• 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!

Future of Newhaven Marine and Harbour Stations?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

trainmania100

Established Member
Joined
8 Nov 2015
Messages
2,566
Location
Newhaven
Yes, smashing video and thanks for sharing. Unfortunately I did not make it; got a calling elsewhere...

I'll try again if there are further runs this week...
I've been advised in my local wibble group it should run every day this week except new year's Day, I would take with a pinch of salt though. Same loco all week.
 

AlbertBeale

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2019
Messages
2,690
Location
London
Apologies for the poor shot, find attached 66154 at Newhaven harbour. I saw the southbound at Lewes because timings showed to Newhaven day aggs only but had to rush to Newhaven when I saw it went into Newhaven marine instead!
Hopefully comes back so I can get better shot at marine

What's "Newhaven day aggs"?
 

AlbertBeale

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2019
Messages
2,690
Location
London
Newhaven Day Aggregates which is located at Newhaven Town Yard adjacent to the incinerator

Freight trains run between Acton and Newhaven once or more times a week operated by DB Cargo (I think...)

Thanks. I hadn't realised there were other sidings at Newhaven, besides the ones at the ex-Marine station; I hadn't noticed them when I used that line to go to Seaford, earlier this year.
 

trainmania100

Established Member
Joined
8 Nov 2015
Messages
2,566
Location
Newhaven

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
Can I object? :D

The site is closed off and inaccessible to the public now
The posters here back in 2015 were worried about the “thin end of the wedge”, and the process being streamlined, which might mean other stations would be more easily closed in future.

But of course the very fact that services ceased in 2006, and it’s taken 14 years to get to the publication of a consultation rather demonstrates the opposite of streamlining. Having scanned the document, it seems there’s no lack of detail, it describes exactly what the changes to port operations have been over the years, which is exactly why it isn’t needed.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
The consultation also confirms that the station was Newhaven Harbour P3 until 1984. Maybe in hindsight they should have reverted to that situation back in 2006...
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
The consultation also confirms that the station was Newhaven Harbour P3 until 1984. Maybe in hindsight they should have reverted to that situation back in 2006...
Yup. Much easier to take a platform out of service than to close a station. But would that have had to go through the closure process?
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
Yup. Much easier to take a platform out of service than to close a station. But would that have had to go through the closure process?
I would have thought not. I’m trying to think of a recent permanent platform closure within a station. How about the down bay at Redhill, or was it ECS only?

In the consultation they mention that if they were to keep the platform open it could now only be reached via Newhaven Harbour’s up platform anyway, so would likely become P3 again?
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
I would have thought not. I’m trying to think of a recent permanent platform closure within a station. How about the down bay at Redhill, or was it ECS only?
I meant would downgrading Marine to a platform of Harbour have required a formal closure process?
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
I meant would downgrading Marine to a platform of Harbour have required a formal closure process?
I don’t think that would have counted as a closure either. It would surely just be considered an internal issue for NR, just combining two almost connected stations?
 

flitwickbeds

Member
Joined
19 Apr 2017
Messages
515
The posters here back in 2015 were worried about the “thin end of the wedge”, and the process being streamlined, which might mean other stations would be more easily closed in future.

But of course the very fact that services ceased in 2006, and it’s taken 14 years to get to the publication of a consultation rather demonstrates the opposite of streamlining. Having scanned the document, it seems there’s no lack of detail, it describes exactly what the changes to port operations have been over the years, which is exactly why it isn’t needed.
Surely the point is, why announce a consultation on closure once the station has already been closed and there is no chance of it ever re-opening due to infrastructure changes?

Possibly similar situation developing at Hubberts Bridge where one platform has recently been removed for "urgent works". If it's never restored and that station closes as a result, what's to stop National Rail or a TOC deciding a station isn't worth the hassle any more and just letting maintenance stop on it until it's closed by default?

I don't agree with keeping pointless stations open. But I disagree more with the way it's being done. Either decide to close it, and close it properly, or maintain it and leave it open.
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,157
Location
West of Andover
Surely the point is, why announce a consultation on closure once the station has already been closed and there is no chance of it ever re-opening due to infrastructure changes?

Possibly similar situation developing at Hubberts Bridge where one platform has recently been removed for "urgent works". If it's never restored and that station closes as a result, what's to stop National Rail or a TOC deciding a station isn't worth the hassle any more and just letting maintenance stop on it until it's closed by default?

I don't agree with keeping pointless stations open. But I disagree more with the way it's being done. Either decide to close it, and close it properly, or maintain it and leave it open.

Or with Hubberts Bridge, the removed platform never returns and it joins the club of one-way only stations (Polesworth, Pilning, Tees-Side Airport). Maybe stop an additional train towards Boston in the morning so any passengers can interchange via Boston.
 

RealTrains07

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2019
Messages
1,748
I would have thought not. I’m trying to think of a recent permanent platform closure within a station. How about the down bay at Redhill, or was it ECS only?

In the consultation they mention that if they were to keep the platform open it could now only be reached via Newhaven Harbour’s up platform anyway, so would likely become P3 again?
Polsworth lost its platform 2, years ago

Whatever happens with marine. It wont affect harbours future considering its still used by over 50k passengers a year?
 

Islineclear3_1

Established Member
Joined
24 Apr 2014
Messages
5,811
Location
PTSO or platform depending on the weather
Polsworth lost its platform 2, years ago

Whatever happens with marine. It wont affect harbours future considering its still used by over 50k passengers a year?

Perhaps the facilities could be improved at Newhaven Town for ferry passengers and the Harbour station closed altogether. It is really falling into disrepair and I can't see any money being spent on it

And I know how busy Newhaven Town gets when Brighton play at home; perhaps there could be provision for a new, separate exit at the south end for ferry passengers

Facilities at the Town are dire and cramped
 

Sunset route

Member
Joined
27 Oct 2015
Messages
1,176
I would have thought not. I’m trying to think of a recent permanent platform closure within a station. How about the down bay at Redhill, or was it ECS only?

That wasn’t a platform but the former post office dock, neither the signalling or the platform were to a passenger standard.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,232
Location
Torbay
Removal of a platform at a station that is to remain doesn't usually require a formal public consultation and closure order, although I guess today it would have to go through an industry network change process. At Newhaven, the Marine platform, although really part of the Harbour station complex operationally, was built later and under a different act of parliament. Hence it requires the full closure process to formally withdraw passenger services. It's not just the station name issue, as the platform is adjacent to a different railway legally.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top