The future of Barlaston / Norton Bridge / Wedgwood railway stations.

[Baxenden Bank]

To all intents and purposes the station has been closed since 2004. Does it serve any decent sized communities and is it worth the cost of rebuilding it. I would suggest no. I don't like to see stations close on an emotional level but practically what is the point of spending the money to rebuild a station to modern standards that few will use?

Possibly so, but closure sets a precedent. An easy closure gives the DfT the confidence to try for more.

Start off with an effectively closed station with high re-opening costs.

Next move onto an effectively closed station with much lower re-opening costs (Barlaston and / or Wedgwood).

Next move onto lightly used / poorly served stations with annual capital costs exceeding revenue (Polesworth).

Then pick off all lightly used stations every time an expense of some kind is imminent.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To all intents and purposes the station has been closed since 2004. Does it serve any decent sized communities and is it worth the cost of rebuilding it. I would suggest no. I don't like to see stations close on an emotional level but practically what is the point of spending the money to rebuild a station to modern standards that few will use?

Exactly.

To use another example, I don't see any particular reason to close Altnabreac, as having it costs next to nothing. But if the line was to need to be realigned for some reason, I wouldn't see any point in spending money to build a new station.

Actually, if anything, straying onto Altnabreac, if you were going to do anything around there closing Scotscalder, Altnabreac and Georgemas as a passenger station and building a new platform at Halkirk would make more sense. But that's for another thread

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Exactly.

To use another example, I don't see any particular reason to close Altnabreac, as having it costs next to nothing. But if the line was to need to be realigned for some reason, I wouldn't see any point in spending money to build a new station.

The costs for rebuilding are built into the annual charge anyway. As they are for all structures. So whether it comes in year 1 or year 100 the costs are accounted for and included in Network Rail's budgets. The clever trick is to accrue 99 years worth of annual charge without incurring any expense and then close it without having to replace it. Nice bonus for the shareholders. The bad alternative is that something falls down in year 1 then you have to recoup the money for the next 99 years!

 

[DarloRich]

Possibly so, but closure sets a precedent. An easy closure gives the DfT the confidence to try for more.

Start off with an effectively closed station with high re-opening costs.

Next move onto an effectively closed station with much lower re-opening costs (Barlaston and / or Wedgwood).

Next move onto lightly used / poorly served stations with annual capital costs exceeding revenue (Polesworth).

Then pick off all lightly used stations every time an expense of some kind is imminent.

I would be worried about any "closed" station, especially ones requiring lots of work. The costs of reopening them & bringing them up to modern standards and lengths are large. Norton Bridge and Polesworth would be, to all intents and purposes, new stations missing as they are bridges and platforms.

Would any of the others listed above be of any great loss either to the railway network or to their communities? I also think there is a a difference between stations on fast main lines and country branch line stations.

 

[thenorthern]

When Norton Bridge, Wedgwood, Barlaston and Stone were mothballed in 2004 what did Network Rail and Central Trains plan to do with the stations?

I know they were reopened after the 2003 closure but were later closed a short time later in 2004 because the paths were needed for other trains. In 2006 though Virgin Trains planned a new Birmingham to Manchester train as at the time there was only one train per hour between Birmingham and Manchester but that never happened and Virgin lost the CrossCountry franchise in 2007.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

I would be worried about any "closed" station, especially ones requiring lots of work. The costs of reopening them & bringing them up to modern standards and lengths are large. Norton Bridge and Polesworth would be, to all intents and purposes, new stations missing as they are bridges and platforms.

Would any of the others listed above be of any great loss either to the railway network or to their communities? I also think there is a a difference between stations on fast main lines and country branch line stations.

Therein lies the problem.

Great loss to the nation as a whole, or great loss to the individuals affected.

To the nation as a whole, taken in the round and after a period of adjustment, the entire passenger rail system could be removed. It operates at a loss, especially London commuter services. Sure there would be some disruption, some people would have to move house, some employers may have to relocate. Great news for the outlying areas. More and better paid jobs in Stoke. Higher house prices in Stoke, lower ones in London so more affordable for those that remain.

