Wisbech-March line reopening cost increase to £200m

[Bald Rick]

But why should Wisbech not have similar rail-based access to that enjoyed by, say, Sheringham or Cromer? Is the current rail network magically the right size? What we have now seems often to be the result of somewhat arbitrary decisions made two generations ago, and rationalisations forced during BR years. I would argue that it is only fair to consider some investment at the margins. If Levenmouth is acceptable, why not Wisbech?

Sharing and Cromer already have a railway, and don’t need several hundred millions of pounds to create on. That’s the key difference.

Levenmouth will be ‘acceptable’ because a case can be made for it. Reinstatement of that line is rather easier than Wisbech, being shorter and much more recently in use. Makes it much cheaper to build. It can be served through the extension of an existing service. That makes it much cheaper to operate, with no additional costs ‘off route’. Therefore it is much more likely to have a good business case.

 

[yorksrob]

Eh?

Thinking of a few projects that the Government is supporting or has supported recently, or has declared an intention to support, and going progressively from the biggest to smaller ones, I can think of:

• HS2
• East-West Rail
• Blyth re-opening
• Fleetwood re-opening
• New trains for Northern and TPE
• Ilkeston station
• Accessibility improvements at stations (link)

Where in that list do you perceive the gap where there's nothing between very big and very small?

I would argue that East West rail, Blythe and Fleetwood are medium sized projects - but that's three in around 20 years.

Similar with the new trains for Northern and TPE. They're very much playing catch-up.

In which case the Gobernemt are sensible, as that is precisely what they are trying to do.

Except they need to cough up the money. That £5 billion budget would go a long way to achieve that.

 

[yorksrob]

Sharing and Cromer already have a railway, and don’t need several hundred millions of pounds to create on. That’s the key difference.

Levenmouth will be ‘acceptable’ because a case can be made for it. Reinstatement of that line is rather easier than Wisbech, being shorter and much more recently in use. Makes it much cheaper to build. It can be served through the extension of an existing service. That makes it much cheaper to operate, with no additional costs ‘off route’. Therefore it is much more likely to have a good business case.

Business cases can't just be skewed on what's cheapest/easiest to reinstate. They need to start by looking at where needs a rail link then work back from there.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Quite. Or at least prove the demand as was done with Corby for example by providing a dedicated bus with through ticketing which links to the train service from March.

Thank you for mentioning the Corby 'RailBus' (initially even branded "Intercity"!). Under what was the Midland Mainline Franchise, let under a Conservative government, this was a 'long term' obligation on National Express to provide a 'new' bus link that connected with practically all trains, including late evening, etc., even though there was a 'competitive' Kettering-Corby bus service operated by Stagecoach (the X4).

I don't pretend to understand all of the legal and competition niceties behind this 24-year old arrangement but it clearly proved that it was possible to do such things relatively cheaply and in relatively short order without prejudice to a subsequent 'proper' rail service. Although initially 'point-to-point' the RailBus was subsequently diverted via Kettering Hospital in order to enhance local connectivity generally. Handy little scheme.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Business cases can't just be skewed on what's cheapest/easiest to reinstate. They need to start by looking at where needs a rail link then work back from there.

Business cases aren't just skewed on what is cheapest/easiest to reinstate. They take into account how expensive it is to reinstate a link AND what benefits the link provides. And that is surely the sensible approach.

 

[Aictos]

Business cases aren't just skewed on what is cheapest/easiest to reinstate. They take into account how expensive it is to reinstate a link AND what benefits the link provides. And that is surely the sensible approach.

Indeed if we take the Dunstable Busway for example, they could have reinstated the former track and operated a shuttle between Luton and Dunstable but they didn't as it doesn't provide as much benefits as the busway does.

For example you now have 3 operators running a frequent service using the busway with reliable services to Dunstable, the Airport, Leighton Buzzard, Milton Keynes with one operator providing a 24/7 service between Dunstable to Luton.

The other main benefit to the busway is the fact that the buses that can use it are no longer stuck in heavy traffic congestion on the approach to Luton from Leighton Buzzard and Dunstable so can sail past all the car drivers stuck in heavy traffic making it much more better for the commuter.

Thus the busway links up more areas then a railway line could and in the case of Luton it was the right call to make although I do believe that they should extend it towards Leighton Buzzard if possible.

