Ivanhoe (Leicester-Burton') reopen call

[IKBrunel]

www.burtonmail.co.uk/News/New-calls-to-reopen-historic-railway-line-20131205113322.htm says

FRESH calls have been made to reopen a historic railway line to passengers in Burton and South Derbyshire.

Two MPs in the region have written to the Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin encouraging him conduct a feasibility study into reopening the former Ivanhoe Line, which runs from Burton to Leicester and has not served passengers for half a century.

Heather Wheeler and Andrew Bridgen, who represent South Derbyshire and North West Leicestershire, say more services are needed in the region and believe reviving the line, which is now known as the National Forest Line, would also boost the economy.

It is not the first time calls have been made to resurrect the former Ivanhoe Line, which serves freight trains but has not carried passengers since the 1960s.

In 2009, the Association of Train Companies recommended reopening the line and building new stations in Castle Gresley, Ashby and Moira.

But the project has yet to come to fruition, thought to be largely down to the £50 million it would be likely to cost.

Mr Bridgen said: “North West Leicestershire has historically been overlooked when it comes to public transport investment as we have no railway station. With the growth in population together with the tourist interest in the National Forest, it is time for the Department of Transport to have a good look at this proposal and get passenger trains on the line again.”

Mrs Wheeler added: “South Derbyshire and North West Leicestershire, at the heart of the National Forest, are fast growing districts in the Midlands so all the help we can get to take traffic off the roads and give commuters, shoppers and tourists an alternative way of travelling will be of great benefit both economically and for our quality of life.”

From previous threads, the line currently has a very low speed restriction, used for freight/bombardier stock deliveries only. Chord at Leicester end is built on & costly to reinstate.

My guess would be that to get a decent BCR & DfT interest, the reopened/upgraded line would need to find a use for some new longer distance or strategic use beyond just local stopping services?

Would it be of use as a diversionary route in the event of problems in Long Eaton/Derby area?

 

[MK Tom]

I think the intention was to open a second Leicester station rather than re-instating the chord? The 2001 SK Baker rail atlas suggests that.

 

[HowardGWR]

I think the intention was to open a second Leicester station rather than re-instating the chord? The 2001 SK Baker rail atlas suggests that.

Looking at the trading estate built on the chord, it looks as though the latter could fairly easily be reinstated with not much problem through a car park and side road, without causing too much bother. I suppose the use of LCs would be ruled out nowadays though, even though the trading estate (probably called a 'business park' now) is a dead end.

 

[t o m]

Looking at the trading estate built on the chord, it looks as though the latter could fairly easily be reinstated with not much problem through a car park and side road, without causing too much bother. I suppose the use of LCs would be ruled out nowadays though, even though the trading estate (probably called a 'business park' now) is a dead end.

I'd say there would be enough space to build a small station at Knighton Yard. It wouldn't have to be very big, just enough to accommodate a 2 or 3 car set I reckon. I don't see there would be a need for any crossings either.

I'm surprised there's no mention of a station at Coalville in that article.

 

[Rugd1022]

From previous threads, the line currently has a very low speed restriction, used for freight/bombardier stock deliveries only. Chord at Leicester end is built on & costly to reinstate.

My guess would be that to get a decent BCR & DfT interest, the reopened/upgraded line would need to find a use for some new longer distance or strategic use beyond just local stopping services?

Would it be of use as a diversionary route in the event of problems in Long Eaton/Derby area?

I sign the route from Leicester as far as Mantle Lane IKB, and work freight trains along it - the line speed from Knighton Junction is 45mph with a 20mph restriction at Lindridge Farm Crossing (just west of Desford LC) and a short section of 20mph (due to subsidence) from Bagworth Junction to just east of Bardon Hill LC. It would be great to see passenger services on the branch again but some serious investment is needed, aside from the chord at Knighton the long single line section from there to Bagworth Jcn would need seeing to.

 

[HowardGWR]

I'd say there would be enough space to build a small station at Knighton Yard. It wouldn't have to be very big, just enough to accommodate a 2 or 3 car set I reckon. I don't see there would be a need for any crossings either.

I'm surprised there's no mention of a station at Coalville in that article.

Could you explain how the chord could get across - you are clearly local whereas I am using just Google. Thanks.

 

[bangor-toad]

Hi,
The allignment of the old cord is visible from the MML and on Google Maps. If you look carefully on google maps you can see the allignment.

