Breich - Public Consultation on Station Closure

[MidnightFlyer]

More generally, this is a welcome development. Can we have more of this sort of thing please?

 

[thenorthern]

Isn't a rebuild (scope unknown) proposed for Livingston South as part of the juicing of the Shotts line? It's specifically highlighted amongst its benefits so I'm presuming it's getting more attention than the other stations on the route.

Yes thats true according to the reports, Livingston South does need re-building in my opinion as when it first opened the population of Livingston was much smaller is now also since the opening of the Bathgate to Airdrie line Livingston South's importance has diminished as Livingston North also has trains to Glasgow that are faster and more frequent.

Given though that between Glasgow and Edinburgh there are currently 2 trains via Motherwell, 2 via Shotts, 4 via Bathgate and 4 via Falkirk marking 12 each hour with electrification of the Shotts line increase that?

 

[infobleep]

Worth quoting these figures, as any debate about closing a barely-used station tends to get the response "but it's not hurting anyone, it's only a minimal cost" etc.

Three million quid, for a station that doesn't see three passengers each week?

I know that not every station is in line for electrification in the near future, and that this "one-off" event has kind of forced Network Rail's hand, but the costs of upgrading other basket-case stations to modern accessibility standards etc.

I'd rather we bit the bullet and closed a handful of stations properly, rather than the nonsense of one-a-week train services, permanent rail replacement buses etc.

I wonder, how much does Denton and Reddish South cost to run trains to? Same goes for Newhaven Marine.

 

[thenorthern]

Mont how much Denton and Reddish South cost to run trains to? Same goes for Newhaven Marine.

With Reddish South and Denton Network Rail proposed closure in 2007 I think but TfGM blocked the proposals, also both stations haven't been modified since the current service pattern was introduced in 1992.

Should the branch change though with electrification or something else then both stations would likely close for good.

 

[infobleep]

With Reddish South and Denton Network Rail proposed closure in 2007 I think but TfGM blocked the proposals, also both stations haven't been modified since the current service pattern was introduced in 1992.

Should the branch change though with electrification or something else then both stations would likely close for good.

So is the issue here, not the cost of running services to a station but the cost if they need to be redeveloped?

 

[thenorthern]

So is the issue here, not the cost of running services to a station but the cost if they need to be redeveloped?

Yes indeed although compared to other parliamentary services TfGM will lobby against any closure of the branch as they have plans for at Stockport to Manchester Victoria one day I think. If Breich station was within the SPT then SPT would lobby against a closure.

With Breich though the cost of installing a new footbridge is £1.4m which with 138 passengers last year would work out at £500 per passenger over a 20 year period. Addiewell's footbridge would work out at £3 per passenger is also is still a lot in financial terms but nowhere near as much as Breich.

Interesting fact though ever year Breich station has in a year the same amount of passengers that use Shotts station in 5 hours.

 

[185143]

I mentioned the station to some spotters I know in Glasgow. They'd never heard of it...

 

[thenorthern]

Looking at old reports from around 1997 there were a couple of lines and stations that train operating companies wanted to close and Breich was mentioned but by the looks of it only a small number such as Pendleton and the two Sinfin stations did close.

 

[D6975]

According to news reports the last station to close in Scotland was Balloch Pier in 1986 which was a strange closure as its was one of the few electrified stations to close.

I seem to recall that closing Balloch Pier enabled a level crossing to be disposed of, so it was a sensible move after the ferries had stopped.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I seem to recall that closing Balloch Pier enabled a level crossing to be disposed of, so it was a sensible move after the ferries had stopped.

That would be at Balloch Central, which was rebuilt on the south side of the level crossing. The old station building acted as the town's tourist information centre when I was last there IIRC.

I suspect removal of level crossings has been a common reason for resiting over the years - Uckfield is another.

 

[D6975]

That would be at Balloch Central, which was rebuilt on the south side of the level crossing. The old station building acted as the town's tourist information centre when I was last there IIRC.

