Suggestions for rail provision in the Aberdeen area

[Bassman]

How else would you get to the terminal though?

I wonder if tram spurs could be scoped out for future proofing for connecting Inverness airport with Dalcross station then Inverness, and Aberdeen Airport to Dyce and Aberdeen , with a prospect of using tram trains to provide fast direct travel to the airports and new housing areas and stations on their route. Too imaginative, or potentially practical?

 

[Jordan Adam]

I wonder if tram spurs could be scoped out for future proofing for connecting Inverness airport with Dalcross station then Inverness, and Aberdeen Airport to Dyce and Aberdeen , with a prospect of using tram trains to provide fast direct travel to the airports and new housing areas and stations on their route. Too imaginative, or potentially practical?

Costs would be through the roof, simply not viable. The bus connections are fairly decent at the Aberdeen end while the Inverness end isn't that busy, so again a shuttle bus would be far more sustainable. We need sustainable solutions, not the "fastest".

 

[47271]

I wonder if tram spurs could be scoped out for future proofing for connecting Inverness airport with Dalcross station then Inverness, and Aberdeen Airport to Dyce and Aberdeen , with a prospect of using tram trains to provide fast direct travel to the airports and new housing areas and stations on their route. Too imaginative, or potentially practical?

What Aberdeen needs first and foremost now that they've got the line capacity to Inverurie is for the local authority to get its finger out and propose two or three intermediate stations between the city centre and Dyce. That could get a good load of traffic off Great Northern Road and help regenerate some of the area's most deprived areas. But instead all we got was hot air about a line to the airport and the new exhibition centre.

Then they need to work with Aberdeenshire to get the Buchan Line reopened.

Inverness airport traffic is very light, it would be a very long time before a rail link could be justified.

 

[Jordan Adam]

What Aberdeen needs first and foremost now that they've got the line capacity to Inverurie is for the local authority to get its finger out and propose two or three intermediate stations between the city centre and Dyce. That could get a good load of traffic off Great Northern Road and help regenerate some of the area's most deprived areas. But instead all we got was hot air about a line to the airport and the new exhibition centre.

Then they need to work with Aberdeenshire to get the Buchan Line reopened.

Inverness airport traffic is very light, it would be a very long time before a rail link could be justified.

I heavily disagree, all building new rail stations between Aberdeen and Dyce would do is slow trains down with them constantly start stopping. Those areas all have great bus coverage, so it's really quite pointless. Great Northern Road isn't that bad for traffic now anyway. Likewise the Rail link to the Airport/TECA is a rather daft idea and not really justifiable when a decent bus link could do just as good of a job at a fraction of the cost.

It's the Buchan Line that we really need reopened. Although i'm not too sure if there's any point if they only plan to go as far as Ellon, ideally you'd want to cover up to Peterhead.

 

[hexagon789]

I wonder if tram spurs could be scoped out for future proofing for connecting Inverness airport with Dalcross station then Inverness, and Aberdeen Airport to Dyce and Aberdeen , with a prospect of using tram trains to provide fast direct travel to the airports and new housing areas and stations on their route. Too imaginative, or potentially practical?

If Edinburgh is anything to go by it would be horrifically expensive and in these cases, not much to serve on some longish stretches.

Ideally the terminals would be closer to the railway really.

 

[Deltic1961]

The train fare is pretty much the same as the bus so there would be no real advantage. It used to be much cheaper but they've increased it from Dyce at 10p pretty much every year so it's caught up with the bus fares now.

If you're going to the Bon Accord Centre the bus would be just as quick as with the train you would have to walk ages just to get to the barrier then all the way up from the station.

One thing I don't understand is why the trains slow down so much when approaching stations. for Dyce it slows down to 30 at Stoneywood which is quite a distance away. doing that for another 3 stations would add a fair bit of time.

 

[Bassman]

If Edinburgh is anything to go by it would be horrifically expensive and in these cases, not much to serve on some longish stretches.

Ideally the terminals would be closer to the railway really.

Yes you make good points, though I am talking about long term planning. As far as I can see Aberdeen ( and also Inverness) lack serious infrastucture in public transport for the longer term. Trams are makjng a comeback and can be integrated into underused rail networks with additional short spurs - a fraction of Edinburghs. Along with electrification this seems to me an asset to be considered. (As the proposals of linking Glasgow airport with the rail network. ) In relative terms with future electrification, and planning for houses alongside this, new stops can make a spur to new investment. It it is thinking long term opening up possibilities of carbon neutral transit !

