Buxton-Matlock Rail and Trail Inquiry

[Bakerbloke]

To coincide with the citizens enquiry next week in Buxton, I thought it may be a good idea to hear your views on the key questions that are being addressed:

1. Is re-opening the railway feasible?
2. Could it be economically viable?
3. What has changed since the last studies concluded?
4. Is the cycle path a better use for the track?
5. Could the cycle path use a different route?

 

[Masboroughlad]

I believe that re-opening was part of the Lib Dems original manifesto last year - you know when they promised everything knowing they thought they wouldn't win!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Unfortunately, all RECENTLY PUBLISHED reports at a level looking impassionately at the re-opening state that it is not a viable proposition at this period of time. The East Midlands review came to that answer. No new freight services look to be forthcoming from local industrial concerns, such as LaFarge.

There is a strong case for the cycle use of this route from the local and tourism forums. The area itself makes the best of the scenic attractions available.

 

[PinzaC55]

To coincide with the citizens enquiry next week in Buxton, I thought it may be a good idea to hear your views on the key questions that are being addressed:

1. Is re-opening the railway feasible?
2. Could it be economically viable?
3. What has changed since the last studies concluded?
4. Is the cycle path a better use for the track?
5. Could the cycle path use a different route?

1. The 2004 study https://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/Image...ices/Reports/DSNet/Cabinet/210904CAB13116.pdf concluded that it was feasible
2. Obviously , since the Hope Valley line is supposedly stretched to capacity.
Feasibilty studies typically wildly underestimate the possible passenger loadings (look at Stirling - Alloa for example).
3. The recession and public spending cutbacks have given them an excuse to say they can't afford it.
On the positive side since walkers are now allowed through the tunnels, the tunnels must be safe for trains.
4. If you are a cyclist, yes. More people are non-cyclists than are. And of course cyclists directly contribute nothing to the economy by their use of the path. Railways are a huge stimulant to the local economy.
5. A cycle can go pretty much anywhere but a train can't. There are roads in the area and if any replacement paths were needed they could be built.

 

[furryfeet]

What is this "citizens enquiry" aiming to acheive ?
Will the findings have any weight with
a) local authorities, including hte Peak Park ?
b) national bodies i.e Daft, Railtrack etc ?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

1. The 2004 study https://www.derbyshire.gov3. The re... that the opportunity for "giving an excuse".

 

[185]

My view has always been Network Rail should work with Peak Rail and get it extended back from Matlock to Bakewell. That could be the springboard to reopening the lot, right through from Matlock to Buxton.

Network Rail should be forced to find a way of doing reopenings cheaper, maybe by recycling disused infrastructure, and using cheaper methods of works, planninng and management.

As for us cyclists and indeed rail enthusiasts, I think the general agreement amongst almost all of us is that if the line can be reopened to passenger rail services, none of us should stand in it's way. There is a duplicate cycle / foot path anyway, Buxton - Longridge-Middleton Top-Cromford/Whatstandwell which is equally a great path. (especially the last bit which I hit 55mph on )

As for Peak Rail, surely they can run side by side with the single line mainline.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

As for Peak Rail, surely they can run side by side with the single line mainline.

At Navigation Road station, there are two parallel single lines running through the station. One is the heavy rail Manchester to Chester Mid-Cheshire line and the other is the Manchester Metrolink Manchester to Altrincham line.

Is this the type of example that you are quoting?

 

[PinzaC55]

My view has always been Network Rail should work with Peak Rail and get it extended back from Matlock to Bakewell. That could be the springboard to reopening the lot, right through from Matlock to Buxton.

Network Rail should be forced to find a way of doing reopenings cheaper, maybe by recycling disused infrastructure, and using cheaper methods of works, planninng and management.

As for us cyclists and indeed rail enthusiasts, I think the general agreement amongst almost all of us is that if the line can be reopened to passenger rail services, none of us should stand in it's way. There is a duplicate cycle / foot path anyway, Buxton - Longridge-Middleton Top-Cromford/Whatstandwell which is equally a great path. (especially the last bit which I hit 55mph on )

As for Peak Rail, surely they can run side by side with the single line mainline.