 

[Class 170101]

Levenmouth will be ‘acceptable’ because a case can be made for it. Reinstatement of that line is rather easier than Wisbech, being shorter and much more recently in use. Makes it much cheaper to build. It can be served through the extension of an existing service. That makes it much cheaper to operate, with no additional costs ‘off route’. Therefore it is much more likely to have a good business case.

Which service would you extend to Levenmouth? I thought the slow service went to at least Dundee these days?

 

[Bald Rick]

Except they need to cough up the money. That £5 billion budget would go a long way to achieve that

But they have coughed up, half a billion. Which is, incidentally, half a billion more than was available a couple of months ago.

Business cases can't just be skewed on what's cheapest/easiest to reinstate. They need to start by looking at where needs a rail link then work back from there.

Quite right, they are judged on what is best value for money. Quite naturally, cheaper schemes that deliver good benefits are better value for money than expensive schemes that deliver the same output.

Which service would you extend to Levenmouth? I thought the slow service went to at least Dundee these days?

Hmm. I was under the impression that there was to be a recast of the Fife circle so that an hourly service went to Levenmouth without disadvantaging the circle itself. I’m not sure how that works, in which case I may be wrong.

 

[Midnight Sun]

Disagree on point 1 - they'll actually take the car to the nearest station, then take the train. It's why the Cambridge busway has two or three huge park and rides - same thing, people will drive to that point and pick up the bus for the final couple of miles.

In theory with Wisbech, the bus makes more sense because it can actually serve the town centre rather than a remote point in an industrial area half a mile away.

As for Cambridge, They drive to Cambridge North and use the large carpark rather then use the bus. Stagecoach found that out when Cambridge North opened, People arriving prefered to walked to the Science Park, Business Park and Cambridge Regional College saving £50.50 each month or over a year £534.50 dpendingthe length of plusbus. The level of bus service provide when the station first opened has since been reduced as very few people used it. Why wait when it's quicker to walk



Not everyone will either live in the town centre or wish to go there. The main retail park and Muiltplex is on Cromwell Road, 5 minuites walk from the station planned site. Where is the main employment area in Wisbech?, south of Weasenham lane and east of Cromwell Road. Again five to ten minuites walk depending on the location. People do need to be able to get to places of employment.


March station is further from the Town Centre then Wisbech, Ely station is 20-25 minuites walk depending route from the City Centre.The same with Downham Market or Littleport.

It is a fact that people will walk further to a railway station then a bus stop.

In the last five years March has seen a 25% increase in usage. There is a morning Bus (X8) to Cambridge and one evening bus back which costs £85 a month to use. With the March-Cambridge rail Season ticket costing £291.80 per month (In the top 10 highest Season ticket price for distance outside London) Which do you think people use? Only one person (A tight fisted Yorkshireman) commutes on bus to Cambridge, over five days spending nearly a day on the bus. Yet it is the East bound platform at March that is crowded at 7.30am and not the Bus stop in the Town Centre at 6.30am

 

[Midnight Sun]

it's probably reasonably simple - as you say one option being join the B1101 the other being a ramp at Norwood road - and I suspect there is space there to do that without cuttting off Whitemoor sidings.

Alternatively they could simply upgrade the A47 and A141 and run a regular bus service between March and Wisbech and Kings Lynn that way - Stagecoach Gold standard. All of which would offer far better journey times to more people and probably be vastly cheaper than the reinstatement of Wisbech's rail connection which is likely to be more costly both in terms of build and operation.

There was a regular bus service between March and Wisbech and Kings Lynn, there years ago it was spit into two routes March to Wisbech and Wisbech to Kings Lynn same bus number, two companines and half hour wait in Wisbech due to the March to Wisbech bus being timetabled to connect with the March to Ely (39) as for the cost it is both cheaper and quicker to take the train via Ely. Old Stagecoach Gold bus are aready being used.

 

[Midnight Sun]

I don't see how the guided busway could even exist because there are the massive and very much in use March Whitemoor sidings at the March end, which are currently being used to store HST's

No HST's stored at Whitemoor yard, they are at Ely

 

[Midnight Sun]

Lots of people would prefer Cambridge-St Ives to be a railway.

