York to Beverley rail line plan ‘hits buffers’

York Press: George McManus George McManus

CAMPAIGNERS who want to reopen a rail line between York and Beverley say plans being considered by council bosses will “kill off any chance” of it happening.

The cabinet of East Riding Council will today receive the draft Local Plan report which, if adopted, will open up the former route to housing development.

Houses could be built on the outskirts of Stamford Bridge and Pocklington under the plans.

Campaigners say if this happens, “a golden opportunity” for the 34-mile rail route will have been lost.

George McManus, who set the campaign up in 2001 said: “East Riding Council’s own report in 2005 said that reopening the line was feasible. The draft local plan now says it can’t be delivered by 2030 and proposes that the route should be opened up to development.

“We believe they’ve made a mistake and I’ve written to the leader of the council to ask them to reconsider. Building on the route, will in our view push the costs of reopening up and make it uneconomic to ever open the line.

“If this proposal is adopted then the council will be doing a great diservice to future generations and almost certainly delivering a fatal blow to our campaign.”

He said a similar £200 million scheme had recently been given the go-ahead in the Midlands.

John Skidmore, interim director of corporate strategy and commissioning at East Riding of Yorkshire Council, said: “Government guidelines only allow the council to include ‘deliverable’ proposals over the plan period of the East Riding Local Plan (up to 2029) and, given the high level of funding required, the council does not believe the Hull-Beverley-York railway proposal will be possible during this time-frame.

“The council does, however, remain broadly supportive of re-opening the line.

“The council cannot outline a protected route for the Hull-Beverley-York railway proposal, as the addition of ‘undeliverable’ items could see the plan found unsound when submitted to the Department for Communities and Local Government next spring.

“The East Riding Local Plan is taking shape and has been the subject of lengthy consultation, resulting in several revisions.”

Comments (12)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:52am Tue 3 Dec 13

SR0843 says...

To have a railway line there and not use it seems like utter madness to me; all those commuters choking York ring road when they could be reading a book or enjoying the view from a railway carriage instead.
To have a railway line there and not use it seems like utter madness to me; all those commuters choking York ring road when they could be reading a book or enjoying the view from a railway carriage instead. SR0843

8:58am Tue 3 Dec 13

Fat Harry says...

A great shame, but it seems as though the council is itself boxed in by the Whitehall bureaucracy surrounding the local plan. Government rules preventing anyone excercising common sense.
A great shame, but it seems as though the council is itself boxed in by the Whitehall bureaucracy surrounding the local plan. Government rules preventing anyone excercising common sense. Fat Harry

9:21am Tue 3 Dec 13

JHardacre says...

"“The council does, however, remain broadly supportive of re-opening the line."

What sort of double-speak is this? They either support it or they don't. If they support it then why allow building along it's route. Typical council nonsense.
"“The council does, however, remain broadly supportive of re-opening the line." What sort of double-speak is this? They either support it or they don't. If they support it then why allow building along it's route. Typical council nonsense. JHardacre

9:57am Tue 3 Dec 13

mjgyork says...

It would make more sense to reinstate a line, so that a direct line to Whitby using the Scarborough linewas possible. Instead a trip via Middlesbrough makes any day trippers almost forced to go by car. A rediculous situation that should be resolved ASAP!
It would make more sense to reinstate a line, so that a direct line to Whitby using the Scarborough linewas possible. Instead a trip via Middlesbrough makes any day trippers almost forced to go by car. A rediculous situation that should be resolved ASAP! mjgyork

10:39am Tue 3 Dec 13

sparkseffect says...

mjgyork wrote:
It would make more sense to reinstate a line, so that a direct line to Whitby using the Scarborough linewas possible. Instead a trip via Middlesbrough makes any day trippers almost forced to go by car. A rediculous situation that should be resolved ASAP!
I think you may be a little confused. They are talking about the line from York via Pocklington and Market Weighton to Beverley, not the one from Malton to Pickering (which would open up services to Whitby). The York to Hull line was closed (by a Labour government) with the proviso that the rails had to be left in place, but they were then hurriedly lifted just before Labour's 1968 Transport Act would have allowed subsidies to reopen it. Very suspicious. The route has since been cut in several places - Link Road in New Earswick, New Lane, Huntington (Portakabin), and in Pocklington, for example, and several bridges have been demolished - such as under the A64 at North Lane and over the A166 at Stamford Bridge (both on road safety grounds). Much as I didn't want to see it closed in the first place, I can see that reopening the line now would be a step too far, and too expensive.
[quote][p][bold]mjgyork[/bold] wrote: It would make more sense to reinstate a line, so that a direct line to Whitby using the Scarborough linewas possible. Instead a trip via Middlesbrough makes any day trippers almost forced to go by car. A rediculous situation that should be resolved ASAP![/p][/quote]I think you may be a little confused. They are talking about the line from York via Pocklington and Market Weighton to Beverley, not the one from Malton to Pickering (which would open up services to Whitby). The York to Hull line was closed (by a Labour government) with the proviso that the rails had to be left in place, but they were then hurriedly lifted just before Labour's 1968 Transport Act would have allowed subsidies to reopen it. Very suspicious. The route has since been cut in several places - Link Road in New Earswick, New Lane, Huntington (Portakabin), and in Pocklington, for example, and several bridges have been demolished - such as under the A64 at North Lane and over the A166 at Stamford Bridge (both on road safety grounds). Much as I didn't want to see it closed in the first place, I can see that reopening the line now would be a step too far, and too expensive. sparkseffect

1:42pm Tue 3 Dec 13

mjgyork says...

