Thanet Parkway updates

[NeilCr]

More out of idle curiosity than anything!

Does anyone have any idea when this new station is likely to open. It’s always been aimed at May this year. The station looks pretty much complete although I know that there and track and level crossing works to be carried out. A mate in the industry told me that was likely early this year

Not too much online that’s current that I can find easily

And any views on its possible “success” or not. Living down here I was sceptical at first but warming to the idea. Not that much parking around the other local stations

 

[Adlington]

This site says May 2023.

 

[NeilCr]

Yes

But it’s been like that for some time. Last update on Kent CCC was nine months or so ago

I guess I was wondering if someone had some knowledge of whether or not it was still (ahem) on track!

 

[zwk500]

It's obviously reckoned to have a decent chance for it to be funded. I expect there's housing intended to be built around it at some point.
AIUI it'll open close to May because there's associated other improvements in the area to recover the journey time lost in the stop.

 

[SargeNpton]

Thanet Parkway appears in the May 2023 timetable data.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Out of interest, does the station provide direct access to the village of Cliffsend and all the existing housing there? I just took a look on Google maps. The satellite views are a bit hard to interpret because they only show the station under construction, but they give the impression of the entrance being on the wrong side of the track to provide walkable access to the village?

 

[NeilCr]

Tbh

It’s not part of Thanet I know that well but using directions on Google Maps suggests an 8 minute walk is possible

Thanks to others for their replies. It was idle curiosity as it’s unlikely I’ll ever use the station

 

[swt_passenger]

Out of interest, does the station provide direct access to the village of Cliffsend and all the existing housing there? I just took a look on Google maps. The satellite views are a bit hard to interpret because they only show the station under construction, but they give the impression of the entrance being on the wrong side of the track to provide walkable access to the village?

Maybe there’s something in last year‘s Geoff Marshall video that will help?

I don’t think there’s been a specific thread for this station in the infrastructure forum, most of the existing info about it is in various posts in the new stations calendar thread.

New Station calendar

As per the previous post, the status of East Linton has been updated to 'under construction' and advanced to 2023 (was by 2024). Also updated Winslow to 'under construction' rather than just referring to the overall route works. March has been suggested for the first trains to serve Reston...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[NeilCr]

Apologies if I have posted this in the wrong section of the forum

 

[zwk500]

Out of interest, does the station provide direct access to the village of Cliffsend and all the existing housing there? I just took a look on Google maps. The satellite views are a bit hard to interpret because they only show the station under construction, but they give the impression of the entrance being on the wrong side of the track to provide walkable access to the village?

Plan available on the Kent CC website: https://www.kent.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/111026/Thanet-Parkway-Station-plan-1.pdf

There's an existing underpass to provide access between platforms, although only a Right of Way across a field, which a later housing development appears to have not maintained very clearly. There are some garages at the end of Earlsmead Crescent that would need to be demolished to provide accessed.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Plan available on the Kent CC website: https://www.kent.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/111026/Thanet-Parkway-Station-plan-1.pdf

There's an existing underpass to provide access between platforms, although only a Right of Way across a field, which a later housing development appears to have not maintained very clearly. There are some garages at the end of Earlsmead Crescent that would need to be demolished to provide accessed.

Thanks for digging that up, that's interesting.

Sadly, those plans rather give the impression of a station that's being opened right next to existing housing, yet with no walkable access to that housing, and instead designed just for people to drive there. I hope that's not the case and I've misunderstood the plans.

 

[zwk500]

Thanks for digging that up, that's interesting.

Sadly, those plans rather give the impression of a station that's being opened right next to existing housing, yet with no walkable access to that housing, and instead designed just for people to drive there. I hope that's not the case and I've misunderstood the plans.

There will be access from the Cliffside direction. However the local council appears to have missed a trick by not upgrading the access and allowing housing development to make it even harder.

 

[NeilCr]

Now 31 July

Local chatter has it that the platforms aren’t wide enough for wheelchair access to trains. I assume that is a load of old crock.