But the current Busway carts far more passengers than heavy rail ever would.

The much qouted figures by 'Busway Bates' are misleading as they are for usage of Busway branded services and not just useage of just the Busway between Cambridge and St Ives which should be the figuire compared. All the local bus services in Huntingdon and St Ives are branded Busway as is the bus service between Huntingdon and Peterborough. The busy part of the Huntingdon and Peterborough section is between Queensgate Bus station and the Hampton Centre as it is nonstop. The bus is often packed between these two stops yet afterwards you can count the number of passengers on one hand until you reach the edge of Huntingdon where it is the local service to Huntingdon bus station. The same with services from Cambridge to Trumpington Park & Ride and Addenbrookes Hospital along the other busway.

This is like looking at rail useage between Ely and March but adding the Peterborough-March and Ely-Cambridge to the total as the service is branded Cross Country.

As for the bus carrying more we don't know, What we do know is that with lines that have been reopened, the actal useage in the first year is two to three time high than the expected useage. Ie: Alloa (expected 155,000) infact 400,000

 

[Midnight Sun]

Yes, people dont trust that bus services will continue, whereas they sometimes make choices about where to live based on the existence of a rail service. No one would move to Wisbech because of the bus service but they might for the train.

That is quite true round here, the bus timetables are always changing with services introduced and withdrawn and going. Yet the rail timetable from March has not changed in 18 years that I have been using the services from March. Bus services are often pulled at short notice (28 days, Bus Services Act 2017)

 

[Midnight Sun]

Maybe so - but at what cost ? And I don't just mean financial cost.

Every train going further than March needs a path to run in - and that needs to be set against other demands. Already there are demands to increase the frequency to Kings Lynn (currently hourly). the Cambridge - Norwich service is growing - it saw a 3% increase 2017 - 2018, a service which not that many years ago was an infrequent 2 car Met Camm DMU - expect to see a demand to increase that. The bi-hourly Ipswich - Peterborough service is another where growth may see demands to increase that to hourly. That's before you factor in freight from Felixstowe that the demand is to route north via Ely and Peterborough rather than south along the GEML and North London Line as at present. Wisbech needs to be factored in among all of those.

The services between Peterborough and Cambridge are aready packed, The Hereward Community Rail Partnership has been pressing for a increasing in services and length of trains for a number of years.

https://www.fenland.gov.uk/media/62...Rail_Development_Strategy-adopted_version.pdf

 

[bspahh]

Stagecoach found that out when Cambridge North opened, People arriving prefered to walked to the Science Park, Business Park and Cambridge Regional College saving £50.50 each month or over a year £534.50 depending on the length of plusbus. The level of bus service provide when the station first opened has since been reduced as very few people used it. Why wait when it's quicker to walk

Some people walk, but there are now shuttle buses from Cambridge North to the Cambridge Science Park, Cambridge Business Park and St Johns Innovation Centre. I use the last of those. At the moment, it is paid for by the Centre and runs on weekdays every 12 minutes between 7 and 10am, and 4 and 7pm.

If you do walk down the cycleway and footpath that runs next to Cowley Road, there are markings on the lampposts with the number of minutes it will take to get to the station. Its 11 minutes from the Milton Road end.

 

[mpthomson]

Business cases can't just be skewed on what's cheapest/easiest to reinstate. They need to start by looking at where needs a rail link then work back from there.

They really don't. It's a cost/benefit analysis at the end of the day.

 

[MikeWM]

As for Cambridge, They drive to Cambridge North and use the large carpark rather then use the bus. Stagecoach found that out when Cambridge North opened, People arriving prefered to walked to the Science Park, Business Park and Cambridge Regional College saving £50.50 each month or over a year £534.50 dpendingthe length of plusbus. The level of bus service provide when the station first opened has since been reduced as very few people used it. Why wait when it's quicker to walk.

While this is partly true, Stagecoach didn't help themselves at all here - Cambridge North was itself very lightly used for the first 6 months that it was open, and Stagecoach removed the new every-20-minutes service less than 4 months after it opened, giving almost no time to account for people changing habits and getting used to new opportunities. The service was reduced to once-an-hour at that point, but at least running at a vaguely useful time to connect into trains from the north. Then last January they changed the timetable again, and now the once-an-hour bus connects with pretty much nothing.

