Great Western Coffee Shop

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/560685/norton-bridge-closure-proposal.pdf

Under the circumstances, it seems reasonable in my view to close the station.
The report points out the very considerable costs of re-opening and also the small local population, meaning that very few passengers may be expected.
The approx. £20 million cost could no doubt be spent elsewhere on the rail network to greater benefit.

My only misgiving is that the closure was surely said to be "temporary" but is now likely to become permanent. This IMHO is setting a very dangerous precedent. I perceive a risk of other low use stations being closed "temporarily" to facilitate upgrade works, and then 10 years or more of delay, after which it is found that re-opening is uneconomic.

IMHO the poor precedent set in this example is that these decision making processes are allowed to drag on for so long.  This consultation should have taken place 10 tears ago, when I bet fairly detailed operational plans would have already been showing that there was no possibility of station calls ever being reinstated...

Paul

Agree completely with both of you.  Bet at least one person sees fit to protest vehemently though...  ::)

I'm not entirely convinced that it only serves 600 people, as the DfT report claims. The town of Eccleshall, population just under 5000, is three miles away - easy cycling distance. But given the current cost structure of the railway industry I'd reluctantly agree that keeping it open doesn't make much sense.

I'd much prefer a smaller amount of money being spent re-installing the footbridge at Polesworth.

how much money has been spent on running a replacement bus service?

I too am significantly trouble by this being "unfinished business" from ten years ago - how was it intended in those days to continue to provided the statutory permanent train service at a realistic two way station on the completion of the West Coast works?   Or if there was no such intent, would it not have been correct to deal with it at that time?   

I read stories from the 1960s of lines, services and stations being "softened up" with inappropriate services ... to be followed by selective surveys of the remaining passengers "look - no school traffic" in Easter week, for example, leading to closure procedures which seemed based on deliberately lowered data.

I don't know the area around Norton Bridge - but I do have 20 years of station usage stats.  In 2000/01, there were 5,155 entrances and exits; please excuse me comparing to Melksham, which had 3,266 that year ... and by last year than had risen to 58,000 plus - even though we had been through dark times equated to the 1960 'tricks', with a service gap from 06:38 to 19:20 and buses for weeks on end.   Where would Norton Bridge be in 2015/16 with a half decent service over the years.

A DfT consultation, judged by a minister at the DfT and signed off by a body sponsored by the DfT, looking at a temporary situation which has been allowed to become permanent as potential traffic goes away, local development takes place that takes trains further from the platforms, and the platforms decay does not strike me as being open and transparent. Thus misgivings. And further misgivings about five other stations where there may be some similarities.

But having said all that - it might actually be the right decision even if reach in incredibly the wrong way.

The way it has been done is somewhat underhand, but as the station is, as the crow flies, just 3 miles from Stone and 5.5 miles from Stafford, one can see why 'they' were keen to remove Norton Bridge from operations in order to smooth things out on the WCML - it is of course at the convergence of the lines from Crewe & Stoke-on-Trent, so I would imagine having trains stopping at Norton Bridge would throw up some operational difficulties compared to having everything running clear through from Crewe/Stoke to Stafford.

Interestingly, Google maps lists the station as 'permanently closed' already...!

might not be practical to reopen it now, but post-HS2 when intercity trains are off that bit of the WCML and stopping services less likely to be in the way, is Norton Bridge the kind of place that could benefit from a better service?

The new alignment - only a very distant pipe dream ten years ago - makes it even more cumbersome to stop trains, especially northbound where they would have to run on the down fast from Stafford, cross over the Up Fast line, before running on the Norton Bridge East Chord in the wrong direction, finally crossing over the Up Norton Bridge line to head towards Stoke.  Removing such moves were the whole point of the new grade separated junction.

Up trains are less of a problem, but would still have to then run on the Up Fast as far as Stafford.

If a station is to be open there, then it really should be rebuilt in a different location, and there's nowhere near the potential traffic to justify that.

If you live somewhere in the North West or Wales ... miles from any railway station in pretty villages such as Gastang or Skelmersdale, Denbigh, Audlem, Market Drayton or Keswick, what better way to visit London or Birmingham that by driving down the M6 to junction 14A for the B5026 and parking up at Eccleshall Parkway.   Served by a half hourly service from Stoke-on-Trent (alternate trains from Crewe and Manchester) to Stafford (alternate trains on to Birmingham and to London).

Not my neck of the woods - is there a Tiverton or Bristol Parkway equivalent in those parts already?

Ecceshall Parkway wouldn't be on the west coast main line, but I suspect it would be very acceptable as a replacement for Norton Bridge in addition to the new traffic generated!

grahame,

I'm a Lancashire lad. Notwithstanding their love of home, but what part of the word 'pretty' are you applying to the domestic settlements of Skelmesdale and Garstang?  ;D

I'm a Lancashire lad too and have fond memories of staying with relatives near Garstang.  Skelmersdale is pretty much one of the largest towns without a station.

With Skem I guess it's either Rainhill Junction (BNM question?) or Ormskirk for connections. However, with Garstang, it's always down to the Wyre!  ;D

As well as the sneaky closure of  Norton Bridge what about Barlaston and Wedgwood also on the line to Stoke on Trent. Will they be put up for closure being soley served by bus.

I can't believe that with the the flyover at Norton Bridge and 110 mph 360s there isn't time to stop the Stafford Stoke locals.

I thought that with the flyover the Stafford Stoke Locals no longer go through the station as they would diverge onto the new line before the station. The line then goes the other side of the village.   