If it was opened it should be double track. Single track is a false economy since it loads extra costs on in the form of extra pointwork and possible delays dou to late trains or failed trains.
Regarding Paul's comment about my "excuse" remark I'm a realist and know that if the government want to do something they'll find the money - witness the billions currently being squandered on the Olympics or HS1.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You miss all the fun on Railforums UK if you don't have the time to scan all the postings, as something usually crops up on another forum that impinges on the one you are involved with. BUXTON to MATLOCK is this one, but there was an interesting idea recently on another forum, concerning a most novel way to travel to BUXTON from the MANCHESTER direction with a diversion just past Chinley at Chinley North Junction, through the Dove Holes Tunel, past the Peak Dale Quarry, through Tunstead and arriving in Buxton. This too would make a scenic route like the BUXTON to MATLOCK one.

The great thing about this area is that it offers so much in the way of recreational opportunities and visual attractions, that actually living surrounded by all these natural assets, you may not appreciate it as would a visitor seeing it for the first time. My wife and I were visiting Buxton, Bakewell and Matlock Bath recently and despite it only being May, there were tourists noted from Korea, Japan, Russia, Poland, Italy and France in these areas.

Remember the motto....NIL DESPERANDUM You have achieved the re-opening to north of Matlock. Surely, that is something to be proud of. The Monsal Trail tunnel openings were well publicised on the local news of the TV channels.

....and if nothing else happens at the moment, the Trans-Peak will still be running from Buxton to Matlock and if you are lucky, you will get fleet number 61 with the tables in the middle

 

[bus man]

Can some one tell me why it is not possible to have a cycle path/ foot way at the edge of the railway ie around 5 foot away subject to space .


I know there could be problems with wind from passing trains but other than that whats the problem .

at the end of the day there are 1,000's of occasions when track workers walk at the side of the line with no problems.

The lowbridge at Rowsley could be solved with a bit of imagination : divert lorries up a specially built road to go over the railway, this would remove the need to get the bridge higher and increase the hight of the embankment.

As a country we need to look carefully at what we do railways are better for the enviroment , however, the road lobby is now so strong that they cry foul every time something is done.

A new railway line should be used for park and ride for bakewell etc especially on bakewell show days - yes i know its only 3 days a year but its chaos.

The line would take the pressue off the hope valley the midland main line and also the west coast if some Manchester - London services were diverted.

The recent report that we sell off unused railway land is worrying .

One of the best things about this lins is , I understand , bus tickets and rail tickets on the matlock section are interchangeable - think this is still the case.

 

[sprinterguy]

Can some one tell me why it is not possible to have a cycle path/ foot way at the edge of the railway ie around 5 foot away subject to space .

That's what I was thinking: The Matlock to Buxton line used to be double track, so why wouldn't it be possible to reopen the line as single track, with a passing loop at Bakewell and perhaps a couple of other places, and run the cycle track parallel to the railway on the other half of the formation.

 

[PinzaC55]

This was discussed in the early 90's. If you actually did this you would have to have a cycle path/bridleway through the tunnels on the upper stretch. Can you honestly imagine being on a cycle or horse in a tunnel with a train thundering by just a few feet away from you? Really?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

This was discussed in the early 90's. If you actually did this you would have to have a cycle path/bridleway through the tunnels on the upper stretch. Can you honestly imagine being on a cycle or horse in a tunnel with a train thundering by just a few feet away from you? Really?

Do bodies in the DfT have a view on what this might entail. I am sure that the RSPCA would be only too happy to give their view on the matter, as it is not the same comparison with animals when in the confined spaces of a tunnel when noise levels from passing traffic either from trains or road vehicles is accentuated by the actual confined space in the tunnel itself.

Noise levels on the open highway are not subject to this particular noise effect.

 

[Lampshade]

I think a Peak Rail/Network Rail/Derbyshire County Council/private investment consortium could go some way to getting this line reopened. The advantages surely outweigh the barriers, we've got:

• Less pressure on the Hope Valley
• A direct route from Manchester to the East Midlands
• A possible alternative route to London (Manchester - St Pancras non stop anyone?)
• Less pressure on the A6
• A link from High Peak to the rest of Derbyshire
• Towns in central Derbyshire have a rail link

The only major barrier is cost, but what's life without risk?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think a Peak Rail/Network Rail/Derbyshire County Council/private investment consortium could go some way to getting this line reopened. The advantages surely outweigh the barriers, we've got:

• Less pressure on the Hope Valley
• A direct route from Manchester to the East Midlands
• A possible alternative route to London (Manchester - St Pancras non stop anyone?)
• Less pressure on the A6
• A link from High Peak to the rest of Derbyshire
• Towns in central Derbyshire have a rail link

The only major barrier is cost, but what's life without risk?

