Station Closure process

[Gathursty]

It is a phrase bandied about and often with the word 'long-winded' or 'costly' preceding it but I'm not entirely sure what this exactly means.

What steps must occur in order to close a station* down?

*Let's assume an example of Humphrey Park as many are just bus stop shelter platforms and also assume there are no listed features which will cloud discussion.

 

[heart-of-wessex]

I'd imagine one long process is the consulation from the locals?

I don't know how mant Pilning residents will want their one Saturday service running!

 

[user15681]

The local consultation takes about 3 months. And any necessary follow up analysis of the consultation will depend on the individual situation (i.e complete closure with no replacement may prompt more objections and a longer follow up than, say, complete closure with a new replacement station).

Others will be able to explain the whole process better (NR assessment, proposal to DfT, DfT consultation, ORR ratification etc), but a current example is Rochester station. Whilst it's not the usual straight closure with no alternative, this might be of interest with regards to the consultation period, as it only started a week or two ago. You get the general idea and layout from the documents.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/rochester-railway-station-closure
The first document is the 25 page consultation document (might be a bit wordy and technical for some towards the end, but you can see how much information is gathered beforehand)
The second is the closure notice, which has pretty much gone up at every station within a 30 mile radius.

 

[infobleep]

The local consultation takes about 3 months. And any necessary follow up analysis of the consultation will depend on the individual situation (i.e complete closure with no replacement may prompt more objections and a longer follow up than, say, complete closure with a new replacement station).

Others will be able to explain the whole process better (NR assessment, proposal to DfT, DfT consultation, ORR ratification etc), but a current example is Rochester station. Whilst it's not the usual straight closure with no alternative, this might be of interest with regards to the consultation period, as it only started a week or two ago. You get the general idea and layout from the documents.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/rochester-railway-station-closure
The first document is the 25 page consultation document (might be a bit wordy and technical for some towards the end, but you can see how much information is gathered beforehand)
The second is the closure notice, which has pretty much gone up at every station within a 30 mile radius.

I've not read the document yet and this may be explained in it. However with Rochester why don't they run a parliamentary service there rather than close it down?
UPDATE: Read the document and there's no mention of a parliamentary service option.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I've not read the document yet and this may be explained in it. However with Rochester why don't they run a parliamentary service there rather than close it down?
UPDATE: Read the document and there's no mention of a parliamentary service option.

The process of closing the current Rochester station is really just a paperwork exercise, as it is being replaced with a bigger and better-located (for the main centre of population) station just a short distance away. The closure of Garston (Merseyside) to be replaced by the low level platforms at Liverpool South Parkway is a better comparison.

 

[infobleep]

The process of closing the current Rochester station is really just a paperwork exercise, as it is being replaced with a bigger and better-located (for the main centre of population) station just a short distance away. The closure of Garston (Merseyside) to be replaced by the low level platforms at Liverpool South Parkway is a better comparison.

A closure notice can't be free though even if a station is replaced.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

A closure notice can't be free though even if a station is replaced.

Of course not, but when viewed as part of a larger project such as Liverpool South Parkway, it won't be a huge proportion. A closure notice for Garston was worth the costs, one for Teesside Airport or whatever it's called isn't.

 

[steamybrian]

It was my thought that closure procedure was not necessary if a station being closed was being replaced by another within 400 metres such as Garston/Liverpool South Parkway mentioned above.
It would appear that the existing and new stations at Rochester are 500 metres apart so require formal closure procedures.

 

[infobleep]

Of course not, but when viewed as part of a larger project such as Liverpool South Parkway, it won't be a huge proportion. A closure notice for Garston was worth the costs, one for Teesside Airport or whatever it's called isn't.

Surely any saving is a saving, even with a large project? I thought these days things had to be done as cheaply as reasonably possible.

 

[WatcherZero]

It can cost hundreds of thousands in legal fees to go through the process of closing a station, but only thousands or tens of thousands to operate a parliamentary service. So while the savings might eventually outweigh the benefits it may take ten years or more to do so.

