Restoring Your Railway Fund: what ideas would you suggest?

[yorksrob]

but this money isnt designed to do that. It is designed to buy positive spin and waste time until people move on to something else/the next election occurs when this money will be pointed to as doing something.

I also suspect your "best" and my "best" are very different!

Well, I'm not going to comment on the motivation behind the current fund, but if it isn't enough, that's all the more reason to commit a fund that's large enough to make a real difference.

Yes, our personal wish lists aren't likely to be the same, which is why there needs to be a proper process to decide between them.

 

[Bald Rick]

Point taken - I'm recounting the figures I've seen reported.

It's worth bearing in mind that the strategic road network is only a proportion of roads, and in the context of £29 billion spent on the existing rail network over the next five years, £5 billion over a similar period to achieve a permanent step-change in the coverage and reach of the network seems entirely reasonable.

Whilst the strategic road network is only a smallish proportion of roads, it carries a much larger proportion of traffic, and attracts nearly all the ‘investment’. The total spend on maintenance and renewal of the entire non-strategic road Network is rather less than £1bn a year. Almost all new roads off the strategic network are either paid for directly by developers, or by local authorities bidding to central government either into the £25bn highways fund as above, or the local growth fund (about £1bn a year), and the latter is modal agnostic. Some of that £1bn pa is being spent on railways, not included in the rail figures I mentioned earlier. For example the Portishead project will receive funding from this fund, outside the transport budget.

 

[bluenoxid]

Whilst Connecting Communities raised a number of opportunities, it is now 10.5 years old.

 

[tbtc]

Again, just dismissive easy conjecture, because the lines are still closed. The facts are unknown until or unless they reopen. Business cases are just conjecture on shiny paper

I'm sure one of the experts will correct me, but I think that the cost of re-opening a mile of new railway is roughly in the ball park of ten million quid. Per mile.

We're not going to just re-open hundreds of miles of abandoned lines on the hunch that sometimes business cases aren't wholly accurate, just to check whether all of our surveys were wide of the mark.

You need something more serious than this, sorry.

Predicting future outcomes can only be guesswork. It proved wrong on the Waverley

...but, as I keep saying on such discussions, the Waverley line was re-opened as the price for the LibDems getting into coalition at Holyrood, not because it had an outstanding business case.

The LibDems used to have a loyal support in the Borders, so they ensured that Labour agreed to open the railway there - political hogtrading - rightly or wrongly - so to say that passenger numbers beat expectations is fairly meaningless because the line wasn't built on the basis of expected passenger numbers, it was built as the price of ensuring a functioning Government.

And, since it was a question of "the line must be built, regardless" (hence the clause forbidding any service to Gorebridge until the whole line to Tweedbank opened, leaving Midlothian commuters clogging up Edinburgh's roads, because the LibDems didn't want Labour to pull a fast one and only re-open through Labour seats), I don't think that much time was spent collating expected passenger numbers - why waste time forecasting demand when you know that you are going to go ahead and do it regardless.

By all means boast about the numbers but it's a phyric victory.

If romanticism was the only criteria, the S&D would probably top the polls

And it does get mentioned pretty regularly on these kind of threads, from the kind of people who know what they want and will then work backwards to try to come up with a reason for it.

Classic "Solution In Need Of A Problem" stuff.

I forgot the Nottingham - Mansfield line

You're probably best to - it's struggled to meet passenger forecasts and the frequency north of Mansfield was cut to reflect this (IIRC) - hence it not being brought out very often on such discussions.

Small and medium sized rural towns require decent public transport too

Small towns don't require heavy rail though, do they?

I'm a rail enthusiast but not so blind that I'd suggest rail as the solution in every case - there are many other public transport options available - for the cost of one mile of railway you could order a fleet of buses and run them as a free service for many years - yet people always come back to suggesting rail as the only way of connecting places (and always obsess about the same disparate rural villages/ small towns).