Unfortunately, your final sentence reveals the reason for the foreseeable future, as the Treasury and the Bank of England will determine what large capital projects are "acceptable" to forward Government budgetry thinking.

 

[ivanhoe]

This is aspirational only and some of the reasons mentioned needs some clarification.

An alternative route to London from Manchester?
Isn't three trains an hour enough?

Direct route to East Midlands? Do you mean Derby? If so you can go via Stoke or Hope valley !

There is a stronger case to keep the old route for Recreational Purposes.

There are enough Buses from Buxton to Matlock.

Lastly, where is the Demand?

These would be the kind of questions I would be asking if I lived in Transport Deserts like Lincolnshire and the likes.

 

[bus man]

With regard the tunnels then have the tunnells just for rail . Up until this year the tunnells have been shut to walkers any way its only now that they have been open as lights have been put in .

However, to stop the entire scheme just for that is an example of how thinking on public transport as to be imporoved so that the we get more schemes.

 

[PinzaC55]

Ivanhoe said "An alternative route to London from Manchester? Isn't three trains an hour enough?"

This assumes that the only reason for reopening the line would be to have trains between those two cities. A direct train from St Pancras to Manchester via Bakewell would link several major conurbations (eg Leicester, Bedford,Derby with Manchester via the National Park thus opening up the Park to those wo don't own or choose to own a car.

"Direct route to East Midlands? Do you mean Derby? If so you can go via Stoke or Hope valley !"

As before. The original reason for closing the line was that trains could be sent via the Hope Valley. But that line is now saturated with traffic and is accessed by a single line curve at Dore.

"There is a stronger case to keep the old route for Recreational Purposes."

Not in many people's opinion. Reopened railways take traffic off the roads (less cars and less demand for buses) especially in a National Park in times when we are all supposed to "think green" andstimulate the local economy.

"There are enough Buses from Buxton to Matlock."

As before. If you lived in London and wished to holiday in Bakewell, would you lug your heavy luggage onto the train at St Pancras, change at Derby then walk to the bus station in Matlock? Or would you drive all the way?
Do the buses carry wheelchairs and bikes?

"Lastly, where is the Demand?"

The Feasibilty Study estimated a million passengers a year. As I said earlier these Studies usually wildly underestimate passenger numbers as in the case of the Alloa and Ebbw Vale lines.

"These would be the kind of questions I would be asking if I lived in Transport Deserts like Lincolnshire and the likes."

Different scenario. I've walked several of the disused Lincolnshire lines and they are horribly remote, so the only real traffic was probably seasonal, name holiday trains to Skegness or Cleethorpes.

 

[dggar]

Just seen a notification about a meeting in Buxton tonight.

Follow links for details

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=115769488507042

http://www.transitionbuxton.co.uk/

 

[Nym]

Major major major reason for re-opening would be an alternative route for fright from the quarries.

And any services to the East Midlands would then be sent this way, and the two Sheffeild - Manchester fasts (EMT and TPE) not being wighed down by Nottingham traffic any more, as they would be travelling via Matlock

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

To coincide with the citizens enquiry next week in Buxton......

What is the date, time and venue for this meeting?

If you attend, can you then post the concensus of that meeting back on this thread, please.

 

[dggar]

What is the date, time and venue for this meeting?

If you attend, can you then post the concensus of that meeting back on this thread, please.

Paul: look at the links I've posted in message 20.

May25th (Tonight,) 7:30pm The Railway public house, Buxton

http://www.gkpubs.co.uk/pubs-in-buxton/railway-pub/

 

[Southern Steve]

Is there not capacity on the Hope Valley route for an additional service at least two-hourly each way? If there is, a regular service could be considered - assuming there was sufficient capacity elsewhere on the route - from Manchester to Leicester via Derby. This would revive links lost with the withdrawal of the Manchester-St.Pancras services that were run to relieve the WCML during re-building. It could then go on to St.Pancras as before, or alternatively via the Melton Mowbray line to Peterborough, then Ely and Cambridge. This would provide new links, and act as a relief to the Liverpool-Norwich service.