I am not confused and fully appreciate the difficulties and costs involved. But if we want less car travel it is a cost we should find. And sooner the better. Whoever was responsible, it is bit late to assign blame now.
I am not confused and fully appreciate the difficulties and costs involved. But if we want less car travel it is a cost we should find. And sooner the better. Whoever was responsible, it is bit late to assign blame now. mjgyork

2:03pm Tue 3 Dec 13

Mullarkian says...

Not this story but - Never mind another 7 years, that McLeod guy should be gassed!
Not this story but - Never mind another 7 years, that McLeod guy should be gassed! Mullarkian

2:32pm Tue 3 Dec 13

3.8liter says...

sparkseffect wrote:
mjgyork wrote:
It would make more sense to reinstate a line, so that a direct line to Whitby using the Scarborough linewas possible. Instead a trip via Middlesbrough makes any day trippers almost forced to go by car. A rediculous situation that should be resolved ASAP!
I think you may be a little confused. They are talking about the line from York via Pocklington and Market Weighton to Beverley, not the one from Malton to Pickering (which would open up services to Whitby). The York to Hull line was closed (by a Labour government) with the proviso that the rails had to be left in place, but they were then hurriedly lifted just before Labour's 1968 Transport Act would have allowed subsidies to reopen it. Very suspicious. The route has since been cut in several places - Link Road in New Earswick, New Lane, Huntington (Portakabin), and in Pocklington, for example, and several bridges have been demolished - such as under the A64 at North Lane and over the A166 at Stamford Bridge (both on road safety grounds). Much as I didn't want to see it closed in the first place, I can see that reopening the line now would be a step too far, and too expensive.
A well written and rational post explaining why this idea was a non starter right from the word go.
Same goes for many other pie in the sky ideas many have about re opening long lost lines. The cost is far too great even if the original route is still accessible and hasn't been built on.
[quote][p][bold]sparkseffect[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mjgyork[/bold] wrote: It would make more sense to reinstate a line, so that a direct line to Whitby using the Scarborough linewas possible. Instead a trip via Middlesbrough makes any day trippers almost forced to go by car. A rediculous situation that should be resolved ASAP![/p][/quote]I think you may be a little confused. They are talking about the line from York via Pocklington and Market Weighton to Beverley, not the one from Malton to Pickering (which would open up services to Whitby). The York to Hull line was closed (by a Labour government) with the proviso that the rails had to be left in place, but they were then hurriedly lifted just before Labour's 1968 Transport Act would have allowed subsidies to reopen it. Very suspicious. The route has since been cut in several places - Link Road in New Earswick, New Lane, Huntington (Portakabin), and in Pocklington, for example, and several bridges have been demolished - such as under the A64 at North Lane and over the A166 at Stamford Bridge (both on road safety grounds). Much as I didn't want to see it closed in the first place, I can see that reopening the line now would be a step too far, and too expensive.[/p][/quote]A well written and rational post explaining why this idea was a non starter right from the word go. Same goes for many other pie in the sky ideas many have about re opening long lost lines. The cost is far too great even if the original route is still accessible and hasn't been built on. 3.8liter

2:26am Wed 4 Dec 13

Magicman! says...

If East Riding council wants to build developments in the area, why not include a rail line, with station halts, within the development? A new small town or good-sized industrial estate would bring a higher demand for rail connections both for passengers and freight, and so integrating at least part of the rail line within any development would be a good starting point.

Whilst the line has been severed in places, most of those places lie within the city of york boundary - and can be worked around if a new line was built to diverge off the Scarborough rail line at Towthorpe Road (Haxby) and then cross over the Strensall Road and carry on straight over the A64 until it comes to the old alignment at Stamford Bridge. East Riding council do have plans which show a proposed route for the rail line around Stamford Bridge.

Plus too thought need to be given about the alternatives: if there was not demand for a railway line, East Yorkshire Motor Services' X46 bus (and the 45 and 46 too) would not require double deckers running at such a good frequency. In addition, the current route to Hull via Selby is on poor ground which means improvements are very very minute which cannot lead to any significant speed improvements, which means the train is slightly slower than driving; whereas if the line betwene York and Beverley was built, a lightweight electric train calling only at Pocklington and Beverley would get between York and Hull in 30-40 minutes and no more. (of course other stations would be served by an all-stops service).

