still required.
Altnabreac
Established Member
The last station closure in Scotland was Balloch Pier in 1986. Transport Scotland and Scottish Government are hardly in the business of rushing to close down little used halts even when there is a reasonable business case to do so.
It seems to me unlikely that the first station to close in Scotland will be one where several hundred new houses are planned. Kildonan, Lochluichart, Beasdale, Barry Links, Scotscalder and Culrain would all be well ahead of it in any theoretical queue.
But while the site is a demolished factory with no possible reason for legitimate visitors it doesn't seem unreasonable to withdraw calls until the development is underway. Much better that than to formally close the station and have to try and raise funds to reopen it later.
It sets no precedent at all. It's not a case of a TOC "not liking" a station, it's a station which, sadly, has no purpose.
I'm not sure why you've made the leap from being annoyed about its closure to being glibly insulting to numerous posters who happen to not agree with the fuss, but I for one certainly have no rose-tinted idea that it'll re-open in the forseeable future. If I did I wouldn't have posted this earlier:
The place has been for sale / redevelopment for years. Perhaps one day it might happen. It it does, re-instating a stop there would be trivial. And no, sorry, that is not naive.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
OK - there seems to be some idea that the station will simply stop having trains call there until such time as lots of lovely houses are built next door and people move in when, hey presto, the station reopens. That would be a lovely idea but lets be realistic. If the station is "mothballed" work wont be done on keeping the fabric of the station up to snuff. It will be allowed to deteriorate.
The station is in a cutting with lots of tress. They wont be cut back. Vegetation will encroach onto the platform. Roots and branches will start to break up the platform surface. allowing water to pool. Freeze/thaw will further damage the surface and begin to get into the structure. I don't know the construction style or standard of the platform so cant comment on how long that might take to start having an effect. It didn't look wooden which is a positive!
The platform will also get used to site cabinets, cabling and equipment to help run the railway. They will have to be moved when the station is reopened. ( although that might help get the strucutre maintained)
All of the information systems will be removed and will need replacing as will the shelter as that will be smashed up and set on fire in no time. The lights will also be smashed up if they are removed as will the DDO equipment. The platform furniture will be attacked and will all need replacing. Obviously the fencing will be damaged and unathorised access facilitated. How long before someone has a near miss ( or worse) in the area and the calls come to knock down the whole thing. How long before the site is being used for some kind of anti social behaviour ( it wont take 5 minutes become a graffiti gallery and a litter trap) such as drug taking? How long before the structures on that stretch of the line get sprayed up because people can easily get access? I doubt very much any form of security or monitoring will take place.
How long before the platform coping stones get taken off or part of the platform cut back for some operational or engineering reason? Also what happens if after mothballing the station also have to be brought up to some modern accessibility standard?
All these things can be overcome but cost money and the more money it costs the less likely a reopening. That then leads to the question: at what point does mothballed become closed.
The station will not be preserved in aspic. It will deteriorate and require rectification. That costs money.
I doubt it will ever reopen. Why cant we just be honest and shut the thing?
As for the precedent - you may be more trusting than me. I am ALWAYS suspicious of efforts to circumvent a defined process and the potential for that to be used more widely. I can only draw on my own experiences of trying to reassert process once the genie is out of the bottle!
Thank you. Very interesting 
There's no plans for works at the station (you talk of these equipment cabinets and cabling appearing on the platform).
There is no CIS or DOO equipment. It's a single platform with some seats, lights and a shelter. Hardly crazy amounts of money to reinstate if vandalised. I highly doubt Transport Scotland would allow the franchise to allow it to fall into the abyss as you expect it to.
Which locals are you expecting to trash the place? There's nothing near it. Trains will still run through the station all day every day.
There is no CIS or DOO equipment. It's a single platform with some seats, lights and a shelter. Hardly crazy amounts of money to reinstate if vandalised. I highly doubt Transport Scotland would allow the franchise to allow it to fall into the abyss as you expect it to.
Which locals are you expecting to trash the place? There's nothing near it. Trains will still run through the station all day every day.
I recommend anyone curious about the station and its facilities take a look at Felix's photographs of it: https://felixunstructured.weebly.com/lusblog/ibm-halt-and-a-bonus
Yes they will, they're next to a running line which will still be maintained.