Should the Mr Jones the businessman, whizzing by Virgin to London for a meeting (when other alternatives exist - Skype, train via Crewe, plane or driving) take precedence over Mr Jones the pensioner, getting to Stafford for his groceries (when no other alternatives exist - post station closure when Norton Bridge will have no bus service within months)?

People need to go about their daily business. I cannot speak for Polesworth but none of the others have much in the way of retail, leisure, health or education provision. Not everyone can drive.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

When Norton Bridge, Wedgwood, Barlaston and Stone were mothballed in 2004 what did Network Rail and Central Trains plan to do with the stations?

I know they were reopened after the 2003 closure but were later closed a short time later in 2004 because the paths were needed for other trains. In 2006 though Virgin Trains planned a new Birmingham to Manchester train as at the time there was only one train per hour between Birmingham and Manchester but that never happened and Virgin lost the CrossCountry franchise in 2007.

Did they return after the WCML upgrade was completed? I cannot recall and do not have timetables for the period. Certainly Etruria never re-opened.

 

[thenorthern]

Did they return after the WCML upgrade was completed? I cannot recall and do not have timetables for the period. Certainly Etruria never re-opened.

They did for a short time but at the time there were a large amount of trains diverted via Stoke-on-Trent as the line from Crewe to Stafford was being upgraded so the services were withdrawn again in 2004.

Etruria did reopen in 2003 but only for First North Western and then later Northern Rail services to Manchester. The track was laid in a way that there was a large gap between the train and the platform so Central Trains decided not the call there.

 

[DarloRich]

Therein lies the problem.

Great loss to the nation as a whole, or great loss to the individuals affected.

To the nation as a whole, taken in the round and after a period of adjustment, the entire passenger rail system could be removed. It operates at a loss, especially London commuter services. Sure there would be some disruption, some people would have to move house, some employers may have to relocate. Great news for the outlying areas. More and better paid jobs in Stoke. Higher house prices in Stoke, lower ones in London so more affordable for those that remain.

Should the Mr Jones the businessman, whizzing by Virgin to London for a meeting (when other alternatives exist - Skype, train via Crewe, plane or driving) take precedence over Mr Jones the pensioner, getting to Stafford for his groceries (when no other alternatives exist - post station closure when Norton Bridge will have no bus service within months)?

People need to go about their daily business. I cannot speak for Polesworth but none of the others have much in the way of retail, leisure, health or education provision. Not everyone can drive.

So we should never close stations because some old gadgie wants to get the train, every now and again, to buy his paper?

There are loads of places with no bus services and life goes on. Norton Bridge is in the middle of no where serving about 4 houses. Unless there is a vast new town planned for the area around Norton Bridge It simply isnt worth the cost and trouble of rebuilding it. The same goes for Polesworth and arguably the other potteries stations.

BTW i don't have a car so am well versed in using alternative options. You get by. it is certainly easier these days with on line shopping etc than it was when i had no car in a rural village in North Yorkshire with no shop and no bus!

 

[6Gman]

Therein lies the problem.

Great loss to the nation as a whole, or great loss to the individuals affected.

Should the Mr Jones the businessman, whizzing by Virgin to London for a meeting (when other alternatives exist - Skype, train via Crewe, plane or driving) take precedence over Mr Jones the pensioner, getting to Stafford for his groceries (when no other alternatives exist - post station closure when Norton Bridge will have no bus service within months)?

People need to go about their daily business.

Oh lord! I remember in my early days as a councillor (mid 1980s) another councillor calling for the Nantwich - Wellington line to be reopened because there were people who couldn't get to Audlem to collect their pensions!

You don't run trains for handfuls of people. It just doesn't make sense. You use buses; then dial-a-ride/ community buses; then taxis/ community cars.

 

[yorksrob]

So we should never close stations because some old gadgie wants to get the train, every now and again, to buy his paper?

There are loads of places with no bus services and life goes on. Norton Bridge is in the middle of no where serving about 4 houses. Unless there is a vast new town planned for the area around Norton Bridge It simply isnt worth the cost and trouble of rebuilding it. The same goes for Polesworth and arguably the other potteries stations.

Arguably no, not if it sets a precedent.