The route could be rebuilt, but is being restricted by people not being visionary enough and still remaining inside the box.
If East Riding council wants to build developments in the area, why not include a rail line, with station halts, within the development? A new small town or good-sized industrial estate would bring a higher demand for rail connections both for passengers and freight, and so integrating at least part of the rail line within any development would be a good starting point. Whilst the line has been severed in places, most of those places lie within the city of york boundary - and can be worked around if a new line was built to diverge off the Scarborough rail line at Towthorpe Road (Haxby) and then cross over the Strensall Road and carry on straight over the A64 until it comes to the old alignment at Stamford Bridge. East Riding council do have plans which show a proposed route for the rail line around Stamford Bridge. Plus too thought need to be given about the alternatives: if there was not demand for a railway line, East Yorkshire Motor Services' X46 bus (and the 45 and 46 too) would not require double deckers running at such a good frequency. In addition, the current route to Hull via Selby is on poor ground which means improvements are very very minute which cannot lead to any significant speed improvements, which means the train is slightly slower than driving; whereas if the line betwene York and Beverley was built, a lightweight electric train calling only at Pocklington and Beverley would get between York and Hull in 30-40 minutes and no more. (of course other stations would be served by an all-stops service). The route could be rebuilt, but is being restricted by people not being visionary enough and still remaining inside the box. Magicman!

7:03am Wed 4 Dec 13

Pinza-C55 says...

sparkseffect wrote:
mjgyork wrote:
It would make more sense to reinstate a line, so that a direct line to Whitby using the Scarborough linewas possible. Instead a trip via Middlesbrough makes any day trippers almost forced to go by car. A rediculous situation that should be resolved ASAP!
I think you may be a little confused. They are talking about the line from York via Pocklington and Market Weighton to Beverley, not the one from Malton to Pickering (which would open up services to Whitby). The York to Hull line was closed (by a Labour government) with the proviso that the rails had to be left in place, but they were then hurriedly lifted just before Labour's 1968 Transport Act would have allowed subsidies to reopen it. Very suspicious. The route has since been cut in several places - Link Road in New Earswick, New Lane, Huntington (Portakabin), and in Pocklington, for example, and several bridges have been demolished - such as under the A64 at North Lane and over the A166 at Stamford Bridge (both on road safety grounds). Much as I didn't want to see it closed in the first place, I can see that reopening the line now would be a step too far, and too expensive.
" I can see that reopening the line now would be a step too far, and too expensive."
And yet the government is about to spend £42 billion of taxpayers money on building a new line, the Scottish parliament is rebuilding part of the Waverley route at a cost of £335 million, and last year the taxpayer stumped up £11.5 billion for.....2 weeks of sport?
[quote][p][bold]sparkseffect[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mjgyork[/bold] wrote: It would make more sense to reinstate a line, so that a direct line to Whitby using the Scarborough linewas possible. Instead a trip via Middlesbrough makes any day trippers almost forced to go by car. A rediculous situation that should be resolved ASAP![/p][/quote]I think you may be a little confused. They are talking about the line from York via Pocklington and Market Weighton to Beverley, not the one from Malton to Pickering (which would open up services to Whitby). The York to Hull line was closed (by a Labour government) with the proviso that the rails had to be left in place, but they were then hurriedly lifted just before Labour's 1968 Transport Act would have allowed subsidies to reopen it. Very suspicious. The route has since been cut in several places - Link Road in New Earswick, New Lane, Huntington (Portakabin), and in Pocklington, for example, and several bridges have been demolished - such as under the A64 at North Lane and over the A166 at Stamford Bridge (both on road safety grounds). Much as I didn't want to see it closed in the first place, I can see that reopening the line now would be a step too far, and too expensive.[/p][/quote]" I can see that reopening the line now would be a step too far, and too expensive." And yet the government is about to spend £42 billion of taxpayers money on building a new line, the Scottish parliament is rebuilding part of the Waverley route at a cost of £335 million, and last year the taxpayer stumped up £11.5 billion for.....2 weeks of sport? Pinza-C55

1:09pm Wed 4 Dec 13

turbosview says...

Torys run the railways down so don't expect Tory run council to help.
They never create any thing just sell off and run down and the general public
pay the price,totally unable to think out side the box, always problems when
a worth while plan is offered up yet can find billions to build a line nobody
want's ie high speed rail link
Torys run the railways down so don't expect Tory run council to help. They never create any thing just sell off and run down and the general public pay the price,totally unable to think out side the box, always problems when a worth while plan is offered up yet can find billions to build a line nobody want's ie high speed rail link turbosview

5:08pm Wed 4 Dec 13

Garrowby Turnoff says...

Reopening the York-Pock-Hull line would be akin to building a ski-lift up the Arras Hill at Mkt Weighton. It would be as underused as the cycle path between the Haxby roundabout and the Hospital Grain Store exit (where is that?) on the York ring.

Just why was this cycle route built?
Reopening the York-Pock-Hull line would be akin to building a ski-lift up the Arras Hill at Mkt Weighton. It would be as underused as the cycle path between the Haxby roundabout and the Hospital Grain Store exit (where is that?) on the York ring. Just why was this cycle route built? Garrowby Turnoff

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree