Minsters Rail Campaign

[AndyF]

The Minsters Rail Campaign is aiming to re-open the line between Beverley (on the Hull to Scarborough line), and York. (The name is a reference to two great churches, York Minster and Beverley Minster). The line would serve Market Weighton, Pocklington and Stamford Bridge in East Yorkshire, basically following a route closed in the 1960's, although new alignments will be needed in various locations. I could not find a section or thread dealing with re-openings, so I posted this to invite comments and so that Campaign members can respond to any discussion.

 

[swt_passenger]

Hi @AndyF and welcome.

I think it’s come up a few times. As an example, back in the optimistic days of 2020 there was a thread in the speculation forum about a hypothetical ‘next 50 re-openings’. It includes a few mentions of the line via Market Weighton.

This link will get you to the thread, and you could search for the station name within the thread once you’re there:

Next 50 Bids for reopenings

NR have said previously that it doesn’t allow any extra services because there is nowhere for them to go towards London. Cue the “diversionary route“ card being played. Fair enough - but what do the Arundel chord proponents actually want to run, were there capacity?

www.railforums.co.uk

If ever you’re in a search box, you should see a dropdown menu allowing you to search either the whole site, all threads, a sub-forum, or an individual thread once you’re in one.

Hope this helps you navigate about.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

This is one of those lines that probably shouldn't have closed but having done so and lost key bits of route, not to mention lack of maintenance to any surviving earthworks, would now be horribly expensive to re-open.

It has sometimes been suggested/alleged that within the former North Eastern Region of BR local managers were in a virtual competition to see who could justify the most closures as a way of improving their standing with senior management, a bending with the wind as it were. Accordingly many traffic surveys were undertaken at particularly quiet times making closure much easier to justify even if the figures were clearly unrepresentative. Remember that campaign groups didn't really exist back then so there was little meaningful opposition to closures. Now it is easy to suggest that the closure was wrong and should be reversed. And the parallel bus services have been improved to the point that between Market Weighton, Pocklington and York there is a daytime frequency of 3bph suggesting that a potential market for a rail service does exist especially as commuting from the area to York and even Leeds is on a much bigger scale than 60 years ago.

But the physical obstacles are real. The viaduct over the Derwent in Stamford Bridge, though repurposed as a footpath and receiving a certain amount of TLC from a local interest group would still need a major survey and almost certainly remedial work to bring it up to modern standards. More difficult is the amount of residential property now standing on the former alignment especially in Market Weighton and Stamford Bridge, and in the Huntington district of York the former formation has been largely obliterated: any reinstated line would need a new alignment joining the York-Scarborough line south of Haxby. And then we have Pocklington. The former station still stands but is now a sports hall belonging to the nearby private Pocklington School: this would need a deal to provide a replacement facility nearby. The main east-west road through the town (The Balk) was rerouted to take advantage of the space created by removal of the railway and would require significant work to fit in a railway line as well as some way of avoiding having a level-crossing in the middle of the town. And there's also a Sainsburys store on the former trackbed.

None of these obstacles are insurmountable but the cost of dealing with them is considerable and right now is beyond what we can afford given other more urgent priorities. Local politicians make all the right supportive noises but even East Riding Council dropped the reopening (in 2014!) from its strategic planning as they accepted that suitable funding just wasn't available and wouldn't be in the foreseeable future.

All of which is a shame. If the line had survived I think it would have eventually thrived under BR Provincial Services and therefore be quite well used today. But as so often with Beeching closures with 60 odd years having passed since complete closure the cost of reinstatement is high, getting higher, and now looking increasingly unaffordable. In short once the track has gone unless reinstatement happens within 2 or 3 decades it's pretty much game over.

 

[stevieinselby]

If the Minster Line was to be rebuilt, much of the route between York and Market Weighton would need to be on a new alignment – as Shaw says, there's far too much housing and other development built on the original route for it to be reinstated, the compulsory purchase costs would be off the scale. But the good news is that with the land being about as flat as can be and mostly just farmland, so from an engineering point of view it would be pretty straightforward, it would just be the financial and political cost of acquiring the land. With the bus service along that corridor going from strength to strength – even with 3bph between Market Weighton and York, and most of them double-deckers, they can still be very busy! – there's clearly a lot of demand, and the train would be likely to halve the journey time compared with the bus which would see significant further growth, but it wouldn't be cheap.

There's a good argument that it should be re-routed to the north of Stamford Bridge, with a station on the eastern side of the village, and then join the York—Scarborough line north of Strensall, where it could serve the planned Haxby station and any putative new station at Strensall in the future as well.