Until last January I was getting a PlusBus most of the time to connect with my job on the Science Park. But now, having had no other alternatives for over a year, I'm used to walking it, even though it is rather tedious. I won't go back to buying PlusBus now, so they've lost my business, probably forever.

 

[AlastairFraser]

No HST's stored at Whitemoor yard, they are at Ely

Oh OK, but Whitemoor sidings are still in active use, aren't they?

 

[Dr Hoo]

Business cases can't just be skewed on what's cheapest/easiest to reinstate. They need to start by looking at where needs a rail link then work back from there.

It would be really helpful for threads like this if you could flesh out your (personal) criteria for "needs a rail link", e.g. population of settlement; population within xxx metres of prospective stations; distance from existing rail facilities; adequacy and scope of existing bus services; levels of car ownership; local levels of employment; local educational facilities; ditto hospitals, entertainment, retail and so forth.

Note that I am deliberately not asking about quantification of costs or benefits here, solely perceived "need".

 

[yorksrob]

It would be really helpful for threads like this if you could flesh out your (personal) criteria for "needs a rail link", e.g. population of settlement; population within xxx metres of prospective stations; distance from existing rail facilities; adequacy and scope of existing bus services; levels of car ownership; local levels of employment; local educational facilities; ditto hospitals, entertainment, retail and so forth.

Note that I am deliberately not asking about quantification of costs or benefits here, solely perceived "need".

That's a good question.

I would say that any town with 30k plus population "needs" a railway station, which includes Wisbech. That isn't a minimum either.

 

[Class 170101]

Hmm. I was under the impression that there was to be a recast of the Fife circle so that an hourly service went to Levenmouth without disadvantaging the circle itself. I’m not sure how that works, in which case I may be wrong.

Not sure how one could do it either unless one accepted Glenrothes to Kirkcaldy section only having an hourly service each way and the other hourly paths each way round the circle being diverted to Levenmouth

Oh OK, but Whitemoor sidings are still in active use, aren't they?

Network Rail base for engineering works in Anglia now including High Output Ballast Cleaning and Track Renewal System trains, when in Anglia.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Network Rail base for engineering works in Anglia now including High Output Ballast Cleaning and Track Renewal System trains, when in Anglia.

Ah, well, in that case, we can see why a guided busway was rejected.

 

[gingerheid]

The much qouted figures by 'Busway Bates' are misleading as they are for usage of Busway branded services and not just useage of just the Busway between Cambridge and St Ives which should be the figure compared. [snip]

As for the bus carrying more we don't know, What we do know is that with lines that have been reopened, the actal useage in the first year is two to three time high than the expected useage. Ie: Alloa (expected 155,000) infact 400,000

The criticism of the stats is something widely quoted locally, and does have a small amount of truth to it (in percentage terms). However the ridiculously explosive growth that seems to be at very least almost unique only to places that have acquired busways is taking place on the guideway. From the April timetable change St Ives will have a better Sunday service than it used to have on Saturdays (and even better than the previous weekday service except in rush hour). Even completely ignoring the U, the southern guideway will from April have up to 12 buses an hour that are completely in addition to the services that ran before. Not only that, but actually the rebirth of the previously failing Royston service and the April expansion to the villages around St Ives and Huntingdon has been driven only by the busway and shows that a busway can create entirely new routes away from the actual new infrastructure. Huntingdon isn't being changed over to tri axle double deckers (when at a time it was mainly single deck) for a laugh either, and the difference is the busway.

What we have seen though is that the guideway doesn't really connect well with trains, and because in this country we just stuff up change of mode of transport and always have done this is no surprise. (Trying to match the buses at Cambridge North with the trains as they have done in the April timetable won't work, as congestion on road sections means we don't know when those buses will actually turn up. They'd have had to divert all the buses via the station, not just 2ph.)

A guideway to Wisbech wouldn't provide the complete journeys people need to make as it isn't going to go to either Peterborough or Cambridge. Unless it could sustain such high frequencies to March that it didn't matter (unlikely given the size and location of Wisbech), it's therefore not the solution for that route.

