Derby Telegraph "Plans to convert Monsal Trail back into railway takes 'significant step forward'"

[HullRailMan]

The bus already provides a much more comprehensive service than a reopened railway would, and the overwhelming majority still choose cars. There’s also the likelihood that most visitors to places like Bakewell will also visit somewhere else in the area, like Chatsworth, making a rail based visit even less attractive. The usual suspects will keep spouting their deluded fantasy that spending vast amounts of cash on this will somehow create a dramatic modal shift, but thankfully the thread also features plenty of common sense and reality.

 

[A0wen]

and I'm sure Buxtonians will make use of more direct connections to London.

Would you like to explain how Buxton will have a direct connection to London without a time consuming reversal ? IIRC the Midland London - Manchester services didn't serve Buxton.

A *far* more effective way to link Buxton to London would be a coach rail link to Macclesfield which is 11 miles away. A non stop coach could cover that in 30 mins and Macclesfield to London takes about 1h 50m, so you're looking at a 2h 30m journey allowing a 10 min connection. Though Virgin tried such a link in the early 00's and it wasn't successful suggesting demand for Buxton to London travel is more limited than you might believe.

 

[yorksrob]

Rishi did.

Maybe because NR doesn't see it as a scheme worth taking forward as it isn't considered an issue? I would hardly call the MEMRAP study getting the the point of a strategic outline business case. File it under SELRAP etc etc. As for the existing network, who do you think were integral to East West, Ordsall Chord, Okehampton etc.

So if the railway north of Preston has these constraints on one of the busiest railways in the country, with currently no resolution, why would we spend a billion pounds on reopening something that doesn't have a problem to solve?

NR clearly aren't in a position to adjudicate on the transport needs off of the network EW rail is a necessary project but again, it is a large politically generated project. I very much doubt that NR initiated it.

And Okehampton was still on the network anyway.

With regard to your last paragraph - it lacks logic. The Bakewell line is being proposed to improve transport links in the area. The fact that it will (unsurprisingly) operate like any other railway in the country doesn't in any way negate that.

The bus already provides a much more comprehensive service than a reopened railway would, and the overwhelming majority still choose cars. There’s also the likelihood that most visitors to places like Bakewell will also visit somewhere else in the area, like Chatsworth, making a rail based visit even less attractive. The usual suspects will keep spouting their deluded fantasy that spending vast amounts of cash on this will somehow create a dramatic modal shift, but thankfully the thread also features plenty of common sense and reality.

Do you ever actually travel on trains ? If you did, you would see that our local regional routes are well used, in spite of the usual deluded lot spouting "the trains are empty, no one will use them, people would far rather spend two hours on a bus with no toilets" etc

 

[willgreen]

I've heard it said on this forum before that Mancunians look to the peak district for their leisure, rather than the Yorkshire Dales etc. This being the case, better penetration will prove very popular. Places like Matlock and Buxton are economically well heeled as well. Plenty of people from Matlock will be drawn to the cultural and commercial delights of Manchester, and I'm sure Buxtonians will make use of more direct connections to London.

Two things -
A) economic geography is not primarily driven by tourism. Journey time Matlock-Manchester would be around 90 minutes which would be too far for commuters, and I can’t imagine many in Buxton will be keen to take up new jobs in Derby. I am sure some tourists would use a reopened line, but I’m not convinced it has a case in terms of commuting - and if it doesn’t have a case there it has no chance of getting built.
B) Genuine question but would it be faster to travel Buxton-Stockport-London or Buxton-Matlock-Derby-London? A quick check suggests that whilst the latter option sounds like it should be faster, it practice it might well not be. Which does sort of underline the point that this isn’t a line reopening which is going to be particularly useful.

 

[yorksrob]

Two things -
A) economic geography is not primarily driven by tourism. Journey time Matlock-Manchester would be around 90 minutes which would be too far for commuters, and I can’t imagine many in Buxton will be keen to take up new jobs in Derby. I am sure some tourists would use a reopened line, but I’m not convinced it has a case in terms of commuting - and if it doesn’t have a case there it has no chance of getting built.
B) Genuine question but would it be faster to travel Buxton-Stockport-London or Buxton-Matlock-Derby-London? A quick check suggests that whilst the latter option sounds like it should be faster, it practice it might well not be. Which does sort of underline the point that this isn’t a line reopening which is going to be particularly useful.