Secondly, if you don't understand why people tend to prioritise expenditure on being able to actually get somewhere, rather than fancy uniforms, then you should be on a fashion forum, not a transport one

If you don't understand that the cost of replacing/upgrading things that need to be replaced every few years anyway (staff uniforms, repainting stations etc) is relatively small and that spending five billion quid is a high price to connect a few rural villages/towns then I certainly agree that we should be on different forums!​

 

[yorksrob]

Whilst the strategic road network is only a smallish proportion of roads, it carries a much larger proportion of traffic, and attracts nearly all the ‘investment’. The total spend on maintenance and renewal of the entire non-strategic road Network is rather less than £1bn a year. Almost all new roads off the strategic network are either paid for directly by developers, or by local authorities bidding to central government either into the £25bn highways fund as above, or the local growth fund (about £1bn a year), and the latter is modal agnostic. Some of that £1bn pa is being spent on railways, not included in the rail figures I mentioned earlier. For example the Portishead project will receive funding from this fund, outside the transport budget.

Indeed, I've been able to make use of the Local Growth Fund in my own non-rail related line of work, so I'm well versed in its benefits in all sorts of areas.

Nevertheless, I do think the dedicated funds for other railway projects, strengthen the case for a dedicated fund for connecting communities.

I'm sure one of the experts will correct me, but I think that the cost of re-opening a mile of new railway is roughly in the ball park of ten million quid. Per mile.

We're not going to just re-open hundreds of miles of abandoned lines on the hunch that sometimes business cases aren't wholly accurate, just to check whether all of our surveys were wide of the mark.

You need something more serious than this, sorry.



...but, as I keep saying on such discussions, the Waverley line was re-opened as the price for the LibDems getting into coalition at Holyrood, not because it had an outstanding business case.

The LibDems used to have a loyal support in the Borders, so they ensured that Labour agreed to open the railway there - political hogtrading - rightly or wrongly - so to say that passenger numbers beat expectations is fairly meaningless because the line wasn't built on the basis of expected passenger numbers, it was built as the price of ensuring a functioning Government.

And, since it was a question of "the line must be built, regardless" (hence the clause forbidding any service to Gorebridge until the whole line to Tweedbank opened, leaving Midlothian commuters clogging up Edinburgh's roads, because the LibDems didn't want Labour to pull a fast one and only re-open through Labour seats), I don't think that much time was spent collating expected passenger numbers - why waste time forecasting demand when you know that you are going to go ahead and do it regardless.

By all means boast about the numbers but it's a phyric victory.



And it does get mentioned pretty regularly on these kind of threads, from the kind of people who know what they want and will then work backwards to try to come up with a reason for it.

Classic "Solution In Need Of A Problem" stuff.



You're probably best to - it's struggled to meet passenger forecasts and the frequency north of Mansfield was cut to reflect this (IIRC) - hence it not being brought out very often on such discussions.



Small towns don't require heavy rail though, do they?

I'm a rail enthusiast but not so blind that I'd suggest rail as the solution in every case - there are many other public transport options available - for the cost of one mile of railway you could order a fleet of buses and run them as a free service for many years - yet people always come back to suggesting rail as the only way of connecting places (and always obsess about the same disparate rural villages/ small towns).

If you don't understand that the cost of replacing/upgrading things that need to be replaced every few years anyway (staff uniforms, repainting stations etc) is relatively small and that spending five billion quid is a high price to connect a few rural villages/towns then I certainly agree that we should be on different forums!​

Well actually, whilst a million per mile sounds like a hefty amount, I suspect that it isn't that far off of the cost of building a new road. And whilst I'd love to see lots of long rural routes reopened, I suspect that the best cases are already on passenger lines, or like Tavistock, Wisbech or Skelmersdale are relatively self-contained branches from main lines.

I get that you don't want the Somerset and Dorset Joint Railway reopened. Such projects probably wouldn't get through a properly adjudicated assessment process for such a fund anyway, so what are you afraid of ?

People don't see buses as a permanent transport replacement for town to town. The current de-regulation doesn't help, but lets not kid ourselves, they didn't back to Beeching.