To reinstate it exactly where it was would require the demolition of one warehouse (the sqaure one visible on google maps), cuttting access to two others and loosing half a car park for another.

A potential "zero cost" option could be devloped:
Reinstate the chord as above.
Build a cheap bridge over the new tracks to access the land in the centre of the railway triangle (eg as they've done near Cosham)
Let the developer use the redundant railway land for further development as compensation for the alterations.

I don't see this as being a cost restricitve excercise one way or another - I think the costs of line re-instatement would come from the civils to sort out the subsidence along the line and other required upgrades.

Cheers,
Jason

 

[HowardGWR]

Hi,
The allignment of the old cord is visible from the MML and on Google Maps. If you look carefully on google maps you can see the allignment.

To reinstate it exactly where it was would require the demolition of one warehouse (the sqaure one visible on google maps), cuttting access to two others and loosing half a car park for another.

A potential "zero cost" option could be devloped:
Reinstate the chord as above.
Build a cheap bridge over the new tracks to access the land in the centre of the railway triangle (eg as they've done near Cosham)
Let the developer use the redundant railway land for further development as compensation for the alterations.

I don't see this as being a cost restricitve excercise one way or another - I think the costs of line re-instatement would come from the civils to sort out the subsidence along the line and other required upgrades.

Cheers,
Jason

Thanks Jason, it was indeed the old trajectory that I had sussed but unlike you I could not envisage the elevations, which is why I mentioned LCs.

Your ideas seem very sensible to me.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

A link to the 2009 study if anyone fancies a read.

http://www.leics.gov.uk/ivanhoe_line_stage2.pdf

 

[t o m]

Could you explain how the chord could get across - you are clearly local whereas I am using just Google. Thanks.

Apologies, I was picturing keeping the layout similar as to what it is now. It would of course be far more practical to reinstate the old chord as you say.

 

[CockneySparrow]

I'd say there would be enough space to build a small station at Knighton Yard. It wouldn't have to be very big, just enough to accommodate a 2 or 3 car set I reckon. I don't see there would be a need for any crossings either.

I'm surprised there's no mention of a station at Coalville in that article.

From reading elsewhere online the councillors or MP for Coalville dont want a station there as they have businesses in the next town, they feel if a station was in Coalville people would shop in Leicester rather than their businesses, suppose they snubbed the idea again

 

[Kettledrum]

Hi,


I don't see this as being a cost restricitve excercise one way or another - I think the costs of line re-instatement would come from the civils to sort out the subsidence along the line and other required upgrades.

There are other places where lines operate successfully in areas where there is subsidence so it's not insumountable. For example, the fast Crewe to Manchester line crosses the Sandbach flashes where there is subsidence due to salt mining. And of course the line across the unstable Chat Moss is just being electrified too.

It would be great if the Leicester to Burton line could be used as an addition to the electric spine. For example, could we have electric freight trains going from Southampton to Leicester to Burton to Lichfield to re-join a re-opened South Staffordshire railway through Walsall and the Black country?

 

[The Planner]

Where are these trains going? there is nothing in the Black country as a destination for freight.

 

[yorksrob]

Where are these trains going? there is nothing in the Black country as a destination for freight.

We should be agitating for lines to be re-opened on the strength of local connectivity. If anything, freight has a here today, gone tomorrow sort of existence that can't be relied upon for business cases.

 

[The Planner]

It is down to the usual problem, who is going to pay for it. If the councils suddenly found a substantial contribution to it behind the sofa this would soon get off the ground.

 

[CalderRail]

Ivanhoe has been an ongoing pipe-dream since I lived in the area back in the eighties.

 

[yorksrob]

Most of these projects stumble at the stage where they have to rebuild it. This route is already in existance, yet still we haven't managed anything in twenty years.

It really is a pathetic indictment of the way in which this country and it's railway network are run.

 

[MarkyT]

Shame the line doesn't go into Swanlincote, although despite being the largest town along the Burton to Leicester axis that's in a yet another county (Derbyshire) and rail service would only serve to transport people across the borders into either Leicestershire or Staffordshire so I can't see Derbyshire being interested. A new terminal station just east of the old one at the Sainsbury's roundabout could be served by a 3 km spur from the Ivanhoe Line alongside William Nadin Way with a triangular junction formed near Stanton by adding a Leicester facing chord. Based on Google Earth, no significant demolition would be required and it appears the bridge under the A444 is still there.