 

[hexagon789]

Yes you make good points, though I am talking about long term planning.

My main concern is that with Edinburgh or indeed a line in Glasgow out to the airport you have concentrations of houses or shops/businesses along the route but with Inverness/Aberdeen unless I'm wrong there are bits where you'd be in open countryside which isn't typically ideal for a tram in my view.

In relative terms with future electrification, and planning for houses alongside this, new stops can make a spur to new investment. It it is thinking long term opening up possibilities of carbon neutral transit !

That would definitely make it more viable, some new housing schemes would be ideal hand-in-hand with such a project.

 

[Jordan Adam]

The train only caters for a very limited market, those who live near the Dyce station and work near Union Square. If i lived in Dyce and needed to commute to the central Union Street area then Bain's Coaches is a no brainier, it is slower than the train, however it's far more convenient as it avoids the steep walk from the train station that many people dislike and is "cheap as chips". IIRC an adult fare from Dyce to Union Terrace is only £1.70!

Part of the issue with the train is that Dyce Rail Station is a fair walk from the bulk of the Dyce passenger market. Who'd want to walk 10/15 minutes when you can get a frequent bus at the end of your street. Then that's not to count the fact that many commuters who live in Dyce work up near Holburn Junction and along Albyn Place. Additionally Dyce has quite a number of residents who work in Altens, again the 18 just ends up being more convenient. Again the train is just inconvenient for all of those.

When it comes to a tram route there's so many reason i'd oppose it. So i'm going to make a list of a few...

• There's not enough demand for a high frequency tram service to the Airport.
• The JET727 is fairly direct and provides a frequent 10 minute service with buses through the night.
• There's not enough space in the city centre for Tram infrastructure.
• In order to make a tram service in any way viable it would probably have to take a slower route via places like Heathryfold, Newhills and Stoneywood slowing down the service.
• In the Bucksburn/Woodside areas there's physically no space to "insert" a tram line, so it would have to use Gt Northern Road, which totally defeats the purpose.

Granted the 17/18 can be quite slow now, especially with the 18 going via Danestone. But it wouldn't take much to create a new express version of the Dyce 17 that went direct via Stoneywood Road. Certainly far far cheaper than some pointless train station at Bucksburn and Hayton or a tram line!

 

[47271]

I heavily disagree, all building new rail stations between Aberdeen and Dyce would do is slow trains down with them constantly start stopping. Those areas all have great bus coverage, so it's really quite pointless. Great Northern Road isn't that bad for traffic now anyway. Likewise the Rail link to the Airport/TECA is a rather daft idea and not really justifiable when a decent bus link could do just as good of a job at a fraction of the cost.

It's the Buchan Line that we really need reopened. Although i'm not too sure if there's any point if they only plan to go as far as Ellon, ideally you'd want to cover up to Peterhead.

Sorry, I wasn't totally clear in what I was saying.

Two or three stations between Aberdeen and Dyce wouldn't be served by Aberdeen to Inverness expresses, my point is that they would be part of a proper cross city service between Buchan/Inverurie and Stonehaven, and this would include reopenings at Cove and Newtonhill. The next stage would be Fraserburgh and Peterhead, equally to the benefit of those suburban stops in the city. So Bucksburn and Kittybrewster stations wouldn't just be there as bus substitutes other than in the early days, they'd be part of a regional network.

I've no idea if there's a business case, what I'm saying is that Aberdeen City Council would better spend time promoting this sort of staged scheme on a newly redoubled main line than waffling on about airport and exhibition centre light rail links.

 

[Jordan Adam]

Sorry, I wasn't totally clear in what I was saying.

Two or three stations between Aberdeen and Dyce wouldn't be served by Aberdeen to Inverness expresses, my point is that they would be part of a proper cross city service between Buchan/Inverurie and Stonehaven, and this would include reopenings at Cove and Newtonhill. The next stage would be Fraserburgh and Peterhead, equally to the benefit of those suburban stops in the city. So Bucksburn and Kittybrewster stations wouldn't just be there as bus substitutes other than in the early days, they'd be part of a regional network.