Economic geography is not primarily driven by commuting. Buxton to London via Derby would likely be competitive with via Stockport, however it would also bring the East Midlands area within easier reach.

Would you like to explain how Buxton will have a direct connection to London without a time consuming reversal ? IIRC the Midland London - Manchester services didn't serve Buxton.

A *far* more effective way to link Buxton to London would be a coach rail link to Macclesfield which is 11 miles away. A non stop coach could cover that in 30 mins and Macclesfield to London takes about 1h 50m, so you're looking at a 2h 30m journey allowing a 10 min connection. Though Virgin tried such a link in the early 00's and it wasn't successful suggesting demand for Buxton to London travel is more limited than you might believe.

I would suggest that the full triangular junction should be reinstated at the Buxton end and the current Matlock terminators extended there. I would run the inter-regional service via Chinley.

 

[HSTEd]

Surely, if you were going to reopen this line you would extend the current Buxton services, not try to run a separate service via Chinley?

 

[willgreen]

Economic geography is not primarily driven by commuting.

What is it driven by?

 

[yorksrob]

What is it driven by?

People going shopping, people going on holiday, people going to work, people visiting cultural events, people on business etc.

Anything where people go about their business.

Surely, if you were going to reopen this line you would extend the current Buxton services, not try to run a separate service via Chinley?

That night be fine for shorter trips, however to meet the routes full regional potential, you'd need something more direct as well.

 

[AlastairFraser]

If you think a rail link will take a lot of cars out of the Peak District the evidence at Matlock and the Hope Valley is rather against it. Only Edale might offer some suport. Even with an hourly service the car park there is full of incoming tourists, not local people travelling out. At Hope car parking is £1 Monday-Friday, £3 weekends and Bank Holidays for that reason.

The car starts from home and goes to the village, path end, hill, pub, whatever you want to visit when you want to go, offers flexibilty to change and come back at any time.

Using a train requires a different mindset. There aren't enough people willing to do that planning to justify building incredibly expensive new lines.

That may be the case for the eastern Peak, but there are a lot of areas that are relatively inaccessible by car due to the lack of parking - e.g. Chatsworth has lots of buses due to the limited parking on site, it's only 15 mins from the Bakewell station site so a shuttle bus could be run between Chatsworth, Eyam, Bakewell station and Bakewell town rather easily (where as now it's a lengthy route of several changes from anywhere on the west side to get there using public transport).

The problem is there don't seem to be many benefits of redirecting this service, other than to run along a route few people want to travel.

Added capacity on the Hope Valley without further upgrades is a significant benefit!

 

[willgreen]

People going shopping, people going on holiday, people going to work, people visiting cultural events, people on business etc.

Anything where people go about their business.

Only one of these happens daily and that’s commuting. Commuting also happens to be the area that is best suited to rail (regular, travelling at the same time as lots of others etc) - shopping or holidays have a far higher percentage using private transport. Commuting is the most significant facet of economic activity and if a line reopening permits limited additional commuting opportunity then it will have limited benefit.

 

[The Planner]

NR clearly aren't in a position to adjudicate on the transport needs off of the network EW rail is a necessary project but again, it is a large politically generated project. I very much doubt that NR initiated it.

It certainly wasnt a user group with a website either which all this is.

Added capacity on the Hope Valley without further upgrades is a significant benefit!

How are you utilising the capacity when this new line is taking it all at the western end?

 

[AlastairFraser]

How are you utilising the capacity when this new line is taking it all at the western end?

Extending the stopper from New Mills Central, running it as a 6 car (at least) as an all stopper the whole way to Sheffield, and making the other one semi fast.

 

[Meerkat]

Would a reinstated rail line replace car journeys or just add more tourists into a crowded area?
I can’t see families going by train, and if its The retired then it’s on railcards and makes the business case worse.
It’s also debatable whether creating commuting possibilities is a good thing. Some locals might get better jobs but many locals would probably get priced out of their home towns/villages as long distance commuters took up th opportunity to live in thE countryside (or even worse it makes second homes there even more attractive).

