ATOC - makes case for new railway lines

[whole diary]

[RailCornwall]

Opportunities for future rail connections serving a million people with 14 new lines and up to 40 new stations have been identified in a new report by the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies see - here)).

In the report, Connecting Communities, ATOC calls for the routes involved to be safeguarded, and for further detailed planning with Network Rail and local authorities to prioritise investment.

The rail links, which might be built over a five to ten year timescale, would serve:

Cranleigh (Surrey)
Bordon, Hythe and Ringwood in Hampshire
Brixham in Devon
Aldridge and Brownhills (West Midlands)
Wisbech (Cambridgeshire).
Leicester to Burton (Derbyshire)
Fleetwood, Rawtenstall and Skelmersdale in Lancashire
Washington (Tyne and Wear)
Ashington & Blyth (Northumberland)


Additionally, the report identifies seven new park and ride stations that could be built on existing lines, providing services for people living in Rushden (Northamptonshire), Peterlee (County Durham), Kenilworth (Warwickshire), Ilkeston and Clay Cross (Derbyshire), Ossett (W Yorkshire) and Wantage (Oxfordshire).

ATOC believes that a further seven cases could be evaluated. They are: Madeley (Staffordshire), Stourport on Severn (Worcestershire), Ripon (N. Yorkshire),  Norton Radstock (NE. Somerset), Portishead (N. Somerset) and Witney (Oxfordshire).


Full Press Release ...

ATOC

[grahame]

Have ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies see - here) suggested any service improvements on existing lines which are currently woefully underused?  I can think of at least one case where a significant difference could be made at a far lower cost that putting in a new line or station.

[Lee]

The ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies see - here) press release suggests that they are in a process of looking at how they can be consistent with the rail policy of a future Conservative government.

Quote from Page 18 of the link below.
http://www.conservatives.com/~/media/Files/Downloadable%20Files/Railreview.ashx?dl=true

Community Rail Partnerships have the potential to play a pivotal role in efforts to re-open much missed local lines. Although we do not underestimate the challenges (or costs) of re-opening lines that have been closed for many years, the renaissance of rail travel since privatisation and the continuing growth expected in the next decade mean it is now practical to re-evaluate some of the closures of the past. New housing also has the potential to transform the economic viability of disused lines, particularly where developers are asked to make a contribution to funding the public transport infrastructure needed to support new homes

We will introduce a moratorium on building on any disused rail paths still in public ownership. This will last for the whole of our first term in office. These corridors are a precious transport resource and once built on, they are lost forever. Not only will our moratorium keep alive the option of re-opening old lines, in the interim period, these corridors can provide excellent walking and cycle paths.

[eightf48544]

The ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies see - here) press release suggests that they are in a process of looking at how they can be consistent with the rail policy of a future Conservative government.

http://www.conservatives.com/~/media/Files/Downloadable%20Files/Railreview.ashx?dl=true

Very intereting Looking at the list they do seem to be mostly in Tory constituencies.

Herewith my analysis.

Cranleigh: Presumably from Peasmarsh Junction. Would need to be electrified third rail, 12 coach platforms used as a Guildford terminus extend New Line stoppers. Capacity issues North of Peasmarsh unless service reductions on Portsmouth Direct.
Bordon: interesting to serve an eco town. Would need to be electrified third rail. 8 coach platform. Served by split Alton/Bordon trains. Split at Farnham? Unless extra infro structure at Bently (junction). Current capacity is tight from Brookwood Waterloo. If split trains current service to Alton would be retained.
Hythe: currently on open freight line, requires extra signalling possibly electrified as far as Hythe. 8 coach trains.
Ringwood: presumably towards Brokenhurst, electrified. 8 coach trains. Served by split trains at Brockenhurst Southampton to Lymington/Ringwood or Waterloo to Bournemouth stoppers/Ringwood. Problems with laying tracks in New Forest?
Brixham: Not sure why this included as it^s a branch off a preserved line.
Brownhills: This has been on the books for a long time. Reinstatement from existing terminus from Lichfield to Walsall. 25Kv Electrification Train length max Birmingham Suburban. The M6 toll bridge on the Brownhills branch is built for 2 track railway!
Aldridge: On existing Sutton Park Line. Why not Sutton Coldfield? What would service be?
Wisbech: Existing Freight line (disused). Should be 25KV in conjunction with Ely Peterborough electrifcation. 8 coach trains.
Leicester to Burton: Keeps coming up. Requires North curve at Knighton junction  to be restored to give access to Leicester.
Fleetwood: Ok. should be electrified from start along with Preston Blackpool.
Rawtenstall: ? What happens to the East Lancs. What would service be? Reinstatement of link to trams in Bury. Served by trams?
Skelmersdale: Presumably from Ormskirk. Electrified to link to Merseyrail?
Washington: Possible link to Tyne and Wear Metro at Sunderland?
Ashington: Be interesting to see how the link will be made.
Blythe: Existing freight route for most of way.

