Peterborough - the case for extra stations

[adamedwards]

Peterborough is a long city north to south with the station at the southern end. Looking at the OS map I wonder, once the dive-under at Werrington is finished, if the population would justify two more stations? We might see something like this:

- Walton station: Where the East Coast Main Line crosses the line of Marholm Road / Wedgewood Way were there is road acces and an existing footbridge: Platforms would be on the outside of the tracks on the slow lines. (The down slow is shared with the Stamford line at this point and electrified.) 12 car plaftforms would be needed (or 8 car plus selective door opening)

- Glinton and Peakirk Parkway: A park and ride station where the Spalding Line passes under the A15 ring road and crosses Foxcovert Road. This could be as simple as a single (12-car) platform on a turnback line (Aylesbury ParkWay style) as the likely demand going north from here to Spalding is met by the existing service to Peterborough city centre and which therefore doesn't need to stop . This would keep costs of bridges/lifts to zero, indeed the existing ramped footbridge at Foxcovert Road might be suitable for incorpoaration into the access to the station. My preference would be for the turnback and station to be on the south side of the line so as to be near to the housing, possibly with the parking north of the line using the Foxcovert Road bridge to create the junction off the A15.

The line from Werrington Junction to this second station would be electified (approx 4 track miles of wiring) and services would be run by extending some of the Peterborough terminators from Thameslink and Kings Cross. By running up to the new Parkway and back trains would cross the main line via the underpass, reducing conflicting moves at the station. I would assume other ECS moves would also use this line.

Local trains to Spadling and Lincoln running reversibly to and from Peterborough station could also serve the Walton station up slow platform only. Stamford trains would not call as they could only do so northbound.

This potentially removes car traffic heading to Peterborough station by putting large areas of the north of the city within easy distance of the new stations. The Parkway would be a railhead for Market Deeping and Bourne, further reducing traffic.

Critique welcomed.

 

[alistairlees]

I’ve often thought pretty much the same, with the addition of one on the south side too. Urban growth and public transport provision should be coordinated.

 

[30907]

First, a (not speculative) query: ISTR that there was supposed to be a new station south of PBO, somewhere near Fletton Parkway. I realise this is dependent on quadrupling, but is it still in the actual plans somewhere. (I note alistairlees has referenced this too.)
Second, if this month's Modern Railways has the layout right, you would need your Foxcovert turnback on the north side of the line (at least that would be right for the P+R!)

To the main point: I see the operational attraction of a terminus just north of the new flyover, but it would be expensive. I wonder if you could instead add a P+R/K+R facility at your Marholm Road station? As it stands it will have only cycle/pedestrian access, which is fine for the local area but won't attract traffic off the A47.
You'd want one car park roughly at the end of Werrington Parkway, and one off Bretton Way, both of which would require repurposing some commercial buildings/land. (It's a good 20 years since I last stayed for any amount of time in PBO, so I don't know if this would cause traffic chaos!)
The operational problem is, obviously, what trains you serve it with! Initially at least I would suggest the existing DMUs rather than Thameslink - with platforms on the Up Slow and the Stamfords you could have 3tph, albeit at irregular intervals. As traffic developed, you might then consider extending TL services.

The big question to my mind is: what market would you be serving? I'm assuming it wouldn't attract people commuting into the city, simply because of where the workplaces are. So - are Werrington and Bretton prime London commuter territory these days, or would the P+R for Stamford/Mkt Deeping/Bourne be the main market?
Any thoughts?

 

[swt_passenger]

The idea of Thameslink reversing via a new turnback location was discussed early in the main Werrington diveunder thread, there wasn’t actually much support AFAICS.

 

[NeilWatson]

A park and ride station at Yaxley, south of Peterborough, would save many commuters travelling north to the current station before travelling south to London. There are large housing estates being added all the time around Hampton.

 

[D365]

The idea of Thameslink reversing via a new turnback location was discussed early in the main Werrington diveunder thread, there wasn’t actually much support AFAICS.

Was that a discussion for a new station, or just a turnback facility in the vein of Royal Oak on Crossrail west of Paddington?

A Yaxley station would be very interesting, but it would need to be considered whether it would take precedence over Alconbury Weald (north of Huntingdon). Four tracking would be needed in either case, however.

 

[swt_passenger]

Was that a discussion for a new station, or just a turnback facility in the vein of Royal Oak on Crossrail west of Paddington?

A Yaxley station would be very interesting, but it would need to be considered whether it would take precedence over Alconbury Weald (north of Huntingdon). Four tracking would be needed in either case, however.

Turnback, in order to remove the existing down to up crossovers; but whether it was just a turnback or a station north of Peterborough it would still have implications for rolling stock numbers.

 

[D365]

Turnback, in order to remove the existing down to up crossovers; but whether it was just a turnback or a station north of Peterborough it would still have implications for rolling stock numbers.

What impact would there be on stock numbers? Peterborough terminators returning southwards spend at least ten minutes on Platform 1 or 2.

 

[swt_passenger]

What impact would there be on stock numbers? Peterborough terminators returning southwards spend at least ten minutes on Platform 1 or 2.

Well that’s the thing. 5 mins there and 5 mins back and you’ve lost ten minutes, it can make the timetable that bit less reliable.

 

[adamedwards]

I'm curious as to the trade off here between delay when a terminating train is unable to cross to platforms 1 and 2 because of other trains coming south versus the extra journey to my proposed Parkway station and back. Yes there is a time penalty, but the diveunder reduces the risk of delay caused when having to cross the up fast (or down fast if the move is from the west side sidings and/or plaforms), so I am assuming there is a trade off against recovery or pathing allowances in the timetable. Also as a Thameslink train crossing the up fast to 1 or 2 blocks the down fast if delayed, there is a need for recovery in the LNER schedules which the Parkway shunt would possibly reduce.

Any expert timetablers able to comment?

 

[Peter Kelford]

I think that the case for a station around the old Yaxley brickwork (aka Hampton) would be far more justified as a lot of people there could well be commuters. Failing a proper railway station, what about a tram-train-esque vehicle that can shuttle back and forth into the disused platform 1?

I'm curious as to the trade off here between delay when a terminating train is unable to cross to platforms 1 and 2 because of other trains coming south versus the extra journey to my proposed Parkway station and back. Yes there is a time penalty, but the diveunder reduces the risk of delay caused when having to cross the up fast (or down fast if the move is from the west side sidings and/or plaforms), so I am assuming there is a trade off against recovery or pathing allowances in the timetable. Also as a Thameslink train crossing the up fast to 1 or 2 blocks the down fast if delayed, there is a need for recovery in the LNER schedules which the Parkway shunt would possibly reduce.

Any expert timetablers able to comment?

I can't comment on all of it, but I can tell you that LNER services are often delayed behind the Norwich service which comes every hour so I would assume that the pathing restrictions from Werrington to Nene C.S. are pretty tight. Don't forget that the ECML reduces to 2/3 tracks over Holme Fen