For example the closure of Abercynon North in 2008, Network Rail estimated the station cost just £4.5-9k per year to maintain and £22,000 annually in signalling and track costs to have trains stop there (two services per hour). 130k people per year used the station before it closed and platforms at Abercynon South were reinstated.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

For example the closure of Abercynon North in 2008, Network Rail estimated the station cost just £4.5-9k per year to maintain and £22,000 annually in signalling and track costs to have trains stop there (two services per hour). 130k people per year used the station before it closed and platforms at Abercynon South were reinstated.

There had been a station on the location named Abercynon South since the early Victorian days, whereas the eventually closed station of Abercynon North only lasted for 20 years, opening in 1988 and closing in 2008.

 

[Taunton]

It does seem silly to start the official procedure to ask if one can close the station next door to the new one, or not, well after construction of the new one has started.

It's also bizarre that we have to go all through this longwinded approach to move the facility just along the line a bit, where the bus service on the adjacent road only has to unbolt their Bus Stop sign and stick it up on a different lamp post - or pull the service completely and nobody can do anything about it.

It can cost hundreds of thousands in legal fees to go through the process of closing a station

I think we all wonder just how the legal profession can justify those fees. What do we actually get for that money. Wouldn't the money be better spent devising and putting into law a better and more efficient approach in the first place.

 

[yorksrob]

It does seem silly to start the official procedure to ask if one can close the station next door to the new one, or not, well after construction of the new one has started.

It's also bizarre that we have to go all through this longwinded approach to move the facility just along the line a bit, where the bus service on the adjacent road only has to unbolt their Bus Stop sign and stick it up on a different lamp post - or pull the service completely and nobody can do anything about it.


I think we all wonder just how the legal profession can justify those fees. What do we actually get for that money. Wouldn't the money be better spent devising and putting into law a better and more efficient approach in the first place.

Do we want an efficient closure process though. Better IMO to make it as difficult as possible and put up with the odd parliamentary than to potentially open the floodgates for something much worse.

 

[The Planner]

Easy to get round that, they just run a bus service instead like Norton Bridge etc...

 

[swt_passenger]

It would surely be less emotive to have a separately named 're-location procedure' as well as a closure procedure - even if they were nearly identical.

 

[AndyNLondon]

In the Rochester example, I think this sentence (on page 16 of the consultation doc) might explain why they don't want to mothball it with a parliamentary service:

A net income of £800,000 from disposal of the existing site, after decommissioning costs, has been included in the appraisal.

A parly might be cheaper that the closure process on its own, but if you chuck the best part of a million quid into the pot from selling off the old station, the balance might change...

 

[user15681]

In the Rochester example, I think this sentence (on page 16 of the consultation doc) might explain why they don't want to mothball it with a parliamentary service:

A parly might be cheaper that the closure process on its own, but if you chuck the best part of a million quid into the pot from selling off the old station, the balance might change...

Not to mention that it's suffering a bit - I believe it's subsiding and you just need to look at some of the platforms to see it would probably need a lot of maintenance going forward.

But, sorry OP, I didn't post it for a discussion about Rochester in particular, only to show an example of all the documents and the information in them which makes it a lengthy process

 

[infobleep]

In the Rochester example, I think this sentence (on page 16 of the consultation doc) might explain why they don't want to mothball it with a parliamentary service:

A parly might be cheaper that the closure process on its own, but if you chuck the best part of a million quid into the pot from selling off the old station, the balance might change...

I didn't spot that. That clearly explains why they wouldn't run a parliamentary service instead.

 

[AndyNLondon]

I didn't spot that. That clearly explains why they wouldn't run a parliamentary service instead.

To be fair, I only noticed it because I went looking, having thought "hmm, chunk of land in a city centre, must be worth a bit, do they get to include its value in the analysis?"