Like probably everyone here I do feel sad that the St Ives guideway isn't a train. If a flawed busway can achieve the undoubted success it has then it's clear the route could support a frequent metro style service, with connecting bus links to Huntingdon and the villages. But it's exactly because we always underestimate the value of trains that I'm almost glad it didn't happen (think what Cast Iron were proposing!). If it had been a railway it would probably have opened with something like an hourly three carriage diesel train that would have been totally insufficient, and by now we *might* be planning the works needed to make that something like a half hourly four carriage electric train that would still be grossly insufficient. We do know the bus is carrying more than a train could have, because in rush hour more people arrive in Cambridge on rammed guided buses than could have physically fitted into any of the rail services proposed by anyone, even if you recruited the people that organise things like the world record for people in a phone box!

 

[A0wen]

That's a good question.

I would say that any town with 30k plus population "needs" a railway station, which includes Wisbech. That isn't a minimum either.

But that's a daft arbitrary measure - take the example of Dunstable, cited elsewhere.

Follow your logic and the line should have been reinstated - but it would have been a single line (which the branch was in any case) with an at best 30 min service to Luton and London. You can't go the other way out of Dunstable because the formation is long gone.

Yet, Dunstable has Leagrave station 3 miles from its town centre - so less for anything east of the town centre which is most of Dunstable - which already gets 4 tph on Thameslink.

Whereas the busway has every 10 minutes which can serve Luton town centre and the airport going east and Leighton Buzzard, MK and other places going west.

The other towns which have a population of over 30,000 and no station are:

- Gosport - unlikely to ever happen, has ferry connection to Portsmouth which gives quicker journey time to London and beyond. Busway using rail formation to Fareham.
- Dudley - Tipton and Dudley port are close by. More likely to be reconnected with extension to Midland Metro.
- Newcastle Under Lyme - Part of Stoke-on-Trent conurbation. No chance of reinstatement as formation of old NSR long gone.
- Washington - May happen if Leamside line reinstated.
- Waterlooville (never been rail connected) - Rowlands Castle, Havant and Cosham all close by.
- Halesowen - Old Hill close by, the line which served it was minor and station closed in 1958.
- Leigh - now has busway.
- West Bridgford (never been rail connected) - Nottingham station less than 2 miles away.
- Kingswood (never been rail connected)
- Skelmersdale - being looked at by Merseyrail
- Canvey (never been rail connected) - Benfleet station covers the area.
- Blyth - already being looked at.
- Woodley (never been rail connected) - Earley and Winnersh Triangle close by.
- Coalville - Depends if Leicester - Burton ever happens.
- Abingdon - was end of a branch from GW Oxford line. Both Radley and Culham are about 3 miles from centre of Abingdon.
- Swadlincote - line long gone - station closed in 1947.
- Wisbech - being discussed.
- Rushden - was on a minor branch from Wellingborough to Higham Ferrers. Formation lost, wouldn't be viable in any case.

So of the 18 which meet your arbitrary population criteria, 5 were never rail connected.

Of the remaining 13:

3 are already being seriously looked at - Skelmersdale, Blyth and Wisbech.
2 have busway connections in place - Leigh and Gosport
2 have rail connections close by - Halesowen and Abingdon so are unlikely to ever justify a reinstatement.
1 will gain connection by light rail in due course - Dudley
2 may happen if other schemes go ahead - Washington and Coalville

Which leaves 3 which definitely won't happen - Newcastle Under Lyme, because the formation has gone and nobody is even vaguely suggesting re-building the NSR network around the Potteries, which is what would be needed. Swadlincote - same reason, would need a new line, more likely to get 'parkway' type station if Leicester - Burton happens. Rushden, formation lost but it was part of a minor branch from Wellingborough to Higham Ferrers. More likely to get a nearer station if an intermediate stop on the MML is put in between Wellingborough and Bedford.

 

[A0wen]

A guideway to Wisbech wouldn't provide the complete journeys people need to make as it isn't going to go to either Peterborough or Cambridge. Unless it could sustain such high frequencies to March that it didn't matter (unlikely given the size and location of Wisbech), it's therefore not the solution for that route.

Nobody's going to go from Wisbech to March to get to Peterborough by train - you've already got the Excel bus running between Peterborough and Wisbech every 30 mins taking 45 mins to cover the journey. March - Peterborough takes 20 mins by train on its own. You'd be looking at 10-15 mins Wisbech to March plus a connection or reversal if it were direct.