 

[Bald Rick]

It would be nudging £2bn.

 

[Grimsby town]

Having lived in York and having family from York, I've closely followed this campaign over the years. The line shouldn't have closed but bringing it back will expensive and there doesn't seem a significant appetite or ability to deliver completely new heavy rail lines in the UK.

My opinion on this and a lot of other potential rail reopenings in the UK is that light rail should be considered. The main benefits from that are:

• More opportunity for cheaper at grade infrastructure with roads and footways
• The ability to negotiate higher gradients
• Cost reductions in signalling
• Potential to have on street sections in areas where the alignment has been lost (although that could increase costs)
• The potential to stage construction. A heavy rail line would likely need to be all nothing. A light rail line with potential stops at York Hospital, A64 parkway, Haxby, Stamford Bridge, Pocklington and Pocklington parkway could form a first stage.

Obviously there are drawbacks to light rail such as lower top speed and the need for new depot facilities. A lower speed of 60mph would still be competitive against car, especially going into York and could be offset with additonal stations and improved frequency to improve generalised door to door journey times.

Heavy rail or light rail, the line shouldn't be considering freight. The junction at York points in the wrong direction and ECML capacity out of York station is too constrained. If heavy rail is chosen then designing in a cost effective manner with single track and higher gradient is a must. The line won't have much interaction with the rest of network so doesn't need the flexibility of two tracks throughout. Minimum viable product is a must.

 

[edwin_m]

Having lived in York and having family from York, I've closely followed this campaign over the years. The line shouldn't have closed but bringing it back will expensive and there doesn't seem a significant appetite or ability to deliver completely new heavy rail lines in the UK.

My opinion on this and a lot of other potential rail reopenings in the UK is that light rail should be considered. The main benefits from that are:

• More opportunity for cheaper at grade infrastructure with roads and footways
• The ability to negotiate higher gradients
• Cost reductions in signalling
• Potential to have on street sections in areas where the alignment has been lost (although that could increase costs)
• The potential to stage construction. A heavy rail line would likely need to be all nothing. A light rail line with potential stops at York Hospital, A64 parkway, Haxby, Stamford Bridge, Pocklington and Pocklington parkway could form a first stage.

Obviously there are drawbacks to light rail such as lower top speed and the need for new depot facilities. A lower speed of 60mph would still be competitive against car, especially going into York and could be offset with additonal stations and improved frequency to improve generalised door to door journey times.

Heavy rail or light rail, the line shouldn't be considering freight. The junction at York points in the wrong direction and ECML capacity out of York station is too constrained. If heavy rail is chosen then designing in a cost effective manner with single track and higher gradient is a must. The line won't have much interaction with the rest of network so doesn't need the flexibility of two tracks throughout. Minimum viable product is a must.

Tram-train might be another option, with the same advantages as above but also able to use the existing line instead of building a very costly and disruptive on-street route into York. This is similar to what TfW are considering for expansion of the South Wales Metro. However I do agree it would be very costly and in the current political climate I don't think it would ever go ahead unless it came with a lot of new housing.

 

[Halifaxlad]

There is so many comments regarding cost, which are very valid but I wonder how many critised the previous goverment allocating around £10 billion to another line netween Liverpool and Manchester to save a couple of miniutes ? If anything its the East side of the country that needs a new line not the West!

Anyway back to this suggestion, too much focus on reopening campaigns such as the Ministers envisages using the old route, it doesnt really matter what route it uses does it as long as it connects Hull - Market Weighton - Pocklington - Stamford Bridge and York and it doesnt neccessarily need to aporoach York from the North.

I would like to see some consideration given to a Southern approach route with stops at Bishopthorpe, the University following the A64 and the A166 to Stamford Bridge.

As for the route generally there is more of a case for a new line between Selby and Hull to relieve the existing one and only line. Could such a new line go via Market Weighton and be the first stage of a new line linking MW to Pocklington to Stamford Bridge and York ?

 

[The Planner]

There is so many comments regarding cost, which are very valid but I wonder how many critised the previous goverment allocating around £10 billion to another line netween Liverpool and Manchester to save a couple of miniutes ? If anything its the East side of the country that needs a new line not the West!

Was it purely based on time saving?

 

[stevieinselby]

Anyway back to this suggestion, too much focus on reopening campaigns such as the Ministers envisages using the old route, it doesnt really matter what route it uses does it as long as it connects Hull - Market Weighton - Pocklington - Stamford Bridge and York and it doesnt neccessarily need to aporoach York from the North.

I would like to see some consideration given to a Southern approach route with stops at Bishopthorpe, the University following the A64 and the A166 to Stamford Bridge.