For towns where there isn't a nearby local network such as LU or tramlink, a link into the national rail network is often the best fixed public transport link for a town.

With regard to uniforms, surely staff would ordinarily replace theirs when they wear out, rather than when the franchise changes ?

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm sure one of the experts will correct me, but I think that the cost of re-opening a mile of new railway is roughly in the ball park of ten million quid. Per mile.

The cost of building a new railway, whether one that is brand new, or on the alignment of one that has been closed for say 50 years, is an absolute minimum of £20m/mile for a simple single track line, heading to an average of £40m/mile for a twin track electrified route.

It can be much more. The Met line extension in Watford was nearly £200m/mile when it was abandoned.

Very approximately, the costs of a new road are broadly the same. There’s a potential MSc dissertation to compare the two, but essentially the most of the costs are the same - feasibility, design, obtaining consents, utilities, project management, environmental mitigation, drainage, all the back office etc. The only difference is that roads need a little bit more land and larger main civils, but don’t need much in the way of signalling or electrification, and very little testing / commissioning. I also suspect that 3-4 layers of blacktop are cheaper than 300mm ballast + sleepers + rail.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

UPDATE:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...By2biWhweUsgWQbikM_BnGxoP0rRLqlNhkCk2t38ZPPI0

Ideas Fund update
The assessment process for funding has been adapted in response to the challenge of COVID-19.

60 applications were received for the first round of the Restoring Your Railway Ideas Fund.

To comply with government guidance on COVID-19, the panel is considering the bids on paper, without direct representation from the promoters.

The Ideas Fund panel members are:

• Chris Heaton-Harris MP – Rail Minister (Chair)
• Simon Clarke MP – Minister for Regional Growth and Local Government
• Sir Peter Hendy – Chair, Network Rail
• Jackie Sadek – CEO UK Regeneration
• Isabel Dedring – Global Transport Leader, Arup

Applicants should contact [email protected] with any questions. Please do not contact the panel directly.

Next steps
A virtual panel chaired by the Rail Minister, comprising ministerial, local authority and rail industry representatives, will be examining the bids on paper in the first instance, without direct representation from the promoters. This will enable us to identify any bids that are sufficiently advanced and provide funding so that more detailed studies can be progressed.

The department will be writing to applicants in May to update them on the progress of their application.

Applicants that have not been successful will be offered further support by the department, to help them develop their application for consideration in a later round.

Further funding rounds
The funding round in June is currently going ahead. The deadlines are Friday 22 May to register your interest and Friday 19 June to submit applications.

We will be publishing a form for applicants to register their interest shortly. This will capture high-level information including contact information, scheme type, aim of proposal, supporting MP and promoters.

We are very aware that local authorities and community organisations across the country are working very hard and prioritising their resources to respond to COVID-19. For this reason, there will be a third funding round in November to enable as many communities as possible to take advantage of the support provided.

New Stations Fund
The third round of the New Stations Fund is underway and applications close on 5 June.

If you have any questions about this fund, you can contact the team directly at [email protected].

any thoughts?

 

[Iskra]

I know that passenger services on the Stocksbridge/Deepcar Line was one of these applications.

 

[Mark J]

The cost of building a new railway, whether one that is brand new, or on the alignment of one that has been closed for say 50 years, is an absolute minimum of £20m/mile for a simple single track line, heading to an average of £40m/mile for a twin track electrified route.

It can be much more. The Met line extension in Watford was nearly £200m/mile when it was abandoned.

Very approximately, the costs of a new road are broadly the same. There’s a potential MSc dissertation to compare the two, but essentially the most of the costs are the same - feasibility, design, obtaining consents, utilities, project management, environmental mitigation, drainage, all the back office etc. The only difference is that roads need a little bit more land and larger main civils, but don’t need much in the way of signalling or electrification, and very little testing / commissioning. I also suspect that 3-4 layers of blacktop are cheaper than 300mm ballast + sleepers + rail.