It's a decent platform - better than at many busy stations.
What cabling and equipment? The line is already electrified, and the platform already has some cabinets on it (what they are, I don't know. Signalling perhaps. I'm struggling to think what new things would appear at a disused station though.
There are none. All there is is a Scotrail Smartcard reader. I'd be surprised if they bothered to remove it. If/when it breaks, it won't get fixed - but who'd know it was broken?
Of course no form of security or monitoring will happen - it doesn't right now, it's a typical unstaffed station! If any of those things were likely to happen they'd have already happened. It's an unused station in the middle of nowhere. Where are the drug users and graffiti artists going to come from?
Now you're really scraping! The line is not about to get some out of gauge new trains requiring the platform to be cut back.
I don't think anyone's suggested it would be preserved. However, neither do any of us know that it won't receive a degree of minimal maintenance!
I think we've shown in the thread that none of us know what the process is, and who defines it!
I still remain confused about why keeping a superficial service would be any better than none.
Yes they will, they're next to a running line which will still be maintained.
It's a decent platform - better than at many busy stations.
What cabling and equipment? The line is already electrified, and the platform already has some cabinets on it (what they are, I don't know. Signalling perhaps. I'm struggling to think what new things would appear at a disused station though.
There are none. All there is is a Scotrail Smartcard reader. I'd be surprised if they bothered to remove it. If/when it breaks, it won't get fixed - but who'd know it was broken?
Of course no form of security or monitoring will happen - it doesn't right now, it's a typical unstaffed station! If any of those things were likely to happen they'd have already happened. It's an unused station in the middle of nowhere. Where are the drug users and graffiti artists going to come from?
Now you're really scraping! The line is not about to get some out of gauge new trains requiring the platform to be cut back.
I don't think anyone's suggested it would be preserved. However, neither do any of us know that it won't receive a degree of minimal maintenance!
I think we've shown in the thread that none of us know what the process is, and who defines it!
I still remain confused about why keeping a superficial service would be any better than none.
Esker-pades
Established Member
The same ones who leave litter all around the path from the station to the A78. The same ones who the police have complained about trespassing on the site. The same ones who seem to be able to gain access to every part of the railway to draw their awful graffiti "tag".
DarloRich
Veteran Member
it wouldn't. Just close it properly.
As for the rest of the post - you are welcome to your views. I think they are naive but your are welcome to disagree with me. Time will tell.
And that's different from now, how?
Esker-pades
Established Member
Despite RealTimeTrains showing IBM as a non-passenger call in the Glasgow direction and National Rail Enquires' journey planner telling people who want to go from IBM to Glasgow to travel via Wemyss Bay, trains still appear to call there as normal. I was at the station in time for the 12:06 service, which stopped. I made sure to be outside the station, away from the driver's line of sight so that I wouldn't mess up the experiment by making a non-passenger stop become a passenger one. However, the driver released the doors, so I boarded.
I don't know why RTT and NRE both seem to think that Glasgow-bound services don't stop at IBM. My observations today suggest otherwise.
I don't know why RTT and NRE both seem to think that Glasgow-bound services don't stop at IBM. My observations today suggest otherwise.
Esker-pades
Established Member
Nobody will repair it. The station will fall into disrepair and will therefore cost a lot more money to re-open when/if the area nearby is re-developed. @DarloRich explains this a lot better than me.
Esker-pades
Established Member
Disused structured becomes a magnate for people to have their merry way with it, including trashing it. That's a thing that happens.
I'd see your point if IBM was at the end of a branch line, being removed from the operational railway without 2tph passing through seven days a week.
I can't see these "locals" trashing the station as comprehensively as you believe they will do, given it's basically a tarmac platform and some seats.
I can't see these "locals" trashing the station as comprehensively as you believe they will do, given it's basically a tarmac platform and some seats.
But you're probably the only person who used it today, yet it's not trashed. I don't understand what will suddenly change.
Esker-pades
Established Member
And a shelter, and a nice antique-looking clock, fences, debris onto track, the nearby bridge.