In the case of the Potteries stations, permission to close was neither sought nor granted. This means that as the custodian of the railway, NR had a duty to ensure that those stations were maintained in a steady state for use at some time in the future. If there is a case for closure, it should be decided on the merits of the station as though it were fully functioning and not reliant on a state of disrepair which arguably it shouldn't have been allowed to fall into in the first place.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The whole area is littered with stations that have closed simply because they get in the way of Richard Branson moving fresh air from Manchester to London at 125mph every 20 minutes.

Ditton Junction was just the start, although that was done in the traditional way of grinding down a useful train service until nobody uses it. Etruria was closed because it got in the way, same with Barlaston and Wedgewood. Polesworth effectively closed because Railtrack would have had to spend shareholders' money in putting the footbridge back in, same with Norton Bridge.

After all these years it's probably not worth re-opening Norton Bridge, but the way the closure has been achieved rather sticks in the throat.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Arguably no, not if it sets a precedent.

In the case of the Potteries stations, permission to close was neither sought nor granted. This means that as the custodian of the railway, NR had a duty to ensure that those stations were maintained in a steady state for use at some time in the future. If there is a case for closure, it should be decided on the merits of the station as though it were fully functioning and not reliant on a state of disrepair which arguably it shouldn't have been allowed to fall into in the first place.

But Norton Bridge didn't fall into disrepair as such - it became irrelevant because of a change to the track layout. If you built it now, it'd be on the flyover lines, which run quite some distance from the village.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The whole area is littered with stations that have closed simply because they get in the way of Richard Branson moving fresh air from Manchester to London at 125mph every 20 minutes.

Ditton Junction was just the start

Ditton Junction has no relevance to VT service increases, as Liverpool to London has exactly the same level of service it had before privatisation - one train per hour. And Ditton itself is probably better served by Hough Green.

In fact Ditton Junction was closed in 1994.

 

[childwallblues]

Can you suggest any reason why Rugeley Trent Valley had such an astronomical annual passenger usage increase to 146,952 from 1,861, as that seems way above the norm in the period from 1997 to 2014.

As has been said it is now an interchange station. At one point trains from the Chase Line used to run through from Stafford so there was no need to change.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

The whole area is littered with stations that have closed simply because they get in the way of Richard Branson moving fresh air from Manchester to London at 125mph every 20 minutes.

Ditton Junction was just the start, although that was done in the traditional way of grinding down a useful train service until nobody uses it. Etruria was closed because it got in the way, same with Barlaston and Wedgewood. Polesworth effectively closed because Railtrack would have had to spend shareholders' money in putting the footbridge back in, same with Norton Bridge.

After all these years it's probably not worth re-opening Norton Bridge, but the way the closure has been achieved rather sticks in the throat.

At the risk of going slightly off topic would the closure of Combe and Finstock stations on the Cotswold line be justified as part of redoubling? Redoubling of the line would bring huge benefits to Oxfordshire, Worcester, Worcestershire and beyond but Finstock would certainly have to be rebuilt as the platform is built on the site of the down line. However could a new double platform station be justified for a station that has one train per day in each direction and less than 2000 passengers per year?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I also think there is a a difference between stations on fast main lines and country branch line stations.

Can I quote one reason for the closure of all the railway stations between Preston and Lancaster as being an example of such on a fast main line as being for operational efficiency.

 

[6Gman]

Possibly so, but closure sets a precedent. An easy closure gives the DfT the confidence to try for more.

Good!

(Puts on body armour.)

I'm a great believer that if a station serves a useful purpose then the service should be developed to the utmost effect; and that if a station serves little or no purpose, or the "cost" (not just financial) outweighs any benefit then it should be closed. Not reduced to three trains a week in one direction or whatever, or trains on one day of the week. Closed.

Get on with it DfT.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Can I quote one reason for the closure of all the railway stations between Preston and Lancaster as being an example of such on a fast main line as being for operational efficiency.

Or indeed over long stretches of the ECML or the WCML between Wolverton and Rugby.

 

[thenorthern]

The local MP Bill Cash is opposing the closure and bringing the matter up with parliament.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Good!

(Puts on body armour.)