 

[zwk500]

Now 31 July

Local chatter has it that the platforms aren’t wide enough for wheelchair access to trains. I assume that is a load of old crock.

It's not impossible that it's been built wrong (Market Harborough had a toilet block that needed quite substnatial rebuilding IIRC), but I would be astonished if it happened as the station will have been designed for disabled access.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Now 31 July

Local chatter has it that the platforms aren’t wide enough for wheelchair access to trains. I assume that is a load of old crock.

Last time I passed through the platforms did seem rather narrow

 

[MarkyT]

There will be access from the Cliffside direction. However the local council appears to have missed a trick by not upgrading the access and allowing housing development to make it even harder.

There's certainly no public foot access shown on the drawing from the south side. If (say) you lived at one of the houses at the north end of Earlsmead Crescent, you could be under 100m from the up platform access steps from the underpass, but it's nearly 1600m round to the north side station access via existing footpaths, partly because the residential cul de sacs have no pedestrian links between them to cut corners*, meaning a fairly long detour south initially. If you were to say 'sod it, I'm driving', its over 3km via the shortest vehicular route, or THIRTY TIMES the notional direct distance on foot. Even if the station development puts in a new shorter footpath link from near the level crossing to the north side entrance, the pedestrian route from Earlsmead Crescent would still be well over a kilometer. Earlsmead Crescent is a worst-case really as far as proximity vs access distance is concerned, with other parts of the village having much better foot access.

* The dead end cul de sac road layout also reduces the utility of a south side access for the wider village.

 

[zwk500]

There's certainly no public foot access shown on the drawing from the south side. If (say) you lived at one of the houses at the north end of Earlsmead Crescent, you could be under 100m from the up platform access steps from the underpass, but it's nearly 1600m round to the north side station access via existing footpaths, partly because the residential cul de sacs have no pedestrian links between them to cut corners*, meaning a fairly long detour south initially. If you were to say 'sod it, I'm driving', its over 3km via the shortest vehicular route, or THIRTY TIMES the notional direct distance on foot. Even if the station development puts in a new shorter footpath link from near the level crossing to the north side entrance, the pedestrian route from Earlsmead Crescent would still be well over a kilometer. Earlsmead Crescent is a worst-case really as far as proximity vs access distance is concerned, with other parts of the village having much better foot access.

* The dead end cul de sac road layout also reduces the utility of a south side access for the wider village.

There is an existing public ROW shown on the drawing from Cottington road/lavender Lane to the southern side of the station and under the arch used for access. It isn't paved, but that could be added later. Neither platform appears to be gated on that plan.

 

[MarkyT]

There is an existing public ROW shown on the drawing from Cottington road/lavender Lane to the southern side of the station and under the arch used for access. It isn't paved, but that could be added later. Neither platform appears to be gated on that plan.

I think it may be signposted from Cottington Rd. There's definietly a signpost on streetview at the junction for Lavendar Lane but I can't read it. The ROW crosses a field and doesn't look like it's been used by anyone recently on aerial imagery, and construction compound fencing for the station seems to have blocked it off at the north, possibly temporarily from a legal perspective. Note the new development on Cottington Road, not shown on the drawing. yet another auto-centric disconnected cul de sac.

 

[zwk500]

I think it may be signposted from Cottington Rd. There's definietly a signpost on streetview at the junction for Lavendar Lane but I can't read it. The ROW crosses a field and doesn't look like it's been used by anyone recently on aerial imagery, and construction compound fencing for the station seems to have blocked it off at the north, possibly temporarily from a legal perspective. Note the new development on Cottington Road, not shown on the drawing. yet another auto-centric disconnected cul de sac.

Indeed that view is very helpful - in theory, the ROW should have been preserved as it was pre-existing (and is listed by Kent CC) but the new development hasn't left much space at all, if any. I had a poke around with the GSV images and there does appear to be a gap between the garages at the north end of the older cul-de-sac that people may be willing to use, but it's unpaved so what state it's left in by winter is anybody's guess.

