I don't think anybody was suggesting that a replacement would be any less rubbish, just further away from the overbridge
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Breich - Public Consultation on Station Closure
- Thread starter DuncanS
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
In that case, what on earth were they thinking? Relocating the station nearer to Breich village would make some degree of sense but leaving it pretty much where it is seems foolish in the extreme. In the present location, it doesn't matter if it gets 2tpd or 2tph- it'll still be used by almost nobody!
Last edited:
tbtc
Veteran Member
I'd treat it as one of the Forum\s great strengths.
There are a mix of people with different experiences. From the crayon wielding kids with their idealism to the hard pressed forty-something commuters dealing with the daily reality of the railway to the nostalgic pensioners who want everything to be like it was fifty years ago. I exaggerate for effect of course - but this place is a mixture.
Some people work in the industry and understand the costs/ practicalities involved in doing things that look so simple with an Ordnance Survey/ Crayola.
A combination of idealism and realism, of optimism and pessimism, of daydreamers and accountants. It'd be rubbish if it were just one side of the argument (as many groups are).
I'm all for new lines, I welcome investment, but we need to focus finite resources where it's best needed.
That means spending money on places with potential. Plenty of places in Scotland with potential - Levenmouth, Renfrew etc. Or infrastructure improvements (additional platforms, additional electrification, passing loops etc).
But you could stop all of the half hourly Shotts services at Breich and hardly attract that many more passengers (whilst inconveniencing lots of other existing passengers by slowing their journeys). Since Ardiwell (to the east) and Fauldhouse (to the west) serve their respected populations pretty well, there's not a lot of population to the north (Armadale will always be a better station for anyone in Whitburn) and virtually nil population to the south.
Keeping stations like Breich can possibly be justified as long as it's just the marginal cost of maintaining it (emptying the bins, fixing the occasional lightbulb) but there comes a time when everything needs upgrading. Which is when things get expensive. You can have a buggy-unfriendly footbridge in operation but when you need to replace it then you have to make sure that the replacement is properly accessible.
We've reached a stage where the station needs the equivalent of around one million pounds per weekly passenger to keep it open. The SNP seem to think that this is a price worth paying. Some enthusiasts seem to think that this is a price worth paying. I think it's a ridiculous waste of money when there are plenty of other competing priorities.
(you may be able to guess my opinion of a line like SKipton - Clone through the middle of a fairly empty bit of countryside...)
At c. £5,000 per resident (est £2M for a new station and 400 residents) it's over twice as expensive per-resident as Levenmouth (£80M and 37,000 residents).
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
Fair point- I shall rephrase my previous statement...
alistairlees
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2016
- Messages
- 3,737
In my opinion both Ravensthorpe and Breich are complete wastes of money. Limited resources should be put to use in other places where they will benefit far more people. Which is almost anywhere else.
Just looking at the OS map, Ravensthorpe looks to have at least 20 times as many people within a mile as Breich.
kieron
Established Member
Sorry. I saw InOban's post (which didn't quote anything) and somehow thought it was a response to something I said.
All I can say now is that a decision has been taken to keep the station, and it's a decision the minister will find it very easy to stick to. If the number of trains serving the station goes up to 1tph or so, we'll then be able to see how many people would actually use a station there. If not, it is just money down the drain.
overthewater
Established Member
- Joined
- 16 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 8,170
I can only agree this has to be stupid idea, and waste of money. Unless the SNP don't want the bad press of closing useless train station for 1 passenger.
YorkshireBear
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 8,692
It is that sort of balanced and well thought out post which will bring an end to the world as we know it. Whether I agree or not (I do) the post is backed up and justified.
I also agree that the balance of members actually provides us with debate, it even allows many of us to learn and change our initial opinions based on new information and thoughts from other members. A great asset indeed.
overthewater
Established Member
- Joined
- 16 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 8,170
Of course most of the people on here will not have to pay for this carbuncle,
Either directly (through Scottish Income Tax) or indirectly (via the Block Grant), most of us will be contributing in one way or another.
I dare say that in future cases like Breich where one of the costs of overall route improvements is the loss of a little-used station, that the infrastructure owner and TOC spend a year experimenting with an improved service to see if it brings an increase in patronage. If it does not, then the case for closure is made.
In English that means: run an improved service as a trial and see what happens. Base your final decision on the outcome.
In English that means: run an improved service as a trial and see what happens. Base your final decision on the outcome.
In this case, the problem is that the infrastructure improvements would need to be paid for in order to trial the service. Having spent the estimated £2M it would be a waste to abandon the station a year later.In English that means: run an improved service as a trial and see what happens. Base your final decision on the outcome.
Well, granted in this case the ship has already sailed. What I failed to make clear in my post was that I meant at the time of planning the infrastructure improvements (or even when it was just a lightbulb in somebody's mind) they could have run the current diesel service with additional Breich stops. The planning process is so elongated that they surely would have had time to do this and make an analysis of the passenger data. Obviously doing it now would be completely useless.
They will have known of the need to close or spend money on Breich at the start of the electrification process. Presumably the project includes funds for Breich? I suspect that rather than announce proposed closure at the start Network Rail left it until the summer and hoped it would slip through without too much fuss. If they & Scotrail (who I believe also want it closed) had agreed to run a trial with more trains calling a couple of years ago then their closure case may have been stronger.
Not necessarily if it's a result of the new clearance regs.