 

[yorksrob]

Would a reinstated rail line replace car journeys or just add more tourists into a crowded area?
I can’t see families going by train, and if its The retired then it’s on railcards and makes the business case worse.
It’s also debatable whether creating commuting possibilities is a good thing. Some locals might get better jobs but many locals would probably get priced out of their home towns/villages as long distance commuters took up th opportunity to live in thE countryside (or even worse it makes second homes there even more attractive).

I think there is a reasonable argument that over-touristing an area can lead to issues. But I don't think a regional link of this type is going to have a particularly adverse effect on the area. One only has to look at other regional routes such as the S&C.

Similarly, the area is a bit too far from Manchester to be turned into s dormitory area.

Putting a motorway through the area would have a far worse effect.

 

[Meerkat]

I think there is a reasonable argument that over-touristing an area can lead to issues. But I don't think a regional link of this type is going to have a particularly adverse effect on the area. One only has to look at other regional routes such as the S&C.

Similarly, the area is a bit too far from Manchester to be turned into s dormitory area.

Putting a motorway through the area would have a far worse effect.

This Line would be more accessible to more people than the S&C.
If it’s too far from Manchester what is the point of the line?
who said anything about motorways?

 

[willgreen]

I think there is a reasonable argument that over-touristing an area can lead to issues. But I don't think a regional link of this type is going to have a particularly adverse effect on the area. One only has to look at other regional routes such as the S&C.

Similarly, the area is a bit too far from Manchester to be turned into s dormitory area.

Putting a motorway through the area would have a far worse effect.

So you concede that overtouristing is a potential problem - you’ve clearly got nothing more to say on the commuting issue - what is the point of a reopening here?

 

[A0wen]

Economic geography is not primarily driven by commuting. Buxton to London via Derby would likely be competitive with via Stockport, however it would also bring the East Midlands area within easier reach.



I would suggest that the full triangular junction should be reinstated at the Buxton end and the current Matlock terminators extended there. I would run the inter-regional service via Chinley.

So not a Buxton to London service then which is what you were saying would be a benefit a couple of posts back.

Buxton currently is 1 change from London (at Stockport) or a short journey the Macclesfield, another railhead for London. All you're suggesting is adding another by changing to the Midland Mainline at Derby.

 

[yorksrob]

This Line would be more accessible to more people than the S&C.
If it’s too far from Manchester what is the point of the line?
who said anything about motorways?

It's not "too far" from Manchester in general, just too far to make it a dormitory area.

So you concede that overtouristing is a potential problem - you’ve clearly got nothing more to say on the commuting issue - what is the point of a reopening here?

Commuting isn't the be all and end all.

It is mildly amusing that some people are so against this line that they are prepared to simultaneously argue that it will both be pointless because no one will use it, while at the same time being so popular it will lead to massive over-touristing.

 

[BrianW]

So you concede that overtouristing is a potential problem - you’ve clearly got nothing more to say on the commuting issue - what is the point of a reopening here?

I'm amazed that forumites consider it worth their time to contribute 76 posts so far on this repeat crayonist 'proposal'. The Monsal Trail is a fabulous and much appreciated and used cycle and walking route; it doesn't need trains instead or as well, which it has been without for longer than many people's lifetimes to potentially take few folk or freight from anywhere to anywhere not already served by another way. I'm enjoying the trail in my mind at no cost, and intend to spend no more time keyboard warriorisating on it at this time

 

[Energy]

The Monsal Trail is a fabulous and much appreciated and used cycle and walking route;

It hasn't really been mentioned yet that once a former railway line has been converted to a popular cycle and walking route, it's quite unpopular for the railway to get it back without a replacement. Building a new path alongside (but not too close) isn't that expensive compared to reopening a line but it isn't zero and would be an issue at Headstone Tunnel. A major draw to the former railway routes is the fairly flat terrain, any replacement path will need to be similarly flat.

 

[Neptune]

How many visitors would be lost to the area if this were to happen with the loss of Peak Rail? What about the loss of those who walk/cycle the Monsal trail which is extremely popular and an attraction in its own right? If there was any increase in footfall brought about by a new line would it balance this loss out? How much compensation would be required for the various groups based there to relocate to somewhere else? Has any of this been factored in I wonder?