I think the Stafford Crewe slow trains also use this diversion.  If I am right only the Crewe Stafford locals could stop. 

So unless they build a completely new station the other side of the village on the new line, it could only ever going to have southbound services. 

Edited after finding a new track diagram

(http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_08_2015/post-7638-0-81260200-1440615124.jpg)

You can route from Down Fast towards Stoke via the Norton Bridge East Chord, so trains could in theory run from Stafford towards Stoke calling at the old platform.  See the opentraintimes map http://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/sta for the location of signals that allow this to happen from signal 3605 via 5691, 5693 and 5695 to 401.  Cumbersome to say the least though.

Not possible to head to Crewe from Stafford and call at Norton Bridge's old platforms.

Having lived a large proportion of my life in that neck of the woods, I can't say I've ever heard Denbigh referred to as being pretty either!

I used to pass through regularly late on Thursdays or Fridays on my way back from Manchester airport and it's the only place I've ever seen 2 women having a fist fight in the street. And that was on a Thursday night as I recall and on more than one occasion! It's a rough old town! Surrounding area, I concede, is particularly lovely though!

Correction to my earlier post - re none-express passenger trains running between Stone and Stafford.  The London (Euston) to Crewe service - via the Trent Valley line, Stafford, Stoke-on-Trent and Alsager runs that way every hour.   And in doing so provides the (only, I think) services to Stone.

Stone is an interesting case on the Stafford - Norton Bridge - Stone - Barlaston and Tittensor - Wedgwood - Stoke-on-Trent service which was suspended / bustituted on a temporary basis about a decade ago.  Ticket sales dropped to 1,342 in the 2006/7 year but rose with a decent service restored to 103,472.   I know that's just an extra "0" and "7" in the number,  but in reality it's massive.    It's a little disappointing that at the end of the temporary closure of Stone when a solution was found, permanent solutions weren't also found at the other three stations.

In my mind, I had the Manchester to Stoke-on-Trent local carrying on via Stafford to Birmingham (and providing service to Penkridge on the way).    My bad - there's a half-hourly Birmingham to Liverpool service calling at Penkridge (hourly in one direction, half hourly in the other it appears from a a quick look!) that passes the current Norton Bridge site, but wouldn't pass a resite at Yarnfield Juntion.   Correction for the record.

A bit of an oddity that one.  Birmingham to Liverpool (2nd and 7th largest cities in UK) and not too far from each other but without a quality InterCity style service, having what could only be described as a semi-fast regional service using 4-car London Midland Class 350s, calling at places like Coseley, Penkridge, Winsford and Hartford.  Don't think adding Norton Bridge into the mix would help much!

If you check out the full consultation report (linked earlier) the prospective LM franchisees HAVE been asked to come up with a case for calls at Barlaston and Wedgewood, if that isn't successful DfT say a separate closure procedure would be commenced for those two stations.
As a side point, there are also track plans in the report explaining the new layout and why northbound trains cannot call, (basically repeating the diagram Grahame has posted above.   Let's face it, the whole rationale for the Norton Bridge flyover was to completely avoid routine flat crossings of the up fast by down trans to Stoke.  The facility is probably there for perturbations and engineering work only.

Paul

Birmingham-Manchester isn't much better, with 4/5-car Voyagers being the main service between the two as far as I can recall (at least the basic design of a Voyager is InterCity style I suppose, even though the number of coaches is more regional-express than InterCity and the interior on the XC units is not much good either). One of the benifits of doing HS2 the way I think it should be done (with Curzon street as a through station and no Birmingham bypass) is that the same 200m & 400m trains used on London services would also provide the links between Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool as through trains (possibly Chester and north Wales too, if the route were to be electrified).

Curious as to what would happen with the Grade I listed entrance building if it was changed to a through station.

No need to worry about it being turned into a through station at this stage, Rhydgaled's is a regularly repeated suggestion that had been thoroughly debunked by HS2 in the early stages of design.   A through underground station under central Birmingham, with useful numbers of platforms, on a suitable London <> NW orientation, and with all the necessary underground tunnelled approaches,  was declared to be unbuildable for the budget.   

Rather like the proposed "Euston Cross" underground station in London.

This is going off at quite a tangent from the Norton Bridge closure though...

Paul

In reply to both dviner and paul7755, I assume the grade I listed building refered to is this one (not my pic) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/106910975@N06/14486867611/in/photolist-oMTtp2-o59Z2v-ramzEY-o7hfYr-o7dH4k-nMXhNu-o5a2Bk-o7dHLx-o5kCsU-nMXNkY-rcv2TX-o5m32s-nMYH7X-o3pqa5-o5ej9a-o3ppzY-o5sfvg-o5wzre). If so, I believe it actually lies just outside the planned footprint of the proposed HS2 station (and near the London end of the proposed platforms). My suggestion is to use a very similar footprint to the planned HS2 station, but sunken below ground level (NOT tunneled) with tunnel portals at one end and a slope up to the planned HS2 route at the other. Thus my suggestion is more like Stratford International than Euston Cross, and neither my idea nor (happily) the official scheme is likely to require demolition of that building.

If even my suggestion of a through station (in the open air, with tunnel on one side only) on the same site as HS2's proposed terminus is unbuildable, then in my opinion HS2 should not serve central Birmingham at all and instead just have the interchange at the airport; a London-Birmingham shuttle at 200-250mph is just so terribly inefficient.

Don't know ... but from Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/groups/306794343166370/permalink/578285046017297/)

Further report at https://busandtrainuser.com/2019/03/29/farewell-norton-bridge/

and clearly it was a well promoted service - NOT!