It's Cambridge and probably London that Wisbech is eyeing up for a rail connection. It's unlikely to get south of Cambridge because there are a finite number of paths heading south so a 2 car unit from Wisbech really isn't going to be a particularly good use of a path south of Cambridge when there are other services with far better claims to it.

 

[Meerkat]

What we have seen though is that the guideway doesn't really connect well with trains, and because in this country we just stuff up change of mode of transport and always have done this is no surprise. (Trying to match the buses at Cambridge North with the trains as they have done in the April timetable won't work, as congestion on road sections means we don't know when those buses will actually turn up. They'd have had to divert all the buses via the station, not just 2ph.)

Can they add a frequent shuttle that connects Cambridge North, the last busway station that most buses use, and the science park?

If a flawed busway can achieve the undoubted success it has then it's clear the route could support a frequent metro style service, with connecting bus links to Huntingdon and the villages

You would have to prove that people want to swap their vaguely door to door bus to a bus-train-bus journey. My money would be on them not wanting to do that.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It's Cambridge and probably London that Wisbech is eyeing up for a rail connection. It's unlikely to get south of Cambridge because there are a finite number of paths heading south so a 2 car unit from Wisbech really isn't going to be a particularly good use of a path south of Cambridge when there are other services with far better claims to it.

I agree. But there are other possibilities. For example, an 8-carriage train that runs London-Cambridge-Ely and then splits with 4 carriages going to Kings Lynn and 4 carriages going to Wisbech would seem to me like a pretty good use of paths - and, arguably, better then all 8 carriages going to Kings Lynn, which seems to be the current aspiration. (For clarity: None of that changes my view that there are much higher priority things to do in East Anglia than building a line to Wisbech).

 

[DynamicSpirit]

That's a good question.

I would say that any town with 30k plus population "needs" a railway station, which includes Wisbech. That isn't a minimum either.

I think I'm starting to understand the difference in the two points of view here:

Most of us are coming from a cost-benefit-analysis perspective. We're thinking roughly in terms of, if we had £X billion to spend on public transport/rail improvements, what ways to spend it with give the best value for money. And on that criteria, Wisbech loses out because lots of other potential rail projects - even just within East Anglia - would seem likely to give better returns.

But I wonder if you're coming from more of a social-engineering / equality perspective - where you're thinking not so much in terms of the value for money, but in terms of making sure that, as far as possible, everyone has access to the rail network a reasonable distance from where they live. Am I correct?

As an example, if I was given some billions to spend on rail projects in East Anglia, probably the first thing I'd do is build Cambridge South station. And that's because I'd be thinking, cost is likely to be 'only' in the tens of millions, just perhaps low hundreds of millions - but for that you open up a very frequent rail service to a major hospital and a significant population in the South of Cambridge. However, I'm going to hazard a guess that you would see that as lower priority because those people already have some kind of access to a major rail station, since Cambridge station is only a mile or so up the road - whereas Wisbech residents currently have no access to rail because the nearest station is much further away. Therefore they should have higher priority for a new station even though building it is more expensive for the value gained. In a way, that's quite similar to the current Government's 'levelling up' philosophy where they are talking about transport improvements to the communities (often in the North) that they feel have been left out, rather than to those places (often in the South) where the investment would give the best returns.

Does that sound reasonable?

 

[yorksrob]

But that's a daft arbitrary measure - take the example of Dunstable, cited elsewhere.

Follow your logic and the line should have been reinstated - but it would have been a single line (which the branch was in any case) with an at best 30 min service to Luton and London. You can't go the other way out of Dunstable because the formation is long gone.

Yet, Dunstable has Leagrave station 3 miles from its town centre - so less for anything east of the town centre which is most of Dunstable - which already gets 4 tph on Thameslink.

Whereas the busway has every 10 minutes which can serve Luton town centre and the airport going east and Leighton Buzzard, MK and other places going west.