I've no idea if there's a business case, what I'm saying is that Aberdeen City Council would better spend time promoting this sort of staged scheme on a newly redoubled main line than waffling on about airport and exhibition centre light rail links.

Fair enough, i get what your saying. Totally agree about having a Newtonhill station as bus provision there is dire, Cove i'm less convinced on as it could have a negative impact to other residents in the area not near the station.

If they were to put stations between Aberdeen and Dyce the only place where i think it could work is near where Don Street meets Hayton Road. Although even then i suspect the market would be pretty limited with people preferring the more frequent bus that serves Union Street. Keep in mind offpeak this area is currently served by about 20 buses per hour in to the city. Likewise at Bucksburn there's 20+ buses per hour offpeak. Installing train stations could risk diverting passengers from these routes meaning that places further out see a reduction in frequency as there's less passengers overall. I just don't think the case for this is strong as the existing bus provision to those areas is good and i doubt the train would have much impact, especially the closer to the city centre you get. Additionally congestion is not much of an issue around the Haudagain/Gt Northern Road compared to 5 years ago and it will only improve once the new link road opens.

Regarding the Airport/TECA First's new X27 covers most of this on a 15 minute frequency and having used it a few times it would probably be faster than the train anyway. Perhaps there could be some sort of public transport partnership so the X27's were better timed to connect with the train as at present they don't. The X27 doesn't go in to the Airport Terminal at the moment, however it does serve Argyll Road which is fairly close. As the service is run on a commercial basis i do worry about it's future as loading at the moment are rather poor with First and the Airport not on best relations.

 

[Bassman]

The train only caters for a very limited market, those who live near the Dyce station and work near Union Square. If i lived in Dyce and needed to commute to the central Union Street area then Bain's Coaches is a no brainier, it is slower than the train, however it's far more convenient as it avoids the steep walk from the train station that many people dislike and is "cheap as chips". IIRC an adult fare from Dyce to Union Terrace is only £1.70!

Part of the issue with the train is that Dyce Rail Station is a fair walk from the bulk of the Dyce passenger market. Who'd want to walk 10/15 minutes when you can get a frequent bus at the end of your street. Then that's not to count the fact that many commuters who live in Dyce work up near Holburn Junction and along Albyn Place. Additionally Dyce has quite a number of residents who work in Altens, again the 18 just ends up being more convenient. Again the train is just inconvenient for all of those.

When it comes to a tram route there's so many reason i'd oppose it. So i'm going to make a list of a few...

• There's not enough demand for a high frequency tram service to the Airport.
• The JET727 is fairly direct and provides a frequent 10 minute service with buses through the night.
• There's not enough space in the city centre for Tram infrastructure.
• In order to make a tram service in any way viable it would probably have to take a slower route via places like Heathryfold, Newhills and Stoneywood slowing down the service.
• In the Bucksburn/Woodside areas there's physically no space to "insert" a tram line, so it would have to use Gt Northern Road, which totally defeats the purpose.

Granted the 17/18 can be quite slow now, especially with the 18 going via Danestone. But it wouldn't take much to create a new express version of the Dyce 17 that went direct via Stoneywood Road. Certainly far far cheaper than some pointless train station at Bucksburn and Hayton or a tram line!

The proposition was one of future potential and using the existing rail track for use by tram/trains .. as successfully being done in the Midlands. When the line is electrified, a short spur can be taken off Dyce, circumvent the runway or go under and connect ,airport to rail station and fast transit to city centre. Just trying to think out the box. Expense minimal compared to engineering works being carried out now. Other station and minor tram loops possible .

 

[Altnabreac]

The proposition was one of future potential and using the existing rail track for use by tram/trains .. as successfully being done in the Midlands. When the line is electrified, a short spur can be taken off Dyce, circumvent the runway or go under and connect ,airport to rail station and fast transit to city centre. Just trying to think out the box. Expense minimal compared to engineering works being carried out now. Other station and minor tram loops possible .

Unlikely

 

[Bassman]

Unlikely

In your opinion

 

[Jordan Adam]

The proposition was one of future potential and using the existing rail track for use by tram/trains .. as successfully being done in the Midlands. When the line is electrified, a short spur can be taken off Dyce, circumvent the runway or go under and connect ,airport to rail station and fast transit to city centre. Just trying to think out the box. Expense minimal compared to engineering works being carried out now. Other station and minor tram loops possible .