I've never understood why some re-opening proposals are so expensive, when:

1) Routes that are already open (freight routes),only need upgrading for passenger use. No land needs to be purchased.
2) Where land is already held but no infrastructure is on that land. Only rails, ballast and signalling needs to be laid.

Is 'red tape' and the 'many fingers in the pie' contributing towards inflated costs?

 

[yoyothehobo]

I've never understood why some re-opening proposals are so expensive, when:

2) Where land is already held but no infrastructure is on that land. Only rails, ballast and signalling needs to be laid.

Is 'red tape' and the 'many fingers in the pie' contributing towards inflated costs?

Well for a start infrastructure needs to be tested, a ground investigation along the whole length, test any structures, add new drainage, add ballast, add fencing, restore any embankments/cutting, replace any bridges, if there is a level crossing replace it with a bridge, buy new rails and lay them, add new signalling and power, build new stations, remove trees, rebuild embankments where you have removed trees.

A reinstated railway is essentially a new railway, just because there was a railway there once doesnt mean you can slap down a new one and its all good. The amount of maintenance that goes on on active railways should give a clue to how much work is needed on an old trackbed.

Also rabbits, they make a mess.

 

[Bald Rick]

I've never understood why some re-opening proposals are so expensive, when:

1) Routes that are already open (freight routes),only need upgrading for passenger use. No land needs to be purchased.
2) Where land is already held but no infrastructure is on that land. Only rails, ballast and signalling needs to be laid.

Is 'red tape' and the 'many fingers in the pie' contributing towards inflated costs?

1) Land may well need to be purchased; for stations, bridges to replace LXs, site compounds for the upgrading, etc. East West Rail being a case in point.

2) just because you own land doesn’t mean you can build a railway on it, in the same way that if you own a field you can’t stick 300 houses on it. And there is a lot, lot more to railway infrastructure than rails, ballast and signalling!

 

[Mark J]

1) Land may well need to be purchased; for stations, bridges to replace LXs, site compounds for the upgrading, etc. East West Rail being a case in point.

2) just because you own land doesn’t mean you can build a railway on it, in the same way that if you own a field you can’t stick 300 houses on it. And there is a lot, lot more to railway infrastructure than rails, ballast and signalling!

The point I was trying to make is: If the land is already held, surely reopening costs are far lower?

Costs are obviously inflated, when having to buy back land is part of the project.

The Borders route was reopened at a cost of £9.5 million a mile (with land purchase included and various new bridges and tunnels). Even the reopening of the route back to Carlisle (70 miles) is costed at around £10 million a mile. So cannot understand where the £20 million+ a mile comes from.

As a final point. Surely what is going on at present and the vast amounts being spent by Government stopping mass un-employment and the economy tanking. Will there still be any money available for re-openings after all this?

 

[yoyothehobo]

I am awaiting Bald Rick telling you how wrong your figures are...

 

[Mark J]

I am awaiting Bald Rick telling you how wrong your figures are...

I'm here for discussion, not arguments. I can go to other discussion forums for that silliness.

I may be wrong. However what I appreciate is good discussion as to why I am wrong. Not silly baiting comments saying I am wrong.

 

[yoyothehobo]

Well I dont have the figures personally, though a quick search shows this

"The Borders line wasn’t £10m/mile, it was about £15m/mile when all costs were accounted for. And that was costs incurred between 5 and 10 years ago. It was also very cheap." Here is his quote, and judging by his previous comments on various threads over the years, he is a trustworthy source on the matter.

 

[Bald Rick]

The point I was trying to make is: If the land is already held, surely reopening costs are far lower?

Costs are obviously inflated, when having to buy back land is part of the project.

The Borders route was reopened at a cost of £9.5 million a mile (with land purchase included and various new bridges and tunnels). Even the reopening of the route back to Carlisle (70 miles) is costed at around £10 million a mile. So cannot understand where the £20 million+ a mile comes from.

As a final point. Surely what is going on at present and the vast amounts being spent by Government stopping mass un-employment and the economy tanking. Will there still be any money available for re-openings after all this?