I'm a great believer that if a station serves a useful purpose then the service should be developed to the utmost effect; and that if a station serves little or no purpose, or the "cost" (not just financial) outweighs any benefit then it should be closed. Not reduced to three trains a week in one direction or whatever, or trains on one day of the week. Closed.

Get on with it DfT.

I wouldn't disagree with any of that.

 

[6Gman]

I wouldn't disagree with any of that.

I should perhaps have added that I'd also like new stations to open in worthwhile locations.



But not Norton Bridge!

 

[The Planner]

The local MP Bill Cash is opposing the closure and bringing the matter up with parliament.

Would he do anything else?

 

[thenorthern]

Good!

(Puts on body armour.)

I'm a great believer that if a station serves a useful purpose then the service should be developed to the utmost effect; and that if a station serves little or no purpose, or the "cost" (not just financial) outweighs any benefit then it should be closed. Not reduced to three trains a week in one direction or whatever, or trains on one day of the week. Closed.

Get on with it DfT.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Or indeed over long stretches of the ECML or the WCML between Wolverton and Rugby.

Would agree, Blaydon station was previously served by 5 trains per day and passenger numbers were understandably low but now it has a two hourly service and passenger numbers are increasing.

Teesside Airport on the other hand wouldn't get a large amount of passengers if it was to have a regular service although it might have done 10 years ago so realistically should be closed.

 

[yorksrob]

Good!

(Puts on body armour.)

I'm a great believer that if a station serves a useful purpose then the service should be developed to the utmost effect; and that if a station serves little or no purpose, or the "cost" (not just financial) outweighs any benefit then it should be closed. Not reduced to three trains a week in one direction or whatever, or trains on one day of the week. Closed.

Get on with it DfT.

I think the cost of having a few parly stations is far outweighed by the benefit of having a Governing class that is reluctant to close stations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I wouldn't disagree with any of that.

Nor I, though I equally wouldn't bother closing little used stations that don't get in the way by the nature of the service - there seems, at present, for example, little sense in closing Kempston Hardwick as keeping it costs next to nothing - but EWR could change that.

But I don't see the point in Parliamentary services, much as a ride on the Flying Dentonian is an interesting diversion (anyone on here end up with one of my DB-style destination labels I stuck up during the supposed last run of 101685 in about 2000 - I know they all got taken as souvenirs?) - either have it open with an adequate service, which would to me be *at least* two-hourly, or for very rural lines where the overall frequency is justifably lower all trains, or close it.

 

[childwallblues]

Can I quote one reason for the closure of all the railway stations between Preston and Lancaster as being an example of such on a fast main line as being for operational efficiency.

Plus the mainline platforms at Carnforth.

 

[Tetchytyke]

At the risk of going slightly off topic would the closure of Combe and Finstock stations on the Cotswold line be justified as part of redoubling?

I'm not familiar with the area, but presumably if the platform is built on the old alignment it is a relatively recent construction? Which immediately makes me wonder why it was justified building the platform and why now the train has a single daily service.

But I think Norton Bridge and definitely Polesworth are slightly different, in that both stations had a footbridge which was removed whilst the line was improved by Railtrack. Having removed the footbridge, and with the WCML work going massively overbudget, Railtrack decided to spend the money on their shareholders rather than replacing the footbridges.

I think the deliberate running down of stations (and I mentioned Ditton Junction as the first privatisation example of this) in order to justify closure is dishonest. Norton Bridge probably deserved to be closed properly when the line was upgraded, but Polesworth should be able to justify a service similar to that at nearby Wilnecote, especially as the platforms are on the slow lines.

I'd agree that some stations should close- unless and until Teesside Airport is demolished and turned into a housing estate, the station there serves no purpose whatsoever- but many more seem to have had their service deliberately run down in order to justify closure. Someone else has mentioned Blaydon; there is no reason why that station never had all the stoppers to Hexham call there.

 

[Bletchleyite]

and I mentioned Ditton Junction as the first privatisation example of this

Incorrectly. It closed before privatisation in 1994, and was run down by BR, not a private TOC.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm not familiar with the area, but presumably if the platform is built on the old alignment it is a relatively recent construction?

