The case for lower use stations

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Last Friday, I took advantage of a free afternoon to take a look at another community rail line - quite particularly to learn from what I saw on a line that's been 'community' far longer than ours, to spot things that we might do, and to appreciate too our good 'luck' in some of the metrics on the TransWilts.

The majority - the vast majority - of the traffic was end to end; a two car train which stopped here and there along the way, but only one or two people getting in or out; the majority on the full and standing train (in one direction) being there for the duration.

But one intermediate station intrigued.  Running through open countryside, our train slowed and called at another wayside platform - except that hidden behind the platform was an incongruous collection of new built town house blocks, of the sort I might expect to see as inner infill in Trowbridge or the like.   Set in amongst the fields with, it appears, not much more than a station platform.  Looking at passenger numbers, I note that ticketed journeys have increased from around 1 per day 10 years ago to around 40 per day now.  And, indeed, on my trains up and back this was the busiest intermediate station.

I recall in the spring talk of planning policy to take a look at some of the less used and less developed stations, with a view to planning development based on where transport is (or could trivially) be available, rather than planning development and then thinking about how people get in and out.   It seems to make sense to me, provided that there's a security in the provision of the train service.

A rise from 1 to 40 passengers a day won't justify a new station.  It won't justify new trains running either.  But it will justify existing stops, and perhaps addition stops with 14x 15x and 16x class units.

I note that the place that brought this to mind is stopped at by pretty much every passing train - that's hourly each way - and that's the place's good fortune.   I wonder about other places in the South West and South Wales and wonder if there are other similar opportunities.   The easiest cases are the request stops which are available to most / many trains ... some stations where only a selection of trains will call on request, but the trains do pass, are perhaps just that little bit harder.    But I do wonder if I see potential sustainable traffic that can be seeded at no cost or low cost, and could grow to something significant.  Almost as a corollary wiping out the "what do we do about Xxx" when it comes to timetabling / providing disabled access for just occasional passengers.  Thoughts?

[RichardB]

Copplestone, by any chance, Graham?

[grahame]

Copplestone, by any chance, Graham?

And there was me writing in general  ...

What has been done on the Tarka^▸ (Branch line from Barnstaple to Exeter) Line / North Devon Main line is very impressive, Richard ... huge congratulations to the whole community team. 

[broadgage]

More housing and related facilities and infrastructure are definatly needed.
In the case of a new town, then building a new station or even a new railway line can be justified.

When much smaller developments are under consideration, then I agree that such developments should be located near existing but under used rail stations. At least passive provision should be made for traffic growth, for example by reserving land for platform lengthening, and for double tracking of single lines.
Building more than a handful of new homes is likely to be vociferously opposed by existing residents, but every little helps. Many rural schools, shops, public houses and shops are under threat for want of customers, each new house provides a few more potential customers.

If new housing is more than about half a mile from the station, then a cycle track between homes and the station, and cycle parking at the station would be valuable.

[grahame]

More housing and related facilities and infrastructure are definatly needed.
In the case of a new town, then building a new station or even a new railway line can be justified.

There are 37 stations to the west of 0.4 degrees west, and to the south of 52.5 degrees north which have under 5 entrances and 5 exits per day in the latest statistics.  Yes, there's quite a number of them on a couple of very poorly served lines and a long way from major employment, but there are other which are rural, with quite a few trains passing through, and within commuter distance of Exeter, Plymouth, Bristol, Trowbridge and even Oxford. I suspect a few are in the land of the NIMBY, and others would benefit from an improved service only to abstract it from another railhead nearby.

Copplestone isn't the only example of a station that's grown dramatically with the station (but perhaps poorly served) there before so much housing - Severn Beach has risen from 22k to 228k in 10 years and I suspect that's partly due to service and partly due to the new housing.  Based on what I've seen, it's certainly not crowds of holidaymakers and day trippers going to the beach!

No objection from me to new line or new station suggestions - but we're got a number of places where the line, station and service is there, as is the commute destination.  "Just add housing"? 

[Chris from Nailsea]

No objection from me to new line or new station suggestions - but we're got a number of places where the line, station and service is there, as is the commute destination.  "Just add housing"? 

Well, the simple addition of 'housing' - in substantial quantities - in Portishead seems to have secured the re-opening of their (almost existing) branch line.