I suspect removal of level crossings has been a common reason for resiting over the years - Uckfield is another.

And Sheringham.

 

[Carntyne]

Transport Minister (Scottish) is the one who makes the decision.

Plans to close are right IMO, the amount of money to upgrade given the level of usage and scope for a usage increase being extremely slim.

 

[Greenback]

If a station no longer serves any useful purpose, then there's no point in retaining it. This seems to be one of those instances where the original function fo the station seems to have been lost. I gather that it was once an are that had some industry, which has all now disappeared.

 

[DuncanS]

The many Bings around West Lothian are a reminder of the long lost shale oil industry.

 

[thenorthern]

Given that the oil shale was beginning to wind down although not completely around the time of the Beeching Axe I think that is why it was not closed during the Beeching axe.

Had the oil shale industry wound down in the 1950s I think Breich would have been closed by Beeching.

Looking at newspaper articles some of the comments mention that Breich would have more passengers using it if more trains stopped there which would almost certainly be the case but I don't think it would ever reach levels that are anywhere near enough to justify the work that would be needed to improve Breich station.

 

[route:oxford]

Looking at newspaper articles some of the comments mention that Breich would have more passengers using it if more trains stopped there which would almost certainly be the case but I don't think it would ever reach levels that are anywhere near enough to justify the work that would be needed to improve Breich station.

And even more passengers if more people lived nearby.

Is the land around Breich station suitable for building on?

Potentially a good site for a new mega-prison to serve Edinburgh and Glasgow?

Or maybe an extensive gated refugee & asylum community?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Is the land around Breich station suitable for building on?

Was there not testing done for shale oil in that area in the 1880 period?

 

[InOban]

And even more passengers if more people lived nearby.

Is the land around Breich station suitable for building on?

Potentially a good site for a new mega-prison to serve Edinburgh and Glasgow?

Or maybe an extensive gated refugee & asylum community?

The mega prison already exists. It at Addiewell, hence the rapid growth in traffic there.

 

[Railsigns]

Do we trust NR's figures ? The bridge is obviously an issue, but raising the platform sounds like unnecessary gold plating.

The issue at Breich is that substantial track lowering is needed to get the wires under the road bridge, which cannot be raised any higher because of the adjacent road junction. The platforms would therefore have to be rebuilt. There's no gold plating involved and no reason not to trust NR's figures.

 

[thenorthern]

There was quite a few houses built in Breich a couple of years ago and I thought Scotrail might look into more trains stopping but nothing came of it.

 

[snowball]

The issue at Breich is that substantial track lowering is needed to get the wires under the road bridge, which cannot be raised any higher because of the adjacent road junction. The platforms would therefore have to be rebuilt. There's no gold plating involved and no reason not to trust NR's figures.

According to this, the road bridge has already been rebuilt.

https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/breich-bridge-back-after-build

I suppose it's possible the track needs lowering as well but there's no suggestion of it in the press release.

 

[Railsigns]

According to this, the road bridge has already been rebuilt.

Yes, it has been, as the picture linked below shows.

https://www.railscot.co.uk/imageenlarge/imagecomplete.php?id=59740

 

[snowball]

I hadn't previously seen any suggestion that clearance uder the rebuilt road bridge was a problem, so I looked at some of the documents accessible by following links from the press release about the closure proposal. The bridge is only mentioned in this one.

My (very quick) reading of it is that the rebuilt road bridge has adequate electrical clearance without track lowering but only if there is no station nearby. The wires have to be low to go under the bridge, but the new regulations require the wires to be high where there's a platform. The cheapest option to keep the station open (assuming no derogation can be obtained on the wire height at the platforms) might be to relocate the station eastward to create a distance for the wires to rise. That would also bring it nearer the houses. But it's not worth the cost because the usage is so low.

 

[PaulLothian]

Given that the oil shale was beginning to wind down although not completely around the time of the Beeching Axe I think that is why it was not closed during the Beeching axe.

Had the oil shale industry wound down in the 1950s I think Breich would have been closed by Beeching.

