• 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!

Cottingley and the new-build White Rose station, Leeds. Is there scope for operating both stations instead of just one?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Iskra

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2014
Messages
8,023
Location
West Riding
I reckon there could be scope for both a Cottingley and White Rose station, if a TP service is diverted via Wakefield and Castleford to York it could work.

It seems a shame to close Cottingley when there has been so much housing development around the station area and when the White Rose must be suffering a massive decline in footfall.
It seems a shame to make a bit-of-nothing local station half a mile from the nearest alternative work if it's to be at the expense of a well-used express train skipping its most important stop.
Usage is steadily growing, some years jumping 5% or more. People could just use one of the plethora of other express trains stopping at Leeds, or they could join two trains together rather than wasting capacity with short trains which causes reliability issues.

TP are already serving Wakefield Kirkgate, Castleford is getting a second platform, continuing that service to York is the logical next step. You may as well use the released capacity on the core to move people. Leeds needs all the urban stations it can get as the centre is already clogged with buses.

It seems short-sighted to close a station with growing use, to open one that's business case is unravelling rapidly...
The above quotes are from this thread: https://railforums.co.uk/threads/tr...ation-updates-cp6.88054/page-138#post-5153530

The current assumption is that when the new White Rose station is built, it will mean the closure of the current Cottingley station. However, is there room for both stations to operate instead, so as to serve the housing developments built near Cottingley station and to relieve traffic from Leeds roads and buses from the already congested city centre?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,350
Location
West of Andover
I would imagine if the new station at White Rose does open, the existing station at Cottingley will be reduced to a token service to avoid the hassle of going through the closure paperwork.

Similar to Warrington West & Sankey.
 

Iskra

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2014
Messages
8,023
Location
West Riding
I would imagine if the new station at White Rose does open, the existing station at Cottingley will be reduced to a token service to avoid the hassle of going through the closure paperwork.

Similar to Warrington West & Sankey.
100% Cottingley will close.
The most similar precedent seems to be Brightside and Meadowhall stations in Sheffield, where Brightside remained open with a limited service for 5 years after Meadowhall was built before being closed, so it’s possible both will happen.

It does seem a waste of a station with growing usage, although admittedly that is growth from a small base.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
It does seem a waste of a station with growing usage, although admittedly that is growth from a small base.

Passenger numbers were generally growing there, but then passenger numbers were generally growing at most stations pre-Covid:

2015/16
Increase
88,810
2016/17
Increase
97,180
2017/18
Decrease
96,596
2018/19
Increase
96,604
2019/20
Increase
101,830

(passenger figures from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cottingley_railway_station)

It's not a quiet station - anything with a six figure passenger number/ over a hundred departing passengers a day generally isn't on the "closures" list - but I'm guessing that the vast majority of those passengers will be short distance traffic for Leeds, generally with the peak flow - it's £3.20 return to Leeds so maybe the total revenue is going to be in the region of half a million pounds (I'm sure someone will be along to suggest that there are some high value Cottingley - London First Class passengers, and that closing it will mean they aren't willing to use a White Rose station instead etc etc)

Lets say that, all things being equal, a White Rose station is more useful for half of the current Cottingley passengers (given that Cottingley is the only station currently open between Morley and Leeds, so presumably serves a wider catchment than just the people living within a stone's throw of the station), so that takes Cottingley down to 50,000 passengers a year (based on the current hourly service)

If you can retain roughly three quarters of those 50,000 passengers with just two or three stops each weekday (into Leeds in the morning, back at tea time, tickets interchangeable with White Rose so people can always travel back to that neck of the woods at other times) then maybe you wouldn't need to consider closing the station.

The problem will be if those passenger numbers are spread much thinner across the week - for arguments sakes, if you assume a station has an hourly service in each direction for twelve hours a day, seven days a week, that's 168 trains stopping there each week. In the case of a station with 100,000 passengers a year, that's (slightly) less than one departing passenger per service that stops there. In the case of a station that's gone down to 50,000 passengers, that's half again.

But people don't turn up randomly, the majority will be travelling to the nearest big city centre station in the morning and back in the afternoon. Not all, sure, but Cottingley isn't a "Destination" station (whereas some people from Kirkless etc will travel to White Rose as a shopping centre/ nearby office park/ connecting bus services etc)

So, for me, keeping it would really depend on how spread/bunched the remaining passengers are. If you can keep most of them with just a few key services a day/week then keep it open. If the "50,000" are spread much thinner across the week then it becomes a lot less economical to keep serving them (given that the opportunity cost of serving Cottingley each hour may be serving another station down the line or an improved dwell time at Leeds to make services more reliable etc etc)

I suppose that one thing Cottingley has got in its favour is how inaccessible it is - Brightside was only a short straight walk from Meadowhall along roads parallel with the railway line, but Cottingley is much further by foot from White Rose than the train would go, maybe the walking distance is twice as far as the crow would fly, which means that a White Rose station is a lot more awkward for Cottingley passengers than a Meadowhall station was for Brightside, maybe we'll see Cottingley retaining more like 75,000 or those 100,000 passengers, maybe more.

"Local" stations on busy main lines are always going to be tricky though - holding up express services etc - maybe if the Government even get around to electrifying the line there'll be more scope for EMUs to make more stops at such stations.
 