These reopening schemes never seem to take into account the fact that it will require millions if not billions of other peoples money and they always seem to think it won’t be a problem (“it will only cost £xm etc”) which is usually a gross underestimation and neglects to take into account costs such as signalling, staffing, disruptive work such as plugging the route in at either end including junction rebuilding, pathing onto the existing network, compensation for people/businesses affected by having a new railway line being built near their properties, the list goes on. It’s all about headline grabbing and fake progress like this latest non-story in the local rag and yet never gets any further forward.

 

[willgreen]

Commuting isn't the be all and end all.

It is mildly amusing that some people are so against this line that they are prepared to simultaneously argue that it will both be pointless because no one will use it, while at the same time being so popular it will lead to massive over-touristing.

Of course that isn’t quite what I said. You are the one who argued that ‘hundreds’ (a quote from upthread) arrive at Hope Valley stations, a figure which would apparently be replicated Buxton-Matlock - I have never argued that such numbers would arrive. I am merely trying to understand your reasoning for backing reopening since you concede that there are dangers of overtourism, and that the line serves little commuting potential. Which leaves, I suppose, shopping trips, gigs in Derby and an occasional long-distance trip to see relatives as the main purposes of a reopened line? Which would come at the expense of a much-loved walking trail (I went on it recently - genuinely excellent) and a major heritage railway?

 

[Grimsby town]

I think there's some valid questions around the impact of tourism on places and how this can be managed in the future. The population of cities like Manchester continues to grow significantly. That will have an impact on the surrounding countryside. I went to Edale on Saturday and the trains were full and standing but there were still a huge number of cars in Edale and Castleton. Cars are a high impact method of travel and use up a lot of space. Its not great for the environment and clearly has an impact on the attraction of an area. Bakewell is absolutely dominated by car parking too and footways aren't wide enough to cater for the number of people walking around the town.

There's also the fact that the population growth of Manchester city centre means more no car households. Access greenspace has a lot of impacts on health and is desirable to provide for good quality of life. Yes places like Edale are already accessible, but can they continue to cater for growing demand to visit or do other areas need to be made accessible?

None of this means that a rail line is neccesarily the answer but there's certainly potential problems that need to be solved and there could be a valid busines case in solving those issues. Whatever the solution, its likely to at least be partially solved by rail, even that involves integrating bus services better or rail operator provided express bus services.

 

[daodao]

A *far* more effective way to link Buxton to London would be a coach rail link to Macclesfield which is 11 miles away. A non stop coach could cover that in 30 mins and Macclesfield to London takes about 1h 50m, so you're looking at a 2h 30m journey allowing a 10 min connection. Though Virgin tried such a link in the early 00's and it wasn't successful suggesting demand for Buxton to London travel is more limited than you might believe.

There is a regular direct bus service (High Peak route 58) from Buxton to Macclesfield, passing the railway station there. It runs hourly Mon-Sat 0700-1900, with 5 journeys on Sundays, but is no longer timed to connect with trains. It is also one of the most scenic and highest bus routes in England, passing the Cat and Fiddle Inn, but is often subject to cancellation in the winter due to inclement weather. When I lived in Macclessfield, I used it on several occasions to visit the Bakewell area as there is a Sunday extension to Chatsworth House. On 2 occasions, my walks involved use of the Monsal Trail and I noted how inconveniently sited the former station at Bakewell was.

 

[6Gman]

Without most of the benefits (including taking a lot of cars out of a national park with a lot of visitors).

Or, maybe, a reopened railway would mean some extra visitors (who do not wish or are unable to drive there) while the current visitors continue to come by car.

I note, for example, that Betws-y-Coed retains a rail service, but the contribution made to the local economy by those who use that means to access the place is incidental to that made by the thousands who arrive by car.

 

[HullRailMan]

NR clearly aren't in a position to adjudicate on the transport needs off of the network EW rail is a necessary project but again, it is a large politically generated project. I very much doubt that NR initiated it.

And Okehampton was still on the network anyway.

With regard to your last paragraph - it lacks logic. The Bakewell line is being proposed to improve transport links in the area. The fact that it will (unsurprisingly) operate like any other railway in the country doesn't in any way negate that.