The issue all comes down to demand, there simply just isn't the demand at Aberdeen Airport to justify such expenses, and the benefits over a road alternative are minimal to none. Simply put when it comes to public transport provision at Aberdeen Airport the way forward is improved bus provision along the route along with a funding/partnership to provide a shuttle bus to connect with the train at Dyce. (Dyce Asda - Dyce Rail - TECA - Aberdeen Airport - Kirkhill(peaktimes) being the idea route).

Any potential tram route in Aberdeen is just a white elephant from the get go. As mentioned already part of the issue with a City - Airport route is that the current landscape of the Woodside/Bucksburn areas would make it impossible to build unless you planned to have it use the roadway (totally defeats the purpose), it would have to divert to serve other areas in order to make it viable and it would have a negative impact on the areas along the corridor outwith the immediate route.

 

[Altnabreac]

In your opinion

While it is indeed my opinion I would suggest that hypothesing that a proposal consisting of digging a tunnel under a live airport runway will not be of "minimal expense" is a reasonably uncontroversial opinion.

Various Aberdeen Airport spurs have been proposed over the years with costs speculated to be anywhere between £70M and £200M. these didn't involve any tunneling though so my guess would be that a proposal with that attached would be even more.

 

[Bassman]

While it is indeed my opinion I would suggest that hypothesing that a proposal consisting of digging a tunnel under a live airport runway will not be of "minimal expense" is a reasonably uncontroversial opinion.

Various Aberdeen Airport spurs have been proposed over the years with costs speculated to be anywhere between £70M and £200M. these didn't involve any tunneling though so my guess would be that a proposal with that attached would be even more.

Yes thank you, i appreciate a more reasoned reply and there may be good reasons for not considering this. Building new or revitalising old infrastucture changes patterns of investment and is forward looking. Most modern cities look to new tram like approaches to mass transit. (shefield tram- trains cover distance of 25 km. Using currwnt underused railways) I merely see that as a possibility for 20, 30 years hence rather than forever relying on buses. Look at the infrastructure done on the Aberdeen city bypass. In Scottish engineering terms it is not totally unrealistic as a future proposal.

 

[Jordan Adam]

Yes thank you, i appreciate a more reasoned reply and there may be good reasons for not considering this. Building new or revitalising old infrastucture changes patterns of investment and is forward looking. Most modern cities look to new tram like approaches to mass transit. (shefield tram- trains cover distance of 25 km. Using currwnt underused railways) I merely see that as a possibility for 20, 30 years hence rather than forever relying on buses. Look at the infrastructure done on the Aberdeen city bypass. In Scottish engineering terms it is not totally unrealistic as a future proposal.

The difference with the bypass is that there was and is demand and a need for it, and it brought significant journey time improvements both in and around the city. Which incidentally 'worsened' the case for a tram/rail link as there's significant less congestion along the Woodside/Bucksburn corridor making the bus services more reliable and faster, especially with the bus lanes you pretty much fly (excuse the pun) through the Haudagain roundabout now where as before you'd often get stuck there for 10/15 minutes.

With a tram/rail link there simply isn't that same need. NE Scotland is totally different to the likes of the Midlands (Which you mentioned before), as such different solutions are needed. In the case of Aberdeen the bus remains the best option for the Airport purely on the basis that it's cheapest, more sustainable and more flexible to future growth. Additionally at present it's viable to run a 70 seater double decker on a 10 minute frequency, with the same route via a tram you'd have to significantly reduce the frequency in order to get the same percentage of passengers per run, thus making it much less convenient. That's not even taking in to account the disruption the construction would cause.

Even in 20 to 30 years i can't see it being viable as the bulk of proposed developments now are outwith the main route and the "oil boom" is pretty much coming to it's end.

 

[Bassman]

The difference with the bypass is that there was and is demand and a need for it, and it brought significant journey time improvements both in and around the city. Which incidentally 'worsened' the case for a tram/rail link as there's significant less congestion along the Woodside/Bucksburn corridor making the bus services more reliable and faster, especially with the bus lanes you pretty much fly (excuse the pun) through the Haudagain roundabout now where as before you'd often get stuck there for 10/15 minutes.