Parkways:

Rushden: Increase car parking at Wellingborough. Double deck a la Chiltern.
Peterlee: Which line. Possible problems if on ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) with Capacity.
Kenilworth: On which line?  Is this an admission that Warwick Parkway, 5 miles away, is full?
Ilkeston: Possibly: Could  be served with through London trains from Mansfield via Pye Bridge.
Clay Cross: Would need to be on both Nottingham and Derby lines, therefore, 4 platforms.
Ossett: Where? Would possibly be better at Horbury Junction where it could serve both Huddersfield and Barnsley line.
Wantage: Additional stop on GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line). You takes your choice.


The other Seven:

Madely:  Presumably on Buildwas power station line freight line. Where would service go? Wolverhampton?
Stourport on Severn: Presumably from Hartlebury. Would be good to link back to Bewdley as well.
Ripon: From Harrogate or Thirsk? This is a big one.
Norton Radstock: ideally direct to Bristol, Via Frome is too long although it gives a London Route.
Portishead: The TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) say it should be revaluated. Why  it^s a no brainer, especially as a tram/train service to central Bristol, Severn Beach/ Yate and possibly Bath Green Park.
Whitley: Very interesting. A North West Oxford terminus. Turnround all Padd. Oxford HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units))/stoppers  at Witney to relieve congestion in Oxford Station. Flyover at Wolvercote junction?

All in all it's a very odd list.

[Tim]

It is an odd list.  A welcome departure for ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies see - here) to be compaigning for expansion though (if the AA argues for more roads why shouldn't they).

Graham's point is very pertenant though.  I know he has a certain station in mind (one which he mentioned very occasionally  ) but there are plenty of places where growth is contrained by poor service or high fares (sometimes as a matter of deliberate policy in fact).  The arguments wheeled out to support re-opening (regeneration, environmental, ant--social exclsuion etc) apply just as well to existing stations

[grahame]

Graham's point is very pertenant though.  I know he has a certain station in mind (one which he mentioned very occasionally  ) but there are plenty of places where growth is contrained by poor service or high fares (sometimes as a matter of deliberate policy in fact).  The arguments wheeled out to support re-opening (regeneration, environmental, ant--social exclsuion etc) apply just as well to existing stations

Thanks Tim ... in fact it would be much more cost effective in terms of "bang for bucks" to deal with some of those existing (lack of) services.   In my own neck of the woods, I used Avoncliff station twice on Saturday, and there were 6 on in the morning, 6 off in the afternoon, in addition to some in the morning / on in the afternoon that I didn't count ... and that for a remote location. Let's say that the Cardiff -> Portsmouth service s all stopped at Dilton Marsh (awaits avalance of horrified readers!  ) then I'll bet that with Westbury Leigh close by on one side, and DM^▸ (Dilton Marsh) expanded on the other, traffic would come, and at a low price.

Only Brixham from the list is strictly in the territory we cover, so I have done a rough and ready piece of research to compare populations ... and here are some recent figures:

Cranleigh - 11000
Bordon - 15000
Hythe - 20000
Ringwood - 13000
Brixham - 18000
Aldridge - 16000
Brownhills - 13000
Wisbech - 20000
Fleetwood - 26000
Rawtenstall  - 23000
Skelmersdale - 38000
Washington - 60000
Ashington - 28000
Blyth - 36000

I have NOT researched catchments / flows, but the figure quoted for Wisbech is similar to that for Portishead, and (come to think of it) for Melksham.  But then Melksham is a lovely town, and perhaps 19,999 of the 20,000 people from Wisbech find it such a dump they want to commute out every day 

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

Brixham - 18000 not far from paignton

sidmouth- 14500+ottery st mary 8600=23100, in order to get to a station you have to get the bus... which is 6.50 return.... it takes 40 mins and the bus is always quite busy if the line was reopened given the choice of paying ^6.50 for a journey of between 40 and 90 mins at peak due to traffic or a reduction in that price to 5.50 (still quite a high fare) and a shorter journey with no traffic what would you chose?

[RailCornwall]

The full report has now been published on the ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies see - here) website.

The Brixham scheme is limited as follows ...

