Restoring your Railway Fund Update

[BrianW]

Except, that in terms of commuter traffic (which is where relief from the Portbury Hundred is most needed), the white collar centre of Bristol has shifted dramatically over the last 25 years to now sit right next to Temple Meads at Temple Quay. You only have to look at how crowded trains are coming in from North Somerset in the rush hour (or at least were pre-pandemic) to realise how the train is a highly attractive option.

And that shift will continue over the next couple of years when the new University of Bristol campus is built on the old Post Office/Bath Road depot site, which as well as academic jobs will offer ancillary and service roles. Similarly the Dental School on Temple Quay.

And of course, you can change at Bristol to commute to Bath and Abbey Wood - again fairly heavy traffic flows from other North Somerset stations exist to these destinations so why would Portishead be any different?

As for leisure traffic, I agree that Temple Meads is not ideally located for the retail centre, but I question whether Cabot Circus is 25 mins walk (it isn't). And if you are in Portishead then I suspect you will already (if able) drive to Cribbs Causeway, rather than into the centre.

I don't know Bristol that well, but a bit. If there had not been a rail pasenger service to Portishead before, would that be a top priority now? Maybe it would- I'm just asking. It's pretty solid Tory- Liam Fox MP.

 

[Brissle Girl]

I don't know Bristol that well, but a bit. If there had not been a rail pasenger service to Portishead before, would that be a top priority now? Maybe it would- I'm just asking. It's pretty solid Tory- Liam Fox MP.

Fair questions.

It's got a population of around 25,000 and has grown incredibly rapidly in recent years, and is still growing. Until removed to permit vegetation growth clearance a couple of years ago it still had track right into the town for the 3 miles from the junction with existing branch to Portbury Dock (albeit disconnected at Portbury), so might have been seen as a relatively easy restoration. Remember also that the branch line into Portbury was restored and reopened around 20 years ago for coal and car transporter traffic, so it's not as though it was the branch all the way to the main line at Parson Street needed restoration.

The route out of Portishead to the M5 Junction 19 (the Portbury Hundred) has been a big traffic bottleneck for many years, with two attempts at reconfiguration of the junction in recent years to ease both traffic from Portishead and in the evening to it (particularly coming off the M5 southbound). So reopening the railway seemed a logical way of reducing substantially one commuter traffic flow, that to the centre of Bristol.

Clearly if there had never been a railway to Portishead before then the difficulty and cost of building a completely new alignment would have probably ruled it out. But when there was track all the way on an existing, albeit overgrown formation, you can see why an optimistic view was taken.

The DCO appears to have been the undoing of the project, with the delays, first due to COVID, and then due to what appeared some relatively minor points (the possible removal of rare trees in the Avon Gorge to ensure the tunnels continued to be safe - work that would probably have been necessary anyway as part of normal maintenance) adding to costs during a period of high inflation of construction costs.

 

[Bald Rick]

It doesn't. In common with other projects, e.g. the Borders Railway which was signed off with a BCR of 0.5. If this goes ahead, in its current incarnation, it will be very poor value for money. Therefore trying again and again to make it work is by definition wasting public money. But that's unfortunately the local government system we have.

Which was based on an overly pessimistic passenger forecast.

Actually it wasn’t. The passenger numbers are a little ahead of forecasts, but not much. What was pessimistic was the first couple of years patronage - it was assumed to take a couple of years to build up, but it actually happened almost immediately.

The cost estimate in the final business case was, however, very optimistic. The final cost was well over twice what was in the business case.

 

[yorksrob]

Actually it wasn’t. The passenger numbers are a little ahead of forecasts, but not much. What was pessimistic was the first couple of years patronage - it was assumed to take a couple of years to build up, but it actually happened almost immediately.

The cost estimate in the final business case was, however, very optimistic. The final cost was well over twice what was in the business case.

Didn't they have to spend money putting in extra double track. That suggests that the original business case overly pessimistic.

 

[Bald Rick]

Didn't they have to spend money putting in extra double track. That suggests that the original business case overly pessimistic.

Nope.

 

[yorksrob]

Nope.

My mistake - on checking, the original spec for double track was cut back.

 

[InOban]

AIR traffic over the full route is higher than predicted but traffic to the Midlothian stations is less than expected.

 

[yorksrob]

AIR traffic over the full route is higher than predicted but traffic to the Midlothian stations is less than expected.