Most land is cheap, unless you are building in urban areas. The process to get to the position to be able to buy it is not. That process is the same as is required to authorise the construction of a railway, regardless of whether the land is already owned or not.

Borders was not £9.5m/ mile. It was nearer to £15m/mile when all costs are included. It was also an easy railway to build, as railways go. Add in construction inflation since those costs were incurred (5-10 years ago) and then more construction inflation to the point where future new lines costs would be incurred (3-10 years hence) and £20m is cheap.

Oxford - Bicester was £30m/mile. Bicester - Bletchley is £40m/mile. I can’t understand why anyone thinks that the cost of building new railways would be any less than the actual costs for new railways that are being built right now.

 

[Bald Rick]

Well I dont have the figures personally, though a quick search shows this

"The Borders line wasn’t £10m/mile, it was about £15m/mile when all costs were accounted for. And that was costs incurred between 5 and 10 years ago. It was also very cheap." Here is his quote, and judging by his previous comments on various threads over the years, he is a trustworthy source on the matter.

Glad I’m consistent!

 

[route:oxford]

I can’t understand why anyone thinks that the cost of building new railways would be any less than the actual costs for new railways that are being built right now.

Essentially, there are a lot of people out there who think that £1M is a lot of money. It still sounds aspirational and is a top prize for the Premium Bonds, but doesn't quite buy what it did in the 20th century.

Probably the biggest frustration is that it takes so long to actually start the work that costs escalate.

Perhaps there needs to be a change in how these things are costed away from actual money to physcial things? Approve 3 new stations of size "x", 5 miles of line upgrades, 5 average bridges and 2 average tunnels. A mile of track will cost a mile of track no matter whether it's done today tomorrow or in 10 years time.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

what could be the sixty schemes? Awards of up to £50,000 towards things like Feasibility studies

The ones I know of that have been submitted or were going to be submitted:

Restore Your Railway Fund Bids/Potential Bids:

1. Leicester-Burton
2. Stockport to Stalybridge
3. Stocksbridge-Sheffield
4. Sheffield to Chesterfield via Barrow Hill
5. Doncaster to Knottingley
6. Doncaster to Shireoaks
7. Stafford to Wellington
8. Buxton to Matlock
9. Gobowen to Oswestry
10. Rhyl to Corwen
11. Tavistock to Bere Alston
12. Tavistock to Okehampton
13. Brent to Kingsbridge
14. Heathfield to Newton Abbot
15. Stratford to Honeybourne
16. Lostwithiel to Fowey
17. Northampton to Market Harborough
18. Northampton to Bedford
19. Wisbech to March
20. Uckfield to Lewes
21. Bourne End to High Wycombe
22. Sandall and Agbrigg to Barnsley
23. Skipton to Colne
24. York to Beverley
25. Penrith to Keswick
26. Silloth to Carlisle
27. Skelmersdale Spur
28. Afon-wen to Bangor
29. Totton to Fawley
30. Newport to Smallbrook Junction
31. Shanklin to Ventor
32. Burscough Curves
33. Grazebrook to Baguely
34. Shirebrook to Ollerton
35. Poulton-le-Fylde to Fleetwood (not included in the 60)
36. Northumberland Park to Ashington (not included in the 60)
37. Harrogate to Northallerton via Ripon
38. Gainsborough Central to Cleethorpes (Potentially, but guess work)
39. Sharpness to Berkeley Road (Potentially, but guess work)
40. Burnley-in-Wharfedale to Weeton via Otley (potentially but guess work)
41. Brokenhurst to Ringwood (Potentially but guess work)
42. Station: Cullompton
43. Station: Wellington
44. Station: Methley
45. Station: Little Deeping
46. Station: Donnington Road
47. Station: Standish
48. Station: Millhouses and Ecclesall
49. Wortley Curve

50-60 ?

New Stations Fund Bids known so far:

1. Marsh Barton
2. Edingswell
3. Wilton Parkway

I have thought about maybe Gainsborough to Cleethorpes was submitted?