It is astonishing how close the station is to having good car-free access to more than half it's local town. And yet, for whatever reason (Rail funding can't be used beyond NR's boundary? County Council unaware of ROW?) it's been utterly missed.

 

[DJ_K666]

There's certainly no public foot access shown on the drawing from the south side. If (say) you lived at one of the houses at the north end of Earlsmead Crescent, you could be under 100m from the up platform access steps from the underpass, but it's nearly 1600m round to the north side station access via existing footpaths, partly because the residential cul de sacs have no pedestrian links between them to cut corners*, meaning a fairly long detour south initially. If you were to say 'sod it, I'm driving', its over 3km via the shortest vehicular route, or THIRTY TIMES the notional direct distance on foot. Even if the station development puts in a new shorter footpath link from near the level crossing to the north side entrance, the pedestrian route from Earlsmead Crescent would still be well over a kilometer. Earlsmead Crescent is a worst-case really as far as proximity vs access distance is concerned, with other parts of the village having much better foot access.

* The dead end cul de sac road layout also reduces the utility of a south side access for the wider village.

A mile?

That's a 20 minute walk instead of a 5 minute one since you'd be 100 yards away, which if they had a 'back' gate then that could be avoided.

Surely contacting Network Rail would be a good idea with these concerns. But then if the platforms are narrow surely that'd be non compliant from an accessibility standpoint, so I wonder if corners have been cut (maybe tell Network Rail that too)?

 

[zwk500]

A mile?????? That's a 20 minute walk instead of a 5 minute one since you'd be 100 yards away, which if they had a 'back' gate then that could be avoided. Surely contacting Network Rail would be a good idea with these concerns. But then if the platforms are narrow surely that'd be non compliant from a DDA standpoint soni wonder if corners have been cut (maybe tell Network Rail that too)

Looking at GSV, there appears to be a narrow gap between the garages and the garden fence that would permit access, however NR won't be allowed to spend money on access outside the boundary and the relevant local government (Thanet District or Kent County Council) will presumably have wanted to avoid any further land take that could be avoided.

If I'm right and there's a cut through I expect to see a desire line appear pretty quickly.

 

[DJ_K666]

Looking at GSV, there appears to be a narrow gap between the garages and the garden fence that would permit access, however NR won't be allowed to spend money on access outside the boundary and the relevant local government (Thanet District or Kent County Council) will presumably have wanted to avoid any further land take that could be avoided.

If I'm right and there's a cut through I expect to see a desire line appear pretty quickly.

Maybe. Best to keep an eye on it and see how long it takes before residents start asking for access that way.

 

[NeilCr]

I’ve just passed through the station and I have to say the platforms do look rather narrow

 

[MarkyT]

I’ve just passed through the station and I have to say the platforms do look rather narrow

Measuring on Google Earth, both platforms seem to be 2.5m wide from face edge to back fence, which I believe is the absolute minimum for a side platform in a new build. All the sheltered seating seems to be in short 'bays' set back behind the main fence line. Lamp posts, signage etc must also be incorporated into or behind the fence to avoid impinging on the minimum width.

 

[NeilCr]

Thanks

That’s interesting

Although I pass through it regularly I haven’t take that much notice in the detail - just the general progress. As I say it’s not a station I’ll be using

It was the local comments about the possible difficulty for disabled passengers getting on the train that piqued my interest

Certainly to the naked eye it looks as though it could be problematic - although given the speed the trains go through it’s only a fairly quick look

 

[civ-eng-jim]

Back to the original question, I'm reliably informed that there's signalling/level crossing commissioning that has caused some delay to the station opening.

There are level crossings either side of the station both currently AHB (Automatic Half-barrier). One will be converted to an MCB (Manually controlled barrier) crossing. With some trains proposed to stop and some trains proposed to pass through there will be 2 strike points on each track to activate the AHB (If it was kept at 1 strike point then the barriers could be down too long (for stopping/starting trains) and this encourages abuse of the crossing or the barrier wouldn't be down long enough for non-stop trains (unsafe, therefore not acceptable).