Which in many ways is the railway doing more of what it's supposed to be good at - carrying people over longer distances !

(However as the route is in a rural area, this is inconvenient for certain agendas)

 

[Techniquest]

Fair questions.

It's got a population of around 25,000 and has grown incredibly rapidly in recent years, and is still growing. Until removed to permit vegetation growth clearance a couple of years ago it still had track right into the town for the 3 miles from the junction with existing branch to Portbury Dock (albeit disconnected at Portbury), so might have been seen as a relatively easy restoration. Remember also that the branch line into Portbury was restored and reopened around 20 years ago for coal and car transporter traffic, so it's not as though it was the branch all the way to the main line at Parson Street needed restoration.

The route out of Portishead to the M5 Junction 19 (the Portbury Hundred) has been a big traffic bottleneck for many years, with two attempts at reconfiguration of the junction in recent years to ease both traffic from Portishead and in the evening to it (particularly coming off the M5 southbound). So reopening the railway seemed a logical way of reducing substantially one commuter traffic flow, that to the centre of Bristol.

Clearly if there had never been a railway to Portishead before then the difficulty and cost of building a completely new alignment would have probably ruled it out. But when there was track all the way on an existing, albeit overgrown formation, you can see why an optimistic view was taken.

The DCO appears to have been the undoing of the project, with the delays, first due to COVID, and then due to what appeared some relatively minor points (the possible removal of rare trees in the Avon Gorge to ensure the tunnels continued to be safe - work that would probably have been necessary anyway as part of normal maintenance) adding to costs during a period of high inflation of construction costs.

Thanks for this very informative post, I knew basically nothing about the project to reopen Portishead before but now, I am much better informed. Thanks

 

[The exile]

Against this, what are the benefits? Very low demand because you're only providing an hourly service which doesn't go into the city centre, but drops people a 20 - 25 minute walk from Broadmead (along horrible roads). Note the existing bus service between Bristol and Portishead which takes a similar generalised journey time once this 20 minute walking allowance is added. Because demand is so low the need for subsidy will be enormous - a DMU plus driver and guard will cost many times over what this service will earn per year.

This assumes that the main destination is Broadmead. Yes - Temple Meads is hardly ideally placed for Central Bristol, but Central Bristol is not where everyone is going. IIRC, the Portishead services are not going to terminate at Temple Meads

 

[Starmill]

This assumes that the main destination is Broadmead. Yes - Temple Meads is hardly ideally placed for Central Bristol, but Central Bristol is not where everyone is going. IIRC, the Portishead services are not going to terminate at Temple Meads

I'm afraid that this is whataboutery, it's indisputable that the forecast demand suffers significantly from the poor location of Temple Meads station. This is easily overcome by journey time savings vs road transport for longer journeys e.g. from Taunton, but it is not overcome for the short journey from Portishead and Pill. Obviously you're right that there will be a tiny trickle of demand to Bath, Cardiff, London, Birmingham and so on but this is tiny compared to people going to Bristol City Centre.

 

[Brissle Girl]

I'm afraid that this is whataboutery, it's indisputable that the forecast demand suffers significantly from the poor location of Temple Meads station. This is easily overcome by journey time savings vs road transport for longer journeys e.g. from Taunton, but it is not overcome for the short journey from Portishead and Pill. Obviously you're right that there will be a tiny trickle of demand to Bath, Cardiff, London, Birmingham and so on but this is tiny compared to people going to Bristol City Centre.

The "poor location" of Temple Meads doesn't stop trains in from the Weston line being stuffed full with passengers in the rush hour, many of whom are going to the extensive office developments which have sprung up next to Temple Meads in the last 25 years (and which have effectively shifted the white collar commercial centre to the doorstep of Temple Meads). And outside the peak there's not inconsiderable shopper traffic too - especially at weekends and in the run up to Xmas - you'll be lucky to get on if joining at Nailsea.

A few years ago someone I know found it more convenient to drive from Portishead to Nailsea to take the train in, rather than commute by road, so a direct train service from Portishead will certainly be more attractive than driving in respect of journey time.

For info a look at Temple Quay - only a few of the major employers are mentioned - there are many more. For shoppers, Cabot Circus is around 900m away by walking route, so 15 mins max for most people.