With a tram/rail link there simply isn't that same need. NE Scotland is totally different to the likes of the Midlands (Which you mentioned before), as such different solutions are needed. In the case of Aberdeen the bus remains the best option for the Airport purely on the basis that it's cheapest, more sustainable and more flexible to future growth. Additionally at present it's viable to run a 70 seater double decker on a 10 minute frequency, with the same route via a tram you'd have to significantly reduce the frequency in order to get the same percentage of passengers per run, thus making it much less convenient. That's not even taking in to account the disruption the construction would cause.

Even in 20 to 30 years i can't see it being viable as the bulk of proposed developments now are outwith the main route and the "oil boom" is pretty much coming to it's end.

Ok you may well be right.
However I differ in mindset that the future is still only the car and bus for city and suburban use. Investment in rail and light rail, tram and bus appropriately is a coming trend, and of choice by more and more people. It may not be suitable here, but I see a lack of modern infrastructure thinking in Aberdeen, compared to a host of other sizeable cities in Europe and the far east. The demand is still led by the car which environmentally is not good.

 

[Altnabreac]

Yes thank you, i appreciate a more reasoned reply and there may be good reasons for not considering this. Building new or revitalising old infrastucture changes patterns of investment and is forward looking. Most modern cities look to new tram like approaches to mass transit. (shefield tram- trains cover distance of 25 km. Using currwnt underused railways) I merely see that as a possibility for 20, 30 years hence rather than forever relying on buses. Look at the infrastructure done on the Aberdeen city bypass. In Scottish engineering terms it is not totally unrealistic as a future proposal.

I just think any Airport line is well down the list of potential rail schemes in the wider Aberdeen area. I'd rank it 8th out of 8 potential future rail schemes in Aberdeenshire. Rail proposals in descending likelihood of happening:

• Kintore Station - under construction
• South Aberdeen stations (Presumably Newtonhill / Cove) NESTRANS have submitted a Local Rail Development Fund proposal to study these, decent potential business case once more local services running. Issue may be affect on overall capacity levels.
• North Aberdeen stations (Presumably Bucksburn / Kittybrewster) NESTRANS have submitted a Local Rail Development Fund proposal to study these, decent potential business case once more local services running. Issue may be affect on overall capacity levels.
• Dyce to Ellon - Various Nestrans studies done. Expensive and difficult to find capacity Dyce - Aberdeen. Probably generate a decent demand if built.
• Inverurie to Oldmeldrum - Railfuture proposal. Seemed slightly odd at first but actually could work well as a cheap extension of existing Inverurie terminators giving a new P&R site for the wider Formartine area. Doesn't seem to be favoured by Aberdeenshire Council or Nestrans though.
• Ellon northwards to Peterhead or Fraserburgh. Occasionally proposed by Nestrans / Councillors. Very expensive and suffers same capacity issues as Ellon extension. May be limited commuting demand for these longer journeys to Aberdeen.
• Banchory - Aberdeen. Busy transport corridor, potential to serve RGU, if it existed already it would do excellent business as a commuter railway. Not easy to justify on regeneration potential however and may be unpopular with neighbouring houses. Rarely mentioned politically.
• Aberdeen Airport Spur. Expensive, capacity issues, low demand.

 

[edwin_m]

Ok you may well be right.
However I differ in mindset that the future is still only the car and bus for city and suburban use. Investment in rail and light rail, tram and bus appropriately is a coming trend, and of choice by more and more people. It may not be suitable here, but I see a lack of modern infrastructure thinking in Aberdeen, compared to a host of other sizeable cities in Europe and the far east. The demand is still led by the car which environmentally is not good.

In a future where car use is scaled back, flying may also be similarly reduced so the number of airport users may reduce. It probably has already due to decline in the oil industry.

If the terminal was easily walkable from Dyce station then the airport could have a useful train service at very little cost, as at Prestwick where air passenger numbers are about a fifth of Aberdeen's. The lowest-patronage UK airport for which rail service is provided specifically is Newcastle, which has over 50% more passengers than Aberdeen, and the link there was relatively easy to build being a short extension of the existing Metro through a rural area and mostly on a disused railway.