Brixham:
^ Stations: Goodrington Sands and Churston (for Brixham).
^ Population: 17,500.
^ Location: Three miles south of Paignton.
^ Catchment area: Continuous housing in the railway corridor would
be served by this short extension, and Churston would also serve
Brixham which is two miles away with a frequent bus link.
^ Current rail access: via Paignton or Newton Abbot stations.
^ Proposed link: existing single track heritage line, with
permission from the Paignton & Dartmouth Railway.
^ Formation: Line and stations capable of taking extension of
local services from Exeter and Paignton.
^ Indicative capital cost: Nil. Operating costs reflected in evaluation.
^ Train service: Hourly from Exmouth via Exeter.
^ Notes: Service would need to flex to accommodate peak
holiday steam services, but scope to provide additional track
capacity for the first half mile to Goodrington if required.

So it's not planned to run to Brixham at all.

[devon_metro]

I don't personally think Churston would be useful, however Goodrington sands "Parkway" would be excellent. The car park is massive, and it is much easier for much of Paignton and Brixham etc etc to get to.

[Lee]

Here is an aspect that I find interesting:

16 other links connecting arms of the network were considered, but as they did not provide new rail access to towns over 15,000, they were not evaluated as part of the study. The 16 were:

Bishop Stortford^Braintree^Colchester

Burscough Curves

Chessington S^Leatherhead

Glazebrook^Partington

Lewes^Uckfield

Matlock^Buxton

March^Spalding

Oxford^Bletchley with Manton curve

Northampton^Bedford

Rugby-Peterborough

Skipton^Colne

Stafford^Wellington

Stourbridge^Walsall

Whelley Lines

Willingdon Chord

Woodhead Route

[Btline]

The Stourport on Severn one is definitely required. The queues of people trying to get in and out of Stourport at rush hour are huge. Extending beyond Stourport to Bewdley would not be possible due to house building and 2 level crossings.

But extending Kidderminster to Bewdley (sharing with the Severn Valley Railway) would be of use, taking pressure of Kidderminster's station car park and road network- a Stourport Parkway could also be added halfway along the route.

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the Herald Express:

Report: Extending rail link would be 'on track'

A strong case to extend Paignton's railway line to Churston has been outlined in a national report.

First Great Western has backed the proposal to add an extra three miles to the existing train service from Newton Abbot to Paignton.

The service would run to Churston railway station on existing tracks currently operated and preserved by the Paignton and Dartmouth Steam Railway.

The Association of Train Operating Companies, which compiled the report, says the new line could potentially serve an extra 17,500 people.

ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies see - here)'s Chris Austin, who helped compile the report, said: "There are so many people living in that corridor who could benefit from an extension of the present main line service from Exeter to Paignton.  There is a very good station at Churston, built by First Great Western originally and kept in nice condition by the Paignton and Dartmouth Steam Railway.  The potential catchment area of the station is about 17,500 people, who at present have to use that awful road to get to Newton Abbot or Paignton.  The traffic congestion, particularly in the summer, would make it very attractive."

Mr Austin said the benefits far outweighed the costs involved in opening up the extra line.  "With this scheme there are no capital costs involved as the steam railway track already exists," he explained.  "It's one of the cheaper schemes."

Initial reports suggested the railway could be extended to reopen the line as far as Brixham but that appears to be a non-starter.

Brixham Town Council chairman Chris Bedford said Torbay Council had investigated opening the old Brixham line as a tram track or cycle route some years ago, but decided it was not practical because houses had been built on the line.  "It would be wonderful to have the train line back but, unfortunately, a lot of the land has been sold off and there are houses build across parts of the track," he said.  "It would have been an enormous advantage for Brixham. It's a major pain not having a rail link but it's what has taken place since that has precluded that happening."

In the decade after Dr Richard Beeching's first report on rail modernisation, published in 1963, more than 4,000 miles of track were closed and the number of stations was halved to 3,000.  In 1962, the Western Region decided to close the Brixham line entirely and the last train ran on May 11, 1963.

A spokesman for the Paignton and Dartmouth Steam Railway was last night unavailable for comment.

[Btline]

Part of the problem with Brixham is the reversal.

Hmmmmmm...

There is a very good station at Churston, built by First Great Western originally...

That's news to me!

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

Part of the problem with Brixham is the reversal.

Hmmmmmm...

There is a very good station at Churston, built by First Great Western originally...

That's news to me!

haha i was thinking the same thing, sdr wasnt it??

[mjones]

I wonder to what extent lower cost options like tram trains, Parry People Movers etc can reduce the cost of re-opening and make these more likely to be funded. Particularly where track is already in place.

This vehicle, a bus that can run on both road and rail, intrigued me:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0615/1224248849959.html

Maybe a better option than lifting rail track and replacing it with concrete bus guideways?