Iskra

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2014
Messages
8,023
Location
West Riding
I agree with a lot of what you have said there @tbtc . Electrification would be the ideal solution. But, the underlying issue that needs solving on the TP core is the concept of Manchester Airport having a direct service to every town in Northern England using multitudes of short trains, which is a waste of valuable capacity on the core. Leeds has well documented inter-urban transport issues, closing its few remaining urban railway stations is merely perpetuating an already horrific mistake in the area, but that's another thread...
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
I agree with a lot of what you have said there @tbtc . Electrification would be the ideal solution. But, the underlying issue that needs solving on the TP core is the concept of Manchester Airport having a direct service to every town in Northern England using multitudes of short trains, which is a waste of valuable capacity on the core. Leeds has well documented inter-urban transport issues, closing its few remaining urban railway stations is merely perpetuating an already horrific mistake in the area, but that's another thread...

Agreed - passengers at places like Cottingley (and Morley, Batley...) suffer as second class citizens on a longer distance line - whereas there's better services for places like Horsforth and Pudsey as they are more "local" lines without the non-stop services - but people doing their daily commute aren't as important/ "sexy" as people travelling to Manchester Airport once a year!

If we had HS3/ TPR taking the longer distance passengers onto a segregated line we'd be able to have more of a "turn up and go" frequency from stations east of Dewsbury into Leeds but that's a long way off.
 

Halifaxlad

Established Member
Joined
5 Apr 2018
Messages
1,409
Location
The White Rose County
Cottingley would be much better to the West of Old road where it runs under the viaduct!

It could do the same at the opposite side of Elland road to the East but with Morley St supposedly moving, its going to be about 1.5 km from Morley!

If it didn't close then they're will be 3 stations within 3km of each other which I can't see being viable! Although I suppose we shall have to wait and see what else is proposed for the section between Ravensthorpe and Leeds.
 

SuperNova

Member
Joined
12 Dec 2019
Messages
960
Location
The North
Agreed - passengers at places like Cottingley (and Morley, Batley...) suffer as second class citizens on a longer distance line - whereas there's better services for places like Horsforth and Pudsey as they are more "local" lines without the non-stop services - but people doing their daily commute aren't as important/ "sexy" as people travelling to Manchester Airport once a year!

If we had HS3/ TPR taking the longer distance passengers onto a segregated line we'd be able to have more of a "turn up and go" frequency from stations east of Dewsbury into Leeds but that's a long way off.
Not really, TRU in theory will allow for two stoppers from Hudds per hour. And Batley/Morley already have 2 trains an hour into Leeds.
 

bluenoxid

Established Member
Joined
9 Feb 2008
Messages
2,472
And if NPR creates a new corridor out of Leeds, then tram trains are not an unrealistic prospect.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,718
Location
Another planet...
And if NPR creates a new corridor out of Leeds, then tram trains are not an unrealistic prospect.
Tram trains are an utterly stupid idea to use anywhere there isn't already a tram system for them to use.
If we go down the route of thinking "a lightweight tram-train vehicle will be cheaper, let's use those" we'll be repeating the mistakes that were made in the 1980s with the Pacers.

Morley, Cottingley and the White Rose Centre itself would all ideally be served by a Leeds Tramway rather than heavy rail. In particular Morley, whose station is a long way below the town.
 

Glenn1969

Established Member
Joined
22 Jan 2019
Messages
1,983
Location
Halifax, Yorks
But this is precisely what the WYCA 2040 vision is suggesting. Except that it shows most disused alignments as mass transit possiblities. Even Queensbury tunnel gets on the map which means my local station would get an RT link for the 1st time since the late 50s
 

Grumpy

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2010
Messages
1,077
As stated above Cottingley is doing quite well serving its own nearby market. Stopping trains at an additional White Rose station would eat into track capacity but that doesn’t mean Cottingley should close-if capacity is a problem it would make sense to shut Ravensthorpe and/or Deighton which each generate lower usage.
The issue really is that the proposed new station is to be built in a location(roughly on the site of the former Churwell) which will be both unattractive for existing Cottingley users and users of the WHite Rose centre. Unless they build it further South and closer to the centre it will be a waste of money
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,718
Location
Another planet...
But this is precisely what the WYCA 2040 vision is suggesting. Except that it shows most disused alignments as mass transit possiblities. Even Queensbury tunnel gets on the map which means my local station would get an RT link for the 1st time since the late 50s
Someone had better tell Highways England then, as they want to infill some or all of the Queensbury tunnels. They tried to sneak it last year during lockdown.
As stated above Cottingley is doing quite well serving its own nearby market. Stopping trains at an additional White Rose station would eat into track capacity but that doesn’t mean Cottingley should close-if capacity is a problem it would make sense to shut Ravensthorpe and/or Deighton which each generate lower usage.
The issue really is that the proposed new station is to be built in a location(roughly on the site of the former Churwell) which will be both unattractive for existing Cottingley users and users of the WHite Rose centre. Unless they build it further South and closer to the centre it will be a waste of money
Closing a station at the other end of the line wouldn't make it suddenly possible to have stations at tramway-style spacings on a two-track mainline nearer to Leeds.

Besides, Ravensthorpe will probably improve after the upgrade, with Wakefield services and housing built in the area which is currently a desolate wasteland.
Deighton also could have been boosted, had the relocation nearer to Bradley Junction proposal gone ahead. It would also have been useful for RRBs into Huddersfield during the works if could be built in advance of the rest. But it seems that building a temporary station at Hillhouse (which I doubt will be easy to get buses in and out) is the strategy chosen. Deighton will now be rebuilt at the current awkward location- one which, like Hillhouse, has issues of anti-social behaviour by a minority of locals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top