 

[Jordan Adam]

I just think any Airport line is well down the list of potential rail schemes in the wider Aberdeen area. I'd rank it 8th out of 8 potential future rail schemes in Aberdeenshire. Rail proposals in descending likelihood of happening:

• Kintore Station - under construction
• South Aberdeen stations (Presumably Newtonhill / Cove) NESTRANS have submitted a Local Rail Development Fund proposal to study these, decent potential business case once more local services running. Issue may be affect on overall capacity levels.
• North Aberdeen stations (Presumably Bucksburn / Kittybrewster) NESTRANS have submitted a Local Rail Development Fund proposal to study these, decent potential business case once more local services running. Issue may be affect on overall capacity levels.
• Dyce to Ellon - Various Nestrans studies done. Expensive and difficult to find capacity Dyce - Aberdeen. Probably generate a decent demand if built.
• Inverurie to Oldmeldrum - Railfuture proposal. Seemed slightly odd at first but actually could work well as a cheap extension of existing Inverurie terminators giving a new P&R site for the wider Formartine area. Doesn't seem to be favoured by Aberdeenshire Council or Nestrans though.
• Ellon northwards to Peterhead or Fraserburgh. Occasionally proposed by Nestrans / Councillors. Very expensive and suffers same capacity issues as Ellon extension. May be limited commuting demand for these longer journeys to Aberdeen.
• Banchory - Aberdeen. Busy transport corridor, potential to serve RGU, if it existed already it would do excellent business as a commuter railway. Not easy to justify on regeneration potential however and may be unpopular with neighbouring houses. Rarely mentioned politically.
• Aberdeen Airport Spur. Expensive, capacity issues, low demand.

Fully agree with your listing. As a basic run down from my point of view.

I'd say Newtonhill is the most probable if another station were to be built in Aberdeenshire, especially given the additionally housing development away to go up to the south east of the village which is well within walking distance of where the train station would most likely be. Cove is also not totally out of the question, although i'm not sure if the impact it made would be positive to the wider Cove area.

Aberdeen North i don't see the point in their stations at Bucksburn or Kittybrewster. With Bucksburn the railway is away from the prime housing developments (besides the Muggiemoss area), again the fact that many people who live there don't commute to the Union Square area is at play here. Kittybrewster would provide decent links to the shops, but demand would be even lower given how near it is to the city centre with the buses only taking 5-10 minutes to get to Union Street thus working out faster than the train.

Dyce - Buchan: Can see demand, but can also see cost issues. Ellon and Newmachar on their own are not enough to justify the service. If it went to Peterhead i could see the value in it, but then that's even more expensive to construct. Oldmeldrum again wouldn't justify an extension on it's own.

Banchory - Aberdeen could have growth potential, but then the issues of routing comes in to play as i highly doubt they'd want to shut pedestrian access to the Deeside Line given the sheer number of cyclists who use it.

Ok you may well be right.
However I differ in mindset that the future is still only the car and bus for city and suburban use. Investment in rail and light rail, tram and bus appropriately is a coming trend, and of choice by more and more people. It may not be suitable here, but I see a lack of modern infrastructure thinking in Aberdeen, compared to a host of other sizeable cities in Europe and the far east. The demand is still led by the car which environmentally is not good.

Aberdeen is car dominated due to the oil boom in the 70s/80s. They'd be much better investing in improving bus provisions rather than splashing cash on some pointless white elephant "light rail" system that all things considered brings no real befits to most residents in the city. As i say the growth rate in Aberdeen is slowing down. I doubt even in 50 years there would be demand for any tram system. It's just not logistically viable in any way. Also comparing Aberdeen to European cities is a flawed argument, totally different landscapes with totally different wants and needs.

Another point i should mention about the Dyce Rail - Airport link is that the bus can cover this in about 7/8 minutes, which to most people is a perfectly acceptable amount of time. That's Station platform to terminal entrance with no walking!

 

[Tobbes]

Interesting, @Altnabreac , very many thanks.

• Dyce to Ellon - Various Nestrans studies done. Expensive and difficult to find capacity Dyce - Aberdeen. Probably generate a decent demand if built.

What are the cost drivers here? I would have thought that if you'd gone to the expense of building to Ellon, and dealing with the capacity south of Dyce, it would actually be better to go on to Peterhead or Fraserburgh - I had assumed that they'd both be in the 60-75 minute commuting time from Aberdeen?