Do you ever actually travel on trains ? If you did, you would see that our local regional routes are well used, in spite of the usual deluded lot spouting "the trains are empty, no one will use them, people would far rather spend two hours on a bus with no toilets" etc

I see you’ve ignored everything I actually wrote. To answer your question, yes I have been on a train. I’ve stood nose to armpit on a sprinter to Matlock. I’ve also seen that many times more people use motor vehicles to get there, and the buses are well patronised too. I’m not the one who is suggesting that spending tens of millions of taxpayers money to reopen a railway that will in turn be significantly loss making, to have practically zero effect of road traffic levels, is a good idea.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Or, maybe, a reopened railway would mean some extra visitors (who do not wish or are unable to drive there) while the current visitors continue to come by car.

I note, for example, that Betws-y-Coed retains a rail service, but the contribution made to the local economy by those who use that means to access the place is incidental to that made by the thousands who arrive by car.

Perhaps, but it must be noted that rail could be the faster option for many to encourage modal shift.

 

[Bald Rick]

It’s not happening, end of.

 

[AlastairFraser]

So not a Buxton to London service then which is what you were saying would be a benefit a couple of posts back.

Buxton currently is 1 change from London (at Stockport) or a short journey the Macclesfield, another railhead for London. All you're suggesting is adding another by changing to the Midland Mainline at Derby.

A Buxton to Macc coach is utterly ludicrous. The A537 over the moors to Macc is frequently closed due to the poor road conditions on the summit and the alternative route for something like a coach/bus would all the way to Hazel Grove and back (which would be longer than the existing train to Stockport).

If you wanted to improve links to London on the cheap, best way would be to introduce a through ticket integrated with the High Peak Bus Transpeak service to Matlock (slightly modified route southbound to pass through the interchange at the station both ways) - but even then it's an hour and ten just Buxton to Matlock, and Peak District roads are in general massively vulnerable to weather and traffic congestion that the connections could not be properly guaranteed.

A limited stop coach to Chesterfield might be a better idea with through fares, problem is that Peak District bus drivers are very hard to come by, a consequence of the relative isolation and none of the local operators would likely be able to resource it. Stagecoach may be able to, but would struggle with early departures at the Buxton end.

 

[yorksrob]

Of course that isn’t quite what I said. You are the one who argued that ‘hundreds’ (a quote from upthread) arrive at Hope Valley stations, a figure which would apparently be replicated Buxton-Matlock - I have never argued that such numbers would arrive. I am merely trying to understand your reasoning for backing reopening since you concede that there are dangers of overtourism, and that the line serves little commuting potential. Which leaves, I suppose, shopping trips, gigs in Derby and an occasional long-distance trip to see relatives as the main purposes of a reopened line? Which would come at the expense of a much-loved walking trail (I went on it recently - genuinely excellent) and a major heritage railway?

As I've explained before, you only have to look at the geography of the area to see that it has more potential for passenger traffic than the intermediate stations on the Hope Valley. There is simply more there.

And if you cared to read my post correctly you would see that whilst I acknowledge that over-tourism is a legitimate concern, judging by similar routes elsewhere, there was little reason to be concerned in this instance. This is particularly true here as some of the biggest problems produced by tourism involve road traffic.

So not a Buxton to London service then which is what you were saying would be a benefit a couple of posts back.

Buxton currently is 1 change from London (at Stockport) or a short journey the Macclesfield, another railhead for London. All you're suggesting is adding another by changing to the Midland Mainline at Derby.

It could be either. Obviously I'me more interested in the improvement to local public transport, but there would be different views as to where the longer distance Derby services would end up.

An additional option of one change would give people in the area more options, however an open access operator might decide that a London service could work for the area.

I see you’ve ignored everything I actually wrote. To answer your question, yes I have been on a train. I’ve stood nose to armpit on a sprinter to Matlock. I’ve also seen that many times more people use motor vehicles to get there, and the buses are well patronised too. I’m not the one who is suggesting that spending tens of millions of taxpayers money to reopen a railway that will in turn be significantly loss making, to have practically zero effect of road traffic levels, is a good idea.

Does the fact that the sprinters are full, the buses well used and the motor car popular not suggest to you that there would be significant demand for a rail service no ?

And do you extend your views on "loss making railways" to the rest of the existing regional network ?