I gather closing a crossing (Assumed temporarily) was mooted to expedite the opening of the station before signalling commissioning but the commissioning is underway now and it looks like July for opening.

 

[MarkyT]

Back to the original question, I'm reliably informed that there's signalling/level crossing commissioning that has caused some delay to the station opening.

There are level crossings either side of the station both currently AHB (Automatic Half-barrier). One will be converted to an MCB (Manually controlled barrier) crossing. With some trains proposed to stop and some trains proposed to pass through there will be 2 strike points on each track to activate the AHB (If it was kept at 1 strike point then the barriers could be down too long (for stopping/starting trains) and this encourages abuse of the crossing or the barrier wouldn't be down long enough for non-stop trains (unsafe, therefore not acceptable).

I gather closing a crossing (Assumed temporarily) was mooted to expedite the opening of the station before signalling commissioning but the commissioning is underway now and it looks like July for opening.

I'll be surprised if all scheduled passenger services don't stop at the new station eventually, as it's likely to become a significant railhead for a wide area. There will no doubt be empty stock moves to and from Ramsgate depot and other workings that needn't call however, so the stopping/non-stopping controls are required, to avoid an enforced stop even when not required.
Two questions:
1. Is it the village crossing on Foads Hill that is planned for MCB conversion?
2. Does NR need to provide additional signals for the platform within AHBC strike-in and MCB scenarios?

 

[swt_passenger]

I'll be surprised if all scheduled passenger services don't stop at the new station eventually, as it's likely to become a significant railhead for a wide area. There will no doubt be empty stock moves to and from Ramsgate depot and other workings that needn't call however, so the stopping/non-stopping controls are required, to avoid an enforced stop even when not required.
Two questions:
1. Is it the village crossing on Foads Hill that is planned for MCB conversion?
2. Does NR need to provide additional signals for the platform within AHBC strike-in and MCB scenarios?

That‘s the crossing, if you skip to the 8 mins point in Geoff Marshall’s video on the Thanet Parkway build, they visit the location, and the NR media bloke attempts to explain the reasons (although possibly simplified). I don’t think your second question is covered though.

 

[MarkyT]

That‘s the crossing, if you skip to the 8 mins point in Geoff Marshall’s video on the Thanet Parkway build, they visit the location, and the NR media bloke attempts to explain the reasons (although possibly simplified). I don’t think your second question is covered though.

Thanks. That explains things very well. There were existing signals visible just off the end of each platform so I expect no additional ones will be required. The NR rep wasn't quite correct in that he said the barriers might lift early if a train stopped for the platform within the strike-in distance. That wouldn't happen but, as civ-eng-jim explained upthread, it's the extended warning time that's considered the big risk at AHBCs as it's so easy for road users to weave around the half barriers if they're led to believe the crossing may have failed. Legal crossing orders for AHBCs have maximum warning times specified for a certain percentage of trains, expressed as something like 'no more than (very low %) of trains must arrive any later than (max extended warning time) after warning has started'. That is why the rail industry invented the stopping/non stopping control method for which there must be a signal between the platform and the crossing which has a timed release from red for a stopping train to ensure the minimum warning time for road users is given.

 

[CFRAIL]

There's been test trains using the station recently which I believe highlighted lighting issues too

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Apr 2023 ==

Network Rail has confirmed that the new railway station at Thanet Parkway will open on 31st July 2023.

Thanet Parkway station - Network Rail

The construction of the new Thanet Parkway station is substantially complete and it will open to passengers on 31 July 2023. We are delivering this large programme of work that will increase connectivity to London and the wider Kent region The new station is located between Minster and Ramsgate...

www.networkrail.co.uk

The construction of the new Thanet Parkway station is substantially complete and it will open to passengers on 31 July 2023.

The new station is located between Minster and Ramsgate stations and will be served by both mainline and high-speed trains....