• Inverurie to Oldmeldrum - Railfuture proposal. Seemed slightly odd at first but actually could work well as a cheap extension of existing Inverurie terminators giving a new P&R site for the wider Formartine area. Doesn't seem to be favoured by Aberdeenshire Council or Nestrans though.

I don't really understand the case for Oldmeldrum alone -unless you were putting in 5,000 houses.

• Banchory - Aberdeen. Busy transport corridor, potential to serve RGU, if it existed already it would do excellent business as a commuter railway. Not easy to justify on regeneration potential however and may be unpopular with neighbouring houses. Rarely mentioned politically.

I've always favoured this - although I'd obviously prefer to go all the way to Ballater for the Cairngorms. It may not tick any regeneration boxes, but it would cut a lot of commuter traffic off the A93. The RGU point is also well taken; is Banchory a no-hoper?

 

[Altnabreac]

Interesting, @Altnabreac , very many thanks.


What are the cost drivers here? I would have thought that if you'd gone to the expense of building to Ellon, and dealing with the capacity south of Dyce, it would actually be better to go on to Peterhead or Fraserburgh - I had assumed that they'd both be in the 60-75 minute commuting time from Aberdeen?

The NESTRANS Ellon study had 3 options costing £270-£380M
http://www.nestrans.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/FPASTS-1plus-Ellon-Rail-Study_Final-Report.pdf

I'd expect about the same again (23 miles at £10-15m a mile say) to extend to Peterhead.

So justifying £250M is hard, expanding that to £500m you need to be certain you have an excellent business case.

Interesting, I don't really understand the case for Oldmeldrum alone -unless you were putting in 5,000 houses.

So it would cost somewhere in the region of £30-50M but there are no major structure difficulties or neighbour issues. The benefits would be in getting your reversing trains out of Inverurie and providing a park and ride railhead for Turiff / Banff etc in a similar way to the Ellon proposal but for £200M less.

Probably not an amazing business case but could do decent business if built. A couple of thousand houses would help the business case.

Interesting, I've always favoured this - although I'd obviously prefer to go all the way to Ballater for the Cairngorms. It may not tick any regeneration boxes, but it would cut a lot of commuter traffic off the A93. The RGU point is also well taken; is Banchory a no-hoper?[/USER]

Some quotes from the Levenmouth announcement:

• transform Levenmouth
• renaissance for the whole of Levenmouth
• this isn’t just a transport project, it’s a social inclusion project
• lead to an enhanced local economy
• increase employment opportunities

Levenmouth has 5 datazones in the most deprived 5% in Scotland. Banchory has 5 out of 10 datazones in the least deprived 10% of Scotland.

No datazones in Banchory, Peterculter, Cults or Miltimber are in the bottom half of deprived datazones at all.

There just isn't a regeneration case for investing hundreds of millions of pounds in Deeside rail at all.

 

[47271]

I just think any Airport line is well down the list of potential rail schemes in the wider Aberdeen area. I'd rank it 8th out of 8 potential future rail schemes in Aberdeenshire. Rail proposals in descending likelihood of happening:

• Kintore Station - under construction
• South Aberdeen stations (Presumably Newtonhill / Cove) NESTRANS have submitted a Local Rail Development Fund proposal to study these, decent potential business case once more local services running. Issue may be affect on overall capacity levels.
• North Aberdeen stations (Presumably Bucksburn / Kittybrewster) NESTRANS have submitted a Local Rail Development Fund proposal to study these, decent potential business case once more local services running. Issue may be affect on overall capacity levels.
• Dyce to Ellon - Various Nestrans studies done. Expensive and difficult to find capacity Dyce - Aberdeen. Probably generate a decent demand if built.
• Inverurie to Oldmeldrum - Railfuture proposal. Seemed slightly odd at first but actually could work well as a cheap extension of existing Inverurie terminators giving a new P&R site for the wider Formartine area. Doesn't seem to be favoured by Aberdeenshire Council or Nestrans though.
• Ellon northwards to Peterhead or Fraserburgh. Occasionally proposed by Nestrans / Councillors. Very expensive and suffers same capacity issues as Ellon extension. May be limited commuting demand for these longer journeys to Aberdeen.
• Banchory - Aberdeen. Busy transport corridor, potential to serve RGU, if it existed already it would do excellent business as a commuter railway. Not easy to justify on regeneration potential however and may be unpopular with neighbouring houses. Rarely mentioned politically.
• Aberdeen Airport Spur. Expensive, capacity issues, low demand.

