Newhaven Marine is a case where I can see little realistic future for an operational station. But (and this is a massive "but") I don't live in or know the area, or understand redevelopment options for the area around and for travel to and from that area. And I look at the consultation document and note areas where it could be seen as less than a level playing field in terms of how the case is put - I will follow up with those just below.
Newhaven Marine almost certainly will (and probably should) go. But I would hate elements of the case and methodologies to be used as precedents for procedure to close other stations, where they have a case which is very much more positive.
Retaining the status quo of a daily service carrying no passengers was considered as the ‘do minimum’ option, suggesting that if no intervention was made the station would remain open, but closed to passenger services. This was compared to the ‘do something’ which would mean restoring the station to working order and running a daily return passenger working from Brighton to Newhaven Marine.
How silly can you get on the comparison case?
A comparison should be made not only against a "most similiar to recent" service, but also against a "what is most likely to work" service. And that is most certainly not a one-service-per-day setup. We've shown at Melksham that an increase from 2 to 8 trains per day (4 fold) has brought a 25 fold increase in passenger journeys, so far; not a comparable case, but I would hate to lose Polesworth or Barlaston or Denton, or to have lost Breich, based on an evaluation of the case for closing only compared to the case of a parliamentary service.
Estimates of wider economic impacts in the Newhaven Port Access Road (NPAR) business case suggest that the scheme could create 456 new jobs across the port of Newhaven, with 216 of these in the East Quay, for which Newhaven Marine may offer slightly closer access to the rail network. Due to uncertainty around the robustness of this estimate, a sensitivity test has been performed which represents a best-case scenario.
Best case scenario for whom? A "best business case" for a new scheme - as far as a business is concerned - is to run with as much business as possible with a bare minimum of employees. And what about visitors to that business and contractors? Might they not use a train service?
Due to the proximity of Newhaven Harbour station, and fact that the East Quay (the only area for which Newhaven Marine could offer any access advantage) is entirely made up of commercial and not residential property, it is unlikely that restoring passenger services would return access to the network to any non-car owning households.
Every journey has two ends and the most typical journey someone will make is from residence to none-residence (workplace, leisure location, hospital, shoppng centre) and it seems perverse to use a measure that looks at one end and excludes the other. On that basis, close Cannon Street because no-one lives close to it!
Restoring passenger services from Newhaven Marine would likely restrict the volume of freight services that would be able to use the branch line, impacting the decision to reopen the line as a freight facility. This could potentially hinder the redevelopment of both the East Quay and the port of Newhaven as a whole, and prevent the Department and East Sussex County Council from achieving their strategic objectives and delivering the benefits of the NPAR scheme.
So there isn't trackbed / space to run a second track past the terminus platform? And if the case (earlier up this note) of just one train a day were to be run, that would hardly preclude the use for freight passing through for more than a few minutes.
Why sort this out now? Well - the last quoted section rather gives the game away - it's in the way of planned development. Probably the right thing to do (but that is just my personal uninformed guess) but the logic leaks and I'm wary of potential precedents.
I've never been to either Newhaven or Dieppe and I'm slightly confused by the presence of both "Harbour" and "Marine" stations in one town. Is this the legacy of Victorian competition? Or maybe one served ferries and the other served the/a prom? Or was it rival ferries refusing to share a harbour and each demanding their own dedicated trains? Or... what?
Was "Harbour" the local station on the Seaford line, used by people living locally and working at the harbour, getting off the frequent electric train that called on the way through, whereas "Marine" was the terminus for London expresses which brought passengers for the ferry to the continent.
Click on the map to explore geographics