 

[JohnB57]

And of course the line across the unstable Chatterley Moss is just being electrified too.

Chatterley?

 

[MarkyT]

Swadlincote new station idea -

http://www.townend.me/files/swadlincote.pdf

 

[Ships]

Chatterley?

He's referring to the chat moss. Never heard it called chatterly.

 

[JohnB57]

He's referring to the chat moss. Never heard it called chatterly.

It's never been called that, hence my query.

 

[Kettledrum]

Where are these trains going? there is nothing in the Black country as a destination for freight.

Bescot yard? - Not my area of expertise, but the group campaigning for the re-opening of the South Staffordshire line is suggesting it as a strategic freight route to by-pass central Birmingham. See

http://southstaffsrail.webs.com/railfreightusage.htm

I'm wondering whether you could link it with the Electric Spine, and the Leicester-Burton line for a much longer freight line.

 

[Harlesden]

Question for Rugd1022.
In relation to the subsidence speed restriction, would it not be a little safer to whizz across the affected area at 50 MPH rather than trundle over it at 20 MPH.
Surely if the track underneath the train is really going to drop, there would be less risk to the train if it was nipping along rather than crawling along.

 

[The Planner]

Bescot yard? - Not my area of expertise, but the group campaigning for the re-opening of the South Staffordshire line is suggesting it as a strategic freight route to by-pass central Birmingham.

Which requires it all to go via Worcester and would bypass all the big freight terminals in the West Midlands, as things are currently it doesn't really have legs based on that, you need someone to decide on sorting Worcester out first too.

 

[Eagle]

Most of these projects stumble at the stage where they have to rebuild it. This route is already in existance, yet still we haven't managed anything in twenty years.

But this project does require quite a lot of rebuilding. The missing Knighton chord, the long and awkward sections of single track, huge linespeed upgrades needed, and on top of that it's not certain whether the ground will need to be stabilized before a more frequent service can operate.

If it was just a case of slapping down a few platforms and finding an extra couple of trains then it would probably have happened by now.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I sign the route from Leicester as far as Mantle Lane IKB, and work freight trains along it - the line speed from Knighton Junction is 45mph with a 20mph restriction at Lindridge Farm Crossing (just west of Desford LC) and a short section of 20mph (due to subsidence) from Bagworth Junction to just east of Bardon Hill LC. It would be great to see passenger services on the branch again but some serious investment is needed, aside from the chord at Knighton the long single line section from there to Bagworth Jcn would need seeing to.

On a thread such as this, where there are still freight services operating even though the passenger stations were closed many years ago, a posting such as yours from full working route knowledge and points to make from that knowledge is most useful for other contributors to this thread.

 

[yorksrob]

But this project does require quite a lot of rebuilding. The missing Knighton chord, the long and awkward sections of single track, huge linespeed upgrades needed, and on top of that it's not certain whether the ground will need to be stabilized before a more frequent service can operate.

If it was just a case of slapping down a few platforms and finding an extra couple of trains then it would probably have happened by now.

If single track was such a problem, half of our network wouldn't exist. Plus, if they'd have got on with it earlier, it probably wouldn't have deteriorated to the extent to which it has done. Remember, this has been mooted for twenty years or more.

Finally, if they can't afford a curve for the time being, use a headshunt.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There are other places where lines operate successfully in areas where there is subsidence so it's not insurmountable. For example, the fast Crewe to Manchester line crosses the Sandbach flashes where there is subsidence due to salt mining.

Mention of Sandbach brings back memories of the long-closed North Staffordshire Railway line from Sandbach to Harecastle that was opened to passengers in June 1846 and to goods in January 1852, which passed through stations at Wheelock, Hassall Green, Lawton, Kidsgrove Central and Chatterly.

There was mention made of Chatterly earlier on postings on this thread, so I wonder if it was this particular Chatterly that may have been in mind.

 

[yorkie]

Question for Rugd1022.
In relation to the subsidence speed restriction, would it not be a little safer to whizz across the affected area at 50 MPH rather than trundle over it at 20 MPH.
Surely if the track underneath the train is really going to drop, there would be less risk to the train if it was nipping along rather than crawling along.

This has to be one of the most bizarre suggestions I've ever read.

Greater speeds will increase the risk of further subsidence and exacerbate the problem.

So, in a word: no!