Yup, that's pretty much how I see it. Oldmeldrum had slipped my mind earlier.

Frustrating that there are concerns about capacity between Aberdeen and Inverurie less than a fortnight before a newly redoubled line is about to open.

In my own mind I like the idea of going the full stretch to Fraserburgh and Peterhead because they're by far the largest concentrations of economic disadvantage in Aberdeenshire and it would be transformational in the connection of two really quite isolated large towns with the outside world - similar to the Borders Railway in that respect. The cost of rail reinstatement could also be played off against dualling of the A90 to its northern extremes, something that comes up again and again, but knowing the area as I do I can well imagine that the locals would rather keep zooming along in their big fat cars and two fingers to the environment.

If I was to put money on what'll be completed from your list in ten years time then it'll be a station at Newtonhill, and that'll be it.

 

[Clansman]

Totally agree with Altnabreac.

Of all the cities in the UK that would have benefitted from some form of light rail network, Aberdeen is up there at the top of the list. Without a doubt it's one of the most bus orientated cities in the UK, with roads near griddlock in the city centre a lot of the time - thank christ for the bypass. Travelling from the west of the city is an absolute nightmare.

There is definitley scope for up to five new railway stations between Kintore and Stonehaven, though it's difficult to know how successful three of them would be in comparison to the current bus links. Any usage from stations at Kittybrewster, Bucksburn, and potentially a park & ride at Woodside (which I'm surprised hasn't been proposed as it's the most logical one of any station in the city) would likely only be used for those heading south of Union Street. I can't imagine anybody would want to use the train as an alternative to travelling to the city centre, given the treck up from Aberdeen station (which is a killer). Though space is a massive problem around the Kittybrewster area with lots of industrial and council housing areas close to the railway.

There is no chance any link to the airport should be prioritised over investment for a line to Ellon and dual carriageways to Peterhead and Fraserburgh. It's 10 minutes max from Dyce station and the Airport bus which leaves Union Square (5 minutes from the railway station) is perfectly adequate - very rarely does it fill.

 

[Tobbes]

@Altnabreac - many thanks for pointing to the NESTRANS study - very interesting. I was struck by the modelling conclusion that the additionality of the Ellon P&R was essentially nil, which seems (rather optimisitically?) to presume that all of the drivers would drive into Ellon and park.... somewhere.

However, the route to the Ellon P&R was inspired by the old Boddam branch - and would make regaining the Maud/Peterhead route very hard. However, it made me wonder whether the Boddam branch could serve as a much shorter - and presumably substantially cheaper - route to Peterhead, swinging north past the power station and then following the Peterhead ring road to regain the old line east of the airfield? If the levels could be made to work, it would save the detour via Maud.

 

[47271]

Without a doubt it's one of the most bus orientated cities in the UK

If only that was true, the grim reality is that it's one of the most car orientated cities in the UK.

 

[JohnRegular]

With regards to reopening the Deeside line, it is likely a non-starter. Whilst I wouldn't doubt it would be well used, it is simply too popular as a cycling and walking route to justify it. I don't have any numbers, but I suspect most people who would use a train are already using the route by bicycle or using the bus services along North Deeside Road.

Now, the route to Ellon is also a cycle route (and a quite pleasant one at that) but it is nowhere near as popular, and as far as I know there are not significant numbers using it as a regular commuter route, it is mostly used for leisure.

 

[HSTEd]

With regards to reopening the Deeside line, it is likely a non-starter. Whilst I wouldn't doubt it would be well used, it is simply too popular as a cycling and walking route to justify it. I don't have any numbers, but I suspect most people who would use a train are already using the route by bicycle or using the bus services along North Deeside Road.

Now, the route to Ellon is also a cycle route (and a quite pleasant one at that) but it is nowhere near as popular, and as far as I know there are not significant numbers using it as a regular commuter route, it is mostly used for leisure.

You could probably put something together using a single track tramway, using tram-trains that go onto the railway for the final stretch into Aberdeen.
It would enable people to be walking/riding much closer to the track than would be the case in a normal railway, which might allow for the walking/cycling alignment to be preserved.

This line was historically rather slow anyway, so 60mph top speed is not a dealbreaker.