Looking at newspaper articles some of the comments mention that Breich would have more passengers using it if more trains stopped there which would almost certainly be the case but I don't think it would ever reach levels that are anywhere near enough to justify the work that would be needed to improve Breich station.

The shale oil industry was completely defunct by 1962, and would have probably closed sooner if there hadn't been a lot of investment pre-war because of concerns about Britain's future fuel security.

Breich was not in the shale oil area. Confusingly there were several shale mines with Breich in their name, all further downstream along the Breich Water.

 

[BML247]

Looking at the map it doesn't seem an immediately obvious place for a busy station but with the level of service the level of patronage is actually rather good. I remain concerned that one way to make a station too poorly used to maintain is to stop few trains at it.

Did they just reduce the service for no reason or reduce the service due to poor patronage?

 

[PaulLothian]

With a population of about 200, Breich village is never going to be a major source of passengers. The village's location will never make it a particularly appealing place to live. Sorry, Breich, but sometimes facts have to be faced!

 

[Altnabreac]

With a population of about 200, Breich village is never going to be a major source of passengers. The village's location will never make it a particularly appealing place to live. Sorry, Breich, but sometimes facts have to be faced!

Breich's population is actually more like 400-450 and more houses are planned there. Unlikely to see growth to much more than 700-800 though.

Station closure was mentioned previously when the Rail 2014 consultation was done. A lot of the political noise then was about potential threats to the Maryhill line but the low usage stations were mentioned then.

West Lothian Council proposed that any closure proposal should be preceded by an improved service to test true demand.

A station relocated eastwards to the village would have more potential and if located at the existing over bridge could be relatively affordable. Still going to be hard to justify without an improved service though.

 

[PaulLothian]

Breich's population is actually more like 400-450 and more houses are planned there. Unlikely to see growth to much more than 700-800 though.

Station closure was mentioned previously when the Rail 2014 consultation was done. A lot of the political noise then was about potential threats to the Maryhill line but the low usage stations were mentioned then.

West Lothian Council proposed that any closure proposal should be preceded by an improved service to test true demand.

A station relocated eastwards to the village would have more potential and if located at the existing over bridge could be relatively affordable. Still going to be hard to justify without an improved service though.

West Lothian Council seems to think, from its website, that the population is 209 (mid-2015 estimate).

A major issue is that rail services don't particularly take people to places they most want to go. The bus services will take you to the centre of Livingston, rather than a mile away.

 

[thenorthern]

I am looking at the Beeching Report and according to it the whole Shotts Line was recommended for closure which of course in the end did not happen. I would imagine that given the line remained open they just left the stations as they were on the line.

I know Newpark station in what in now Livingston closed in 1959 which of course was before Beeching.

 

[backontrack]

More generally, this is a welcome development. Can we have more of this sort of thing please?

With this sort of proposal, the danger always is that a precedent could be set. Even if Breich should close, we remain cautious. If the government can close schools and hospitals, then why not railways?

I speak with my FoFNL hat on, here. Even apparently-purposeless, moribund old platforms can be used again. I'm no advocate of the 'build it and they will come' strategy, but sometimes, if you put a little effort into making an option more attractive for punters, you will get a lot back (e.g. NC500).

Not that I'm suggesting we do that with Breich. The trick is to limit closures as much as possible. Breich, Culrain, Altnabreac and Kildonan could all probably go. So could Teesside Airport. But we shouldn't go looking for stations to close, because that's a dangerous mindset to have. We've seen that before with Beeching. In the 1950s, lines were axed because they were unprofitable - but along came Beeching and Marples, and soon statistics were being fiddled to build roads and shut the railways.

So Breich should be allowed to shut, but we ought to be careful. Sometimes it is better to kill off a station so that we can justify more new ones (Abronhill, Bannockburn, Kirkliston and Halbeath, for example), but we shouldn't let the power of closure go to our heads.

There's probably a list of stations in Scotland that could probably be closed. Altnabreac and Culrain, for example, have probably fulfilled their purpose