Station Closure Proposal / Consultation - Norton Bridge

[whole diary]

[grahame]

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

The station at Norton Bridge was taken out of use for train services in May 2004 to allow for the rebuilding of the railway as part of the West Coast Route Modernisation project, and since then services have been provided by rail replacement bus services. Prior to this date the station was served by a local train service between Stafford and Stoke-on-Trent.

The Department for Transport has carried out an assessment in accordance with the Railway Closures Guidance on whether to reinstate train services at the station, or to close it as part of the national rail network. The assessment showed that bringing the station back into use for train services is neither an appropriate nor responsible use of resources and we are therefore proposing to proceed with the closure of the station.

Under section 30(3)(b) of the Railways Act 2005 the Secretary of State, as the relevant national authority, is required to carry out a consultation concerning a proposal to discontinue use of a particular station if, having received or carried out the assessment, he has formed the opinion that the closure should be carried out.

A copy of the Railways Closures Guidance may be found at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/266296/railwaysclosuresguidance.pdf

Interested parties are therefore invited to comment on this proposal.
The consultation period will run from 19 October 2016 to 3 February 2017.

Following the consultation period the Department will review its proposal based on comments received from interested parties and, if it decides that the closure should be carried out, seek ratification of the closure from the Office of Rail and Road.

[broadgage]

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^▸ (in my humble opinion) 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.

[paul7575]

IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) 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

[IndustryInsider]

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

[Richard Fairhurst]

I'm not entirely convinced that it only serves 600 people, as the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) 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.

[IndustryInsider]

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

[Tim]

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

[grahame]

My only misgiving is that the closure was surely said to be "temporary" but is now likely to become permanent. This IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) 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^» (Department for Transport - about) 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 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.

[chrisr_75]

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^▸ (West Coast Main Line) - 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...!

[Tim]

might not be practical to reopen it now, but post-HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) when intercity trains are off that bit of the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) and stopping services less likely to be in the way, is Norton Bridge the kind of place that could benefit from a better service?

[IndustryInsider]

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^▸ (West Coast Main Line) - 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.

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.

[grahame]

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!

[Oxonhutch]

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? 

[grahame]

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? 

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.

[Oxonhutch]

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!