 

[Jim]

I'm afraid that this is whataboutery, it's indisputable that the forecast demand suffers significantly from the poor location of Temple Meads station. This is easily overcome by journey time savings vs road transport for longer journeys e.g. from Taunton, but it is not overcome for the short journey from Portishead and Pill. Obviously you're right that there will be a tiny trickle of demand to Bath, Cardiff, London, Birmingham and so on but this is tiny compared to people going to Bristol City Centre.

Most Saturdays trains towards Bristol with leisure travellers (presumably going to the City Centre) often turn people away at various places in the journey (for example the 0640 Penzance to Cardiff which some Saturdays even had a relief train covering it) - and yes, most of them were going to Bristol and didn't stay in to Cardiff.

 

[Starmill]

The "poor location" of Temple Meads doesn't stop trains in from the Weston line being stuffed full with passengers in the rush hour, many of whom are going to the extensive office developments which have sprung up next to Temple Meads in the last 25 years (and which have effectively shifted the white collar commercial centre to the doorstep of Temple Meads). And outside the peak there's not inconsiderable shopper traffic too - especially at weekends and in the run up to Xmas - you'll be lucky to get on if joining at Nailsea.

A few years ago someone I know found it more convenient to drive from Portishead to Nailsea to take the train in, rather than commute by road, so a direct train service from Portishead will certainly be more attractive than driving in respect of journey time.

For info a look at Temple Quay - only a few of the major employers are mentioned - there are many more. For shoppers, Cabot Circus is around 900m away by walking route, so 15 mins max for most people.

Again there's always an argument you can make. However the generalised journey time between Portishead and Bristol is undeniably going to be significantly better under the scheme. That people use the train from Weston-super-Mare, which has very different generalised journey time comparisons, doesn't come into it.

Most Saturdays trains towards Bristol with leisure travellers (presumably going to the City Centre) often turn people away at various places in the journey (for example the 0640 Penzance to Cardiff which some Saturdays even had a relief train covering it) - and yes, most of them were going to Bristol and didn't stay in to Cardiff.

This isn't a reason for building a new line though is it?

 

[Jim]

Again there's always an argument you can make. However the generalised journey time between Portishead and Bristol is undeniably going to be significantly better under the scheme. That people use the train from Weston-super-Mare, which has very different generalised journey time comparisons, doesn't come into it.

Ah yes point taken, I guess the point to point times in the car from Weston to Bristol are somewhat (painfully) slow!

 

[Brissle Girl]

Again there's always an argument you can make. However the generalised journey time between Portishead and Bristol is undeniably going to be significantly better under the scheme. That people use the train from Weston-super-Mare, which has very different generalised journey time comparisons, doesn't come into it.


This isn't a reason for building a new line though is it?

The point I was making is that it's wrong to suggest that the location of Temple Meads makes it unattractive, because of the shift in the centre of gravity for office accommodation to be on Temple Mead's doorstep. (a point you seem to ignore). Traffic flows from Nailsea and Yatton (comparable to Portishead in terms of distance) prove that.

From Portishead, the office development at Temple Quay is on the opposite side of the centre too, so the fact the journey time is a bit longer is balanced out. Oh, and many people will be able to walk to the station in Portishead, so if they use rail instead of driving they will save a fortune in City Centre parking, assuming they are not one of the few who get a work car park space (say around £50 a week.)

 

[Cowley]

Thread reopened for @A0wen to provide an update.

 

[A0wen]

Noticed online this update about one scheme which has been removed from the Restoring Your Railways scope.

Funding pulled for Bury to Rochdale abandoned railway restoration due to cost concerns | New Civil Engineer

Transport secretary Mark Harper has informed local MPs that the application to restore the abandoned Bury-Heywood-Rochdale line will not progress further

www.newcivilengineer.com

The government has pulled its support for reinstating the Bury to Rochdale railway line under the Restoring Your Railway Fund.

Transport secretary Mark Harper has informed local MPs that the application to restore the abandoned Bury-Heywood-Rochdale line will not progress further owing to “cost and wider capacity challenges”.

Makes sense to me as a link between Rochdale and Bury would surely be more logical as part of Metrolink, not heavy rail.

 

[Starmill]

Makes sense to me as a link between Rochdale and Bury would surely be more logical as part of Metrolink, not heavy rail.

There's no proposal for a Metrolink expansion of this kind in TfGM's current prospects though. That's probably not an enormous surprise either given that there's no obvious way to connect either the low-level Metrolink station in Bury or the street-level section in Rochdale town centre to one another.