Baxenden Bank
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 4,017
Because that is the way things are done nowadays. Decide what you want to happen well in advance but tell no-one until it is a 'fait accompli' and you get your way. Even if you have reasoned arguments to change a proposal it is too late once the detailed (i.e. expensive) design work has been completed. Similarly, if you had objected to the closure of Breich at the consultation stage of the electrification scheme you would have been laughed at - closure, what closure, who mentioned any prospect of closure, you're just paranoid! Except the clever strategy appears to have backfired on this one occasion. Generally it works though. Think Etruria, Norton Bridge and most likely in future Polesworth, Wedgwood and Barlaston. The Highways Agency performs similar tricks, neglecting to show enough detail to allow proper analysis and response in a timely manner.
Blindtraveler
Established Member
It seems very silly to me to keep this station open when there are plenty of other stations and a viable alternative to serve it by integrating it into the bus service with through ticketing
I've just linked and quoted, in the Scottish electrification thread, an NR press release about the awarding of a contract for works on the Shotts line, including "complete rebuilding" of Breich (and Livingston South) stations.
NSEFAN
Established Member
I felt that this thread would be most appropriate to bump, given it's about Breich station itself. I made a trip to Breich the other day to see how/if it has changed, given the ongoing electrification work to the Shotts line.
Unlike the other stations on the route, I found that the station itself has largely been untouched and still has its old lattice footbridge. Electrification masts have however been added, including on the platforms. Pictures can be found here.
Is there any indication as to when the station will be rebuilt, and where it will be sited? I see that Livingston South has already been rebuilt. Presumably an easy way to avoid an expensive footbridge would be to build another access point on the Edinburgh side?
Unlike the other stations on the route, I found that the station itself has largely been untouched and still has its old lattice footbridge. Electrification masts have however been added, including on the platforms. Pictures can be found here.
Is there any indication as to when the station will be rebuilt, and where it will be sited? I see that Livingston South has already been rebuilt. Presumably an easy way to avoid an expensive footbridge would be to build another access point on the Edinburgh side?
Kite159
Veteran Member
The easiest (and cheapest) way would be to remove the footbridge and close the Edinburgh bound platform. Then have the 06:55 Edinburgh - Glasgow Central service call additionally at Breich (07:38) with an easement to allow passengers travelling from Breich to points east to double back at Fauldhouse (as that 06:55 Edinburgh - Glasgow will give a roughly 20 minute connection at Fauldhouse for a service back to Edinburgh which would have been the one to call at Breich.
Also having the services which call at Breich towards Glasgow to be local door only with a large Harrington bump installed to close the gap.
Also having the services which call at Breich towards Glasgow to be local door only with a large Harrington bump installed to close the gap.
Altnabreac
Established Member
Remember the issue at Breich is not just the footbridge but is an issue of electrical clearance because the platform is adjacent to the bridge. The catenary is therefore lower than the standard dictates for wires in the vicinity of a station.
The bridge couldn't be raised any more than it was because of the crossroads immediately south of the bridge. I suspect initially they intended to apply for a derogation. This then changed to a station closure but was refused by ministers. As part of that refusal Ministers also proposed that Breich should receive an enhanced service so any one platform solution will not be compliant.
So there is now a requirement to relocate the platforms to meet standards. The assumption is that this would need to be at least 100m or so to the east although I'm not certain exactly how far it has to go. One of the options proposed as part of the station closure consultation was to move the entire station 800m to the east to actually be in the village of Breich. This was the option favoured by the local council.
It is however very unclear which of the options has been chosen. Is the station moving a short distance east or all the way to the village? Will the pedestrian access be by a new footbridge or via a new entrance on the north of the railway? Suspect discussions with landowners and planners are not yet complete.
The bridge couldn't be raised any more than it was because of the crossroads immediately south of the bridge. I suspect initially they intended to apply for a derogation. This then changed to a station closure but was refused by ministers. As part of that refusal Ministers also proposed that Breich should receive an enhanced service so any one platform solution will not be compliant.
So there is now a requirement to relocate the platforms to meet standards. The assumption is that this would need to be at least 100m or so to the east although I'm not certain exactly how far it has to go. One of the options proposed as part of the station closure consultation was to move the entire station 800m to the east to actually be in the village of Breich. This was the option favoured by the local council.
It is however very unclear which of the options has been chosen. Is the station moving a short distance east or all the way to the village? Will the pedestrian access be by a new footbridge or via a new entrance on the north of the railway? Suspect discussions with landowners and planners are not yet complete.
Keeping the station open at all is an insanity, but of all the insanity it makes most sense to move it closer to the (very few) people who will be using it.
Altnabreac
Established Member
Agreed on both fronts.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
I see there is a minor road crossing the railway where it is close to the village, which could perhaps be used for platform access avoiding the need to spend £2m or so on a footbridge. I don't know if this bridge has been renewed, and if so whether it now has a footway, but it doesn't on Bing aerial view. Given the low passenger and likely low traffic measures maybe that doesn't matter, but I suspect there is some standard somewhere that says a footway is needed. The other issue would be whether the platform-wire clearance issue is a problem at this site as well.
The station will close this weekend for 12 weeks (will anyone notice?) while they spend/waste £2.4m upgrading it for OHLE. At least they are taking the advice of the previous poster and replacing the bridge with graded ramps up to the road.
Info from @shottslineelec
Info from @shottslineelec
I take it from what you say that the platforms are not being moved eastward, contrary to how some of us understood the problem??
- Status