 

[Bald Rick]

A mile of track will cost a mile of track no matter whether it's done today tomorrow or in 10 years time.

Except it doesn’t. Costs can vary widely depending on where that mile is and what it is to be built on (physically and politically).

 

[yorksrob]

Glad to see some of my favourites on there.

 

[backontrack]

Glad to see some of my favourites on there.

Yeah, there are some good bids.

A couple of surprises, too! Silloth to Carlisle???

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Yeah, there are some good bids.

A couple of surprises, too! Silloth to Carlisle???

yeah they are good but a few notes need to be made. The DfT did say the schemes don’t-necessarily have to a medium or high BCR they can have a low BCR but as long as they have some benefits then.

any more that surprise anyone?

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

There are still 19 short (including the 7 stations said to be submitted for restoration)?

 

[backontrack]

yeah they are good but a few notes need to be made. The DfT did say the schemes don’t-necessarily have to a medium or high BCR they can have a low BCR but as long as they have some benefits then.

I still think there are some good ones. After all, you don't know which schemes I'm referring to!

There are still 19 short (including the 7 stations said to be submitted for restoration)?

I'd imagine Ripon and Sharpness might be among those? Also possibly Otley?

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

I still think there are some good ones. After all, you don't know which schemes I'm referring to!

I'd imagine Ripon and Sharpness might be among those? Also possibly Otley?

If you add Ripon, Sharpness, Otley and Gainsborough Central to Cleethorpes routes that would leave 15 still to find

 

[The Planner]

Not sure why some of these are asking for money to fund studies when a few must have them coming out their ears. £50k isnt going to get them much else.

 

[D365]

4. Sheffield to Chesterfield via Barrow will be ambitious if they don't sort out the Sheffield Midland two track bottleneck.

Unless they propose running it as an extension of the Stocksbridge service?

 

[cactustwirly]

what could be the sixty schemes? Awards of up to £50,000 towards things like Feasibility studies

The ones I know of that have been submitted or were going to be submitted:

1. Leicester-Burton
2. Stockport to Stalybridge
3. Stocksbridge-Sheffield
4. Sheffield to Chesterfield via Barrow Hill
5. Doncaster to Knottingley
6. Doncaster to Shireoaks
7. Stafford to Wellington
8. Buxton to Matlock
9. Gobowen to Oswestry
10. Rhyl to Corwen
11. Tavistock to Bere Alston
12. Tavistock to Okehampton
13. Brent to Kingsbridge
14. Heathfield to Newton Abbot
15. Stratford to Honeybourne
16. Lostwithiel to Fowey
17. Northampton to Market Harborough
18. Northampton to Bedford
19. Wisbech to March
20. Uckfield to Lewes
21. Bourne End to High Wycombe
22. Sandall and Agbrigg to Barnsley
23. Skipton to Colne
24. York to Beverley
25. Penrith to Keswick
26. Silloth to Carlisle
27. Skelmersdale Spur
28. Afon-wen to Bangor
29. Totton to Fawley
30. Newport to Smallbrook Junction
31. Shanklin to Ventor
32. Burscough Curves
33. Grazebrook to Baguely
34. Shirebrook to Ollerton
35. Poulton-le-Fylde to Fleetwood (not included in the 60)
36. Northumberland Park to Ashington (not included in the 60)

The other 26? Are some of these stations?

List of station bids:

1. Cullompton
2. Wellington
3. Methley
4. Little Deeping
5. Donnington Road
6. Wilton Parkway
7. Standish
8. Marsh Barton

I have thought about maybe Gainsborough to Cleethorpes was submitted?

Lots of dead wood on there, which have no hope.
1, 3 and 17/18 are interesting, although Stocksbridge could be very expensive, but there is not access to Sheffield staion currently.
29 has potential too.

 

[Kendalian]

Yeah, there are some good bids.

A couple of surprises, too! Silloth to Carlisle???

To think people mock the idea of reopening Tweedbank to Carlisle

Seriously though, good to see the Burscough Curves in there and Skipton-Colne.