 

[Metroland]

I would have thought the chief reason was to provide better access to the heart of the second most visited national park in the world with a high quality fast public transport link.

East Midlands to the NW also has pretty poor timings by rail, and by road you need to travel realistically via Stoke-on-Trent to avoid the slow and congested, although rather scenic A6.

For journey opportunities, a couple of trains per day from St Pancras - Manchester, bringing people from London (and parts of Europe) straight to the heart of the Peak district.

Nottingham-Manchester stopping services, calling at principal stations, maybe hourly. (reopened/revamped stations at Darley Dale, Rowsley, Bakewell, Millers Dale, Peak Forest.)

And some of the Norwich-Liverpool services, maybe 2 hourly, Calling Derby, Matlock, Bakewell, Stockport and Manchester, then to Liverpool.

It's not an especially massive project by most standards, double Ambergate-Matlock/Rowsley, new bridge at Rowsley, one over the A6 and one further on, and relay to Peak Forest over 10 miles or so which is pretty much intact. Then upgrade freight lines to Chinley. 2/3 Aspect signalling throughout.

 

[Kingfisher200262]

Localism is all very well. However, sometimes it's necessary to step back and look at the bigger picture.

One of the strongest arguments to come from the pro HS2 brigade is that the West Coast Main Line is almost full. Did someone grow some trains over the past ten years, or has this line recently been upgraded at a cost of over £9Bn?

Railtrack / Network Rail etc bottled the WCML upgrade in my opinion. It should have had in cab signalling, not for higher speed (although it would have delivered that) but for more capacity. As it was, it was decided not to proceed with this due to project time / cost over-run.

Now, everyone is paranoid about touching the WCML again, when, in reality that's what is needed... ERTMS.

When the West Coast main line was electrified in the 1960s, the Midland Main Line was open all the way through to Manchester via Matlock and Miller's Dale and this served as a perfect diversionary route. Had this route been available during the last WCML upgrade, the pain would have been much less and the civils guys wouldn't have had operational trains around their necks half the time.

The 16 missing miles between Miller's Dale junction and Matlock are a critically important artery of our railway network, which should never have been given up to the walkers and cyclists.

As for Peak Rail, well it might be a bit idealistic, but wouldn't it be nice to be able to operate a public service railway through the Peak for six days of the week, and then hand it over to the kettle fans on a Sunday so that they can play trains and entertain the masses? That surely is the ultimate railway win-win.

 

[Lampshade]

In many ways it's even easier than Skipton - Colne, apart from crossing the A6, the trackbed is clear all the way through to Peak Forest.

 

[PinzaC55]

"As for Peak Rail, well it might be a bit idealistic, but wouldn't it be nice to be able to operate a public service railway through the Peak for six days of the week, and then hand it over to the kettle fans on a Sunday so that they can play trains and entertain the masses? That surely is the ultimate railway win-win."

I was thinking about this very question since I used to volunteer for Peak Rail.
It's commonly accepted among them that PR will never go north of Rowsley because the A6 road bridge site is an insurmountable obstacle.
Let's imagine you have a 2 track main line with the bit from Rowsley to Matlock still owned by PR who have free running rights over it. They still have Rowsley South station and the loco shed connected to the main line. Also the bit of line into Rowsley original station is rebuilt and forms their new terminus.
I know it is all pie in the sky but it could be done.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Paul: look at the links I've posted in message 20.

May25th (Tonight,) 7:30pm The Railway public house, Buxton

http://www.gkpubs.co.uk/pubs-in-buxton/railway-pub/

Sorry that I could not make it, due to family committments ( A new grandson on the scene).

Please post with the matters decided at the meeting to keep us all informed,

 

[PinzaC55]

Regarding what was said earlier about the Hope Valley line, this post from the "Chinley" thread is worth reading http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=43304&page=4 ( post by VideozVideoz ) with clip from Buxton Advertiser.