Done in BR days. I guess it was a saving by being able to remove a footbridge.

FWIW, I can't really see a reason not to close either - they are very close to a larger station with a better service. It's either worth stopping all trains there on a low-frequency line like that or it's not worth having it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think the deliberate running down of stations (and I mentioned Ditton Junction as the first privatisation example of this) in order to justify closure is dishonest. Norton Bridge probably deserved to be closed properly when the line was upgraded, but Polesworth should be able to justify a service similar to that at nearby Wilnecote, especially as the platforms are on the slow lines.

Agreed. Close it or don't close it. If you're not going to close it, serve it properly - as I said I'd say a minimum of a train every two hours or all trains if the service on the whole line is less frequent.

 

[onlinespotting]

Etruria had just one morning peak train to Manchester each day and had circa 1400 per year using the station. The close was actually overturned for about a year. Had it remained, then now 11+ years lasted I imagine its usage would have increased due to the retail and housing developments that have happened in the area over the past years. Increase the service to peak only or two hourly trains then had it remained , Etruria would have developed as a station and increased footfall. We don't know what's going to be at Norton Bridge in ten years time.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Etruria had just one morning peak train to Manchester each day and had circa 1400 per year using the station. The close was actually overturned for about a year. Had it remained, then now 11+ years lasted I imagine its usage would have increased due to the retail and housing developments that have happened in the area over the past years. Increase the service to peak only or two hourly trains then had it remained , Etruria would have developed as a station and increased footfall. We don't know what's going to be at Norton Bridge in ten years time.

If there's something worth building a station for, it will no doubt be built - probably a new-build on the flyover lines well away from its present location.

That's the problem with Norton Bridge - the present platform's location is not of use. It would basically be a total new-build.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Etruria had just one morning peak train to Manchester each day and had circa 1400 per year using the station. The close was actually overturned for about a year. Had it remained, then now 11+ years lasted I imagine its usage would have increased due to the retail and housing developments that have happened in the area over the past years. Increase the service to peak only or two hourly trains then had it remained , Etruria would have developed as a station and increased footfall. We don't know what's going to be at Norton Bridge in ten years time.

REALLY? You been to Etruia? There is a six lane dual carriageway, the only way to cross is by subway. If coming from Newcastle, you have to cross the A500. Although there are crossings, they aren't weighted to favour pedestrians, and the damage to the barriers is constant, you really are taking a risk being on the pavement here! It can't be described as handy for Festival Park. There is no where for a car to stop, let alone pull in, so all access has to be on foot. Areas change, and Etruia was one of them. I work at Festival Park, and would not use Etruia if it were open, the bus is far and away a better option.

Norton Bridge needs to be closed formally. Polesworth should be kept open, one of Barlaston and Wedgwood too. I don't know who all these people using the bus from Norton Bridge are! Noone moves to Norton Bridge to be reliant on the Public Transport! I know it is hard to close a station, but we shouldn't stand in the way, just because it is a station. Newhaven Marina needs shutting too.

 

[onlinespotting]

REALLY? You been to Etruia? There is a six lane dual carriageway, the only way to cross is by subway. If coming from Newcastle, you have to cross the A500. Although there are crossings, they aren't weighted to favour pedestrians, and the damage to the barriers is constant, you really are taking a risk being on the pavement here! It can't be described as handy for Festival Park. There is no where for a car to stop, let alone pull in, so all access has to be on foot. Areas change, and Etruia was one of them. I work at Festival Park, and would not use Etruia if it were open, the bus is far and away a better option.

Norton Bridge needs to be closed formally. Polesworth should be kept open, one of Barlaston and Wedgwood too. I don't know who all these people using the bus from Norton Bridge are! Noone moves to Norton Bridge to be reliant on the Public Transport! I know it is hard to close a station, but we shouldn't stand in the way, just because it is a station. Newhaven Marina needs shutting too.

It was an island platform accessible from the bridge which had a bus stop by it and is now within 5 mins walk of a new housing development and a short walk, via the canal to commercial and industrial premises and new developments.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It is more difficult to approach on foot from Basford, I agree, but it would have served Etruria