As for the route generally there is more of a case for a new line between Selby and Hull to relieve the existing one and only line. Could such a new line go via Market Weighton and be the first stage of a new line linking MW to Pocklington to Stamford Bridge and York ?

The southern approach to York station is already congested, whereas coming in over Scarborough Bridge you can get straight into platform 2 without conflicting with any other movements, which is a definite advantage in terms of resilience and reliability. I think it would also be harder to get a route in that way, especially if you want a station at Stamford Bridge, but happy to be proved wrong.

I don't see any need to relieve the Selby—Hull line. It has 3 or 4 trains per hour with very few all-stops services, plus a couple more from Gilberdyke. If there's demand for a more intense service over that line (which I don't think there is) and it can't be accommodated with the line as it is then I'm sure that could be fixed a lot more economically by upgrading the signalling, there's no way that line should be considered maxed out – plus, it is the most direct alignment you'll get, whereas running from Selby to Hull via Market Weighton and Beverley would extend the route from 50km to 60km and with the commensurate time penalty, which would not be attractive to passengers.

York to Hull, on the other hand, should be achievable in under an hour via Pocklington, and so would save 10–15 minutes over the current service via Selby, which along with doubling from 1tph to 2tph (one each way) could be enough to spur a significant amount of growth on that corridor.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Was it purely based on time saving?

I believe it was partly based on justifying HS2 from Crewe to Manchester and other politics.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

I believe it was partly based on justifying HS2 from Crewe to Manchester and other politics.

Never mind politics, how about the fact that the current routes between Liverpool and Manchester have insufficient capacity to support the growing levels of demand. If we could turn back the clock one route or the other would be built with 4 tracks throughout. But adding additional tracks now to either route would be so disruptive it makes more sense to build a new route. Making it a high speed route for longer distance services allows the current routes to be dedicated to local traffic. Win win.

 

[Grimsby town]

Tram-train might be another option, with the same advantages as above but also able to use the existing line instead of building a very costly and disruptive on-street route into York. This is similar to what TfW are considering for expansion of the South Wales Metro. However I do agree it would be very costly and in the current political climate I don't think it would ever go ahead unless it came with a lot of new housing.

Yep that's what I was thinking. Use the existing Scarborough line into York and have a stop at the hospital. There's definitely potential for more housing in the area too do that should form part of any proposal. There really needs to be more done to reduce car dependence in York given how unsuited to cars a lot of the city is.

 

[IanXC]

York to Hull, on the other hand, should be achievable in under an hour via Pocklington, and so would save 10–15 minutes over the current service via Selby, which along with doubling from 1tph to 2tph (one each way) could be enough to spur a significant amount of growth on that corridor.

If the York to Hull service was diverted via the ECML (with a York to Selby via Sherburn additional service) then York to Hull is also somewhere around an hour journey time... probably without any infrastructure investment being needed.

(Generally in the current timetable when the weekday Hull to York goes via the ECML there is a services from Sheffield, indicating that there is probably at York to Hambleton North path, and a York to Sherburn path - although the additional York to Selby might need to not run in the hours when the Sheffield runs.)

 

[Halifaxlad]

If there's demand for a more intense service over that line (which I don't think there is) and it can't be accommodated with the line as it is then I'm sure that could be fixed a lot more economically by upgrading the signalling,

This does remind me of Leeds Bradford Airport, the farce of those against building a decent terminal only to get to the previously approved one instead.

Never mind politics, how about the fact that the current routes between Liverpool and Manchester have insufficient capacity to support the growing levels of demand. If we could turn back the clock one route or the other would be built with 4 tracks throughout. But adding additional tracks now to either route would be so disruptive it makes more sense to build a new route. Making it a high speed route for longer distance services allows the current routes to be dedicated to local traffic. Win win.

But this new line wasnt going all the wsy to Liverpool.

The problem between Liverpool & Manchester is that every route has too many stations on it!

Spending billions to fix half the problem isnt the answer!

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

But this new line wasnt going all the wsy to Liverpool.

The problem between Liverpool & Manchester is that every route has too many stations on it!

Spending billions to fix half the problem isnt the answer!

That almost sounds as if you would like to see some stations closed. I take it I am misunderstanding you.

 

[generalnerd]

I’d take this so long as east Yorkshire gets a good integrated transport system, and not before something is done for hull. I personally think reopening (or adding stations to) one of the existing/beeched lines that go through hull would be a good idea, creating a core section for services elsewhere in the region

 

[Halifaxlad]

That almost sounds as if you would like to see some stations closed. I take it I am misunderstanding you.

Quite!