 

[geoffk]

Noticed online this update about one scheme which has been removed from the Restoring Your Railways scope.

Funding pulled for Bury to Rochdale abandoned railway restoration due to cost concerns | New Civil Engineer

Transport secretary Mark Harper has informed local MPs that the application to restore the abandoned Bury-Heywood-Rochdale line will not progress further

www.newcivilengineer.com

Makes sense to me as a link between Rochdale and Bury would surely be more logical as part of Metrolink, not heavy rail.

Bury - Heywood is of course part of the East Lancs Railway and there is (or was) an aspiration to extend trains to Castleton.

 

[A0wen]

There's no proposal for a Metrolink expansion of this kind in TfGM's current prospects though. That's probably not an enormous surprise either given that there's no obvious way to connect either the low-level Metrolink station in Bury or the street-level section in Rochdale town centre to one another.

Bit in bold - I think the question is what do you want to serve between the two ? There appear to be 2 corridors, one which takes in the Heywood Distribution Park, possibly Heywood and Castleton the other taking in Fairfield General Hospital, Rochdale town centre.

One would require a lot of on street running, the other, I guess would need to parallel run alongside the ELR to Heywood, but then creates capacity issues.

 

[Starmill]

Bit in bold - I think the question is what do you want to serve between the two ? There appear to be 2 corridors, one which takes in the Heywood Distribution Park, possibly Heywood and Castleton the other taking in Fairfield General Hospital, Rochdale town centre.

One would require a lot of on street running, the other, I guess would need to parallel run alongside the ELR to Heywood, but then creates capacity issues.

The idea is mentioned in the 2040 vision but it isn't one of the ones under direct business case development currently so it's probably too soon to consider the actual route. Either way it's going to be a totally different scheme to the rail one and won't be worked on any time soon. The ones that are are Manchester Airport Terminal 2, Davenport Green, Sandhills, Cop Road abd Elton Reservoir. There are also possibilities for tram-train options.

 

[507020]

Makes sense to me as a link between Rochdale and Bury would surely be more logical as part of Metrolink, not heavy rail.

It only makes sense to me as heavy rail. As well as serving stations at Darcy Lever, Bury and Heywood etc, from the east and west the line provides a valuable cutoff route avoiding Manchester Victoria to the north, diverting longer distance passengers from Southport, Liverpool and Wigan to Yorkshire destinations away from the congested Manchester Victoria which should free up valuable capacity, create local connectivity and shorten journey times.

There is also a frequent bus service on the corridor, the 471, illustrating demand, but which is described as absolutely useless by regular users and does not fulfil any of these benefits of rail connectivity.

Timperley - Cadishead provides an equivalent role avoiding Manchester to the south.

 

[Starmill]

It only makes sense to me as heavy rail. As well as serving stations at Darcy Lever, Bury and Heywood etc, from the east and west the line provides a valuable cutoff route avoiding Manchester Victoria to the north, diverting longer distance passengers from Southport, Liverpool and Wigan to Yorkshire destinations away from the congested Manchester Victoria which should free up valuable capacity, create local connectivity and shorten journey times.

There is also a frequent bus service on the corridor, the 471, illustrating demand, but which is described as absolutely useless by regular users and does not fulfil any of these benefits of rail connectivity.

Timperley - Cadishead provides an equivalent role avoiding Manchester to the south.

Nobody was proposing a service between Rochdale and Bolton via Bury.

 

[Class 170101]

Noticed online this update about one scheme which has been removed from the Restoring Your Railways scope.

Funding pulled for Bury to Rochdale abandoned railway restoration due to cost concerns | New Civil Engineer

Transport secretary Mark Harper has informed local MPs that the application to restore the abandoned Bury-Heywood-Rochdale line will not progress further

www.newcivilengineer.com

Makes sense to me as a link between Rochdale and Bury would surely be more logical as part of Metrolink, not heavy rail.

Any chance of providing more of the article as it is unfortunately behind a paywall?

 

[snowball]

Any chance of providing more of the article as it is unfortunately behind a paywall?

It's readable if you haven't tried to read one from NCE recently.

The government has pulled its support for reinstating the Bury to Rochdale railway line under the Restoring Your Railway Fund.

Transport secretary Mark Harper has informed local MPs that the application to restore the abandoned Bury-Heywood-Rochdale line will not progress further owing to “cost and wider capacity challenges”.