The other towns which have a population of over 30,000 and no station are:

- Gosport - unlikely to ever happen, has ferry connection to Portsmouth which gives quicker journey time to London and beyond. Busway using rail formation to Fareham.
- Dudley - Tipton and Dudley port are close by. More likely to be reconnected with extension to Midland Metro.
- Newcastle Under Lyme - Part of Stoke-on-Trent conurbation. No chance of reinstatement as formation of old NSR long gone.
- Washington - May happen if Leamside line reinstated.
- Waterlooville (never been rail connected) - Rowlands Castle, Havant and Cosham all close by.
- Halesowen - Old Hill close by, the line which served it was minor and station closed in 1958.
- Leigh - now has busway.
- West Bridgford (never been rail connected) - Nottingham station less than 2 miles away.
- Kingswood (never been rail connected)
- Skelmersdale - being looked at by Merseyrail
- Canvey (never been rail connected) - Benfleet station covers the area.
- Blyth - already being looked at.
- Woodley (never been rail connected) - Earley and Winnersh Triangle close by.
- Coalville - Depends if Leicester - Burton ever happens.
- Abingdon - was end of a branch from GW Oxford line. Both Radley and Culham are about 3 miles from centre of Abingdon.
- Swadlincote - line long gone - station closed in 1947.
- Wisbech - being discussed.
- Rushden - was on a minor branch from Wellingborough to Higham Ferrers. Formation lost, wouldn't be viable in any case.

So of the 18 which meet your arbitrary population criteria, 5 were never rail connected.

Of the remaining 13:

3 are already being seriously looked at - Skelmersdale, Blyth and Wisbech.
2 have busway connections in place - Leigh and Gosport
2 have rail connections close by - Halesowen and Abingdon so are unlikely to ever justify a reinstatement.
1 will gain connection by light rail in due course - Dudley
2 may happen if other schemes go ahead - Washington and Coalville

Which leaves 3 which definitely won't happen - Newcastle Under Lyme, because the formation has gone and nobody is even vaguely suggesting re-building the NSR network around the Potteries, which is what would be needed. Swadlincote - same reason, would need a new line, more likely to get 'parkway' type station if Leicester - Burton happens. Rushden, formation lost but it was part of a minor branch from Wellingborough to Higham Ferrers. More likely to get a nearer station if an intermediate stop on the MML is put in between Wellingborough and Bedford.

I suppose my point is that as far as I'm concerned, the railway network isn't an optional extra, so as far as I'm concerned, any large town should have a station.

I'll make an exception in cases where the large town adjoins a small village which has the railway station instead, so the town still has access, but that clearly isn't the case with Wisbech.

In terms of the Leigh guided busway, that absolutely should have been a rail reinstatement.

 

[yorksrob]

I think I'm starting to understand the difference in the two points of view here:

Most of us are coming from a cost-benefit-analysis perspective. We're thinking roughly in terms of, if we had £X billion to spend on public transport/rail improvements, what ways to spend it with give the best value for money. And on that criteria, Wisbech loses out because lots of other potential rail projects - even just within East Anglia - would seem likely to give better returns.

But I wonder if you're coming from more of a social-engineering / equality perspective - where you're thinking not so much in terms of the value for money, but in terms of making sure that, as far as possible, everyone has access to the rail network a reasonable distance from where they live. Am I correct?

As an example, if I was given some billions to spend on rail projects in East Anglia, probably the first thing I'd do is build Cambridge South station. And that's because I'd be thinking, cost is likely to be 'only' in the tens of millions, just perhaps low hundreds of millions - but for that you open up a very frequent rail service to a major hospital and a significant population in the South of Cambridge. However, I'm going to hazard a guess that you would see that as lower priority because those people already have some kind of access to a major rail station, since Cambridge station is only a mile or so up the road - whereas Wisbech residents currently have no access to rail because the nearest station is much further away. Therefore they should have higher priority for a new station even though building it is more expensive for the value gained. In a way, that's quite similar to the current Government's 'levelling up' philosophy where they are talking about transport improvements to the communities (often in the North) that they feel have been left out, rather than to those places (often in the South) where the investment would give the best returns.

Does that sound reasonable?

Yes, I think that is a fair assessment of my position. As I mentioned in my above post, I believe that all large towns should where practical have access to the rail network, and those without current access, if not exactly prioritised, should at least have dedicated funding in light of the particular challenge of being separated from the railway network.

I've made this point about smaller settlements such as Tavistock as well.