Smethwickian
Member
I am as anti-closure as the next rail user and enthusiast. But it is patently obvious that this station had a very specific potential usage which no longer exists. It is in the midst of a desolate, demolished wasteland which will only become increasingly hazardous to access unless and until any redevelopment occurs. There being no reasonable reason to board or alight there other than purely for the sake of it, it is no wonder the police and safety advice would be to temporarily cease calls by trains.
Regardless of any minimal maintenance that may prevent bits of the station falling onto the track, it will inevitably require substantial refurbishment anyway, for any future public use, because expectations about even the most basic access, passenger information and other aspects will be higher than presently provided.
Regardless of any minimal maintenance that may prevent bits of the station falling onto the track, it will inevitably require substantial refurbishment anyway, for any future public use, because expectations about even the most basic access, passenger information and other aspects will be higher than presently provided.
Esker-pades
Established Member
I didn't (or certainly didn't mean to) suggest that there would be a sudden wave. That is what I predict will happen over time (months-years) of closure.
This has side-tracked this thread for too long now, sorry.
Esker-pades
Established Member
The biggest problems that most commenters have is the apparent lack of formal closure procedure. I'm not saying the station shouldn't be closed (certainly to rail traffic). I have spent time arguing either that a token rail replacement taxi should be provided (at a stupid time of day) so that it is easier to re-open the station when re-development occurs. Or that a formal closure procedure is followed (and if not, why it doesn't have to be followed in this case).
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
How does a taxi at 4am make the station more likely to be reopened?
Esker-pades
Established Member
Because the station was never "shut", just served by a temporary road replacement service. Rather than having nothing serving it and having to start from scratch. I'm not convinced that a station with no rail service and no alternative can just be re-opened as easily as one which already has some level of service.
pdeaves
Established Member
(DarloRich said lots of stuff)
If a station is 'mothballed', it's much the same situation as where there is 'passive provision' for something. You take account of its presence. You don't put stuff in places that would be in the way. You treat the site as if it's got a station (or whatever else there is provision for) already there. You don't go mucking about with stations without going through the standard industry 'network change' and 'station change' processes. Note that NC and SC are totally unrelated to the decision as to whether a train will stop or not.
Network Rail will not ruin a 'mothballed' station any more than any other 'live' station. If it's closed then they will have cart blanche to dig it up. Proper closure will be worse in the future if it's needed again.
If a station is 'mothballed', it's much the same situation as where there is 'passive provision' for something. You take account of its presence. You don't put stuff in places that would be in the way. You treat the site as if it's got a station (or whatever else there is provision for) already there. You don't go mucking about with stations without going through the standard industry 'network change' and 'station change' processes. Note that NC and SC are totally unrelated to the decision as to whether a train will stop or not.
Network Rail will not ruin a 'mothballed' station any more than any other 'live' station. If it's closed then they will have cart blanche to dig it up. Proper closure will be worse in the future if it's needed again.
moggie
Member
I guess one has to ask what would be the point of spending time and money taking the station through a formal closure process. Who could reasonably object? The public? Not really, there is no public right of access therefore any individual private petition would be ruled inadmissible. Employees? There are none. Private companies - ditto. The local authority? Maybe so. Seems to me that but simply withdrawing the train service they preserve the legal establishment of the station and if in future the site is developed for housing the local authority with the agreement of NR / TOC obtain a planning obligation that a sum of money is set aside by the developer to refurbish the station as part of the transfer of the public areas of the land (highway) to local authority control. No cost to the public purse.
If none of that happens it will be eventually for NR to seek formal closure before it becomes a hazard to passing trains or spend funds making the structure safe.
If none of that happens it will be eventually for NR to seek formal closure before it becomes a hazard to passing trains or spend funds making the structure safe.
Because legislation requires that you have to.
Did we ever establish if IBM is even subject to the normal station closing procedure? Isn't the reason it's hard to close stations due to the various Acts of Parliament that opened the lines in the first place? In which case a station is a station built after the fact even subject to such requirements?
Its not an "experimental" station so therefore not subject to the Speller amendment so I believe that the normal closure procedure should still apply. Only Scotrail/Transport Scotland can answer the question as to why as to why the formal closure procedure has not been invoked.
- Status