He added that “the scheme would be best considered as part of Greater Manchester’s City Region Sustainable Transport Settlement programme”.

The Restoring Your Railway Fund was announced in January 2020 as part of the levelling up agenda when the government pledged £500M to deliver on its manifesto commitment and start reopening lines and stations.

Proposals to restore the Bury to Rochdale line won £50,000 to put together a business case in the first round of funding awards. A line used to connect the two towns but was abandoned in the 1960s as part of the Beeching cuts, which saw lines with Restoring Your Railway funding decommissioned.

MP for Rochdale Tony Lloyd said: “The government’s announcement is a kick in the teeth for Rochdale and Greater Manchester.

“Tram and rail services from Rochdale to Manchester provide transport to the city centre but it doesn’t provide the kind of connections we need to get around the city region, and in particular, from Rochdale and Heywood to Bury.

“Whilst there are future plans for tram-train services between Oldham, Rochdale, Heywood and Bury, these are way down the line and Transport for Greater Manchester are still looking at ways on how to fund this which will only be made more difficult with the withdrawal of this support.

The Greater Manchester five-year delivery plan shows the Bury to Rochdale line to be a key consideration as the corridor highlighted is suitable for intervention. Transport for Greater Manchester is currently undertaking a tram-train pathfinder project, but currently funding only encompasses the pilot tram-train from Heywood to Oldham.

In October 2021, the Dartmoor line, connecting Okehampton to Exeter, became the first former line to open under the government’s Restoring Your Railway fund. It was the first of a number of schemes to revive abandoned routes, with then Network Rail chief executive Andrew Haines emphasising that restoring such lines is among key solutions to secure the future of the industry given the pandemic-driven decrease in commuting.

In the second round of funding, backers of 15 proposals were awarded cash to develop their business cases, while plans to reopen 13 abandoned railways and disused stations were accepted for development under the third round of the fund.

In June 2022, former rail minister Wendy Morton announced a further £15M in funding to develop nine more abandoned lines.

The nine latest schemes set to receive funding are:

Aldridge station and line upgrade in Walsall
The Barrow Hill Line between Sheffield and Chesterfield
The Ivanhoe Line between Leicester and Burton on Trent
Meir Station between Stoke-on-Trent and North Staffordshire
Haxby Station on the York to Scarborough Line
Reinstating the Fleetwood Railway Line
Ferryhill Station in County Durham
The Mid Cornwall Metro, connecting Newquay, Truro and Falmouth
Devizes Station between Pewsey and Westbury in Wiltshire

 

[WatcherZero]

There's no proposal for a Metrolink expansion of this kind in TfGM's current prospects though. That's probably not an enormous surprise either given that there's no obvious way to connect either the low-level Metrolink station in Bury or the street-level section in Rochdale town centre to one another.

Funding for development work for a scheme was granted last year. Its substantially identical to the East Lancs scheme, a tram-train starting in Oldham runs the Metrolink line into Rochdale Railway station then a short hop on the National Rail Network to the Castleton junction, follow the ELR to Bury then a downramp curve down into Bury Interchange which would gain a second platform access point and southern pedestrian station exit. Theres been some early talks on merging it with the ELR commuter phase 1 proposal which was starting in Rawtenstall then running to a new Bury Interchange high level platform built on Pyramid Park with a couple of parkway stations added enroute and an extra passing loop in the center but not calling at most of the heritage stations. (ELR Commuter Phase 2 would have been carrying on past Bury then turning south at Castleton junction and running to Victoria on heavy rails).

Best combination of the two schemes would probably be a pair of high level platforms serving Metrolink and ELR commuter and a southern facing curve connection to the Bury Metrolink line on Pyramid Park for moving stock between the Bury and Oldham/Rochdale lines. The ELR commuter proposal utilised class 230 for cost saving so naturally Vivarail going into administration likely contributed to the Dft pulling funding for the scheme development.

 

[Chrius56000]

Hi!

There has been Carlisle–Silloth suggested for reopening – I can't see anything like that ever getting off the ground in anybody's lifetime!

Paying an adequate subsidy to reinstate the 60 bus from Maryport plus a reasonable hourly service from Carlisle to allow one or two additional late–evening services is about all that could be achieved!

If Stagecoach Cumbria couldn't run the 60 bus from Maryport (12 m) as a viable proposition, what hope is there to to totally rebuild a totally closed, lifted and overgrown/built on ex–branch line twice that length?

Chris Williams