York to Beverley rail line campaigners in protest

York Press: . .

CAMPAIGNERS calling for the reopening of a rail line between York and Beverley will stage a protest outside the headquarters of the council they claim could scupper their hopes.

East Riding of Yorkshire Council meets on January 8 to discuss the authority’s draft Local Plan, outlining how the region will be redeveloped up to 2029 and proposing to open up the former rail route for housing.

But the Minsters’ Rail Campaign said this would “kill off” any prospect of the line being revived, and has asked supporters to join a demonstration outside the council’s Beverley HQ ahead of the meeting. Supporters said the council was going back on a 2005 decision that reopening the line was feasible, though now saying it could not be delivered by 2029.

George McManus, the campaign’s chairman, said: “We set the campaign up in 2001 and have been making steady progress ever since.

“On the back of its own study that reopening the line was feasible, the council decided to protect the route. If they now decide to open it to development, reopening it will become hideously expensive.”

Mr McManus said similar rural lines were being reopened elsewhere, saying: “It’s baffling that the council would now wish to remove the York-Beverley route’s protected status. All we are asking is that the status quo is maintained and we have further discussions. If we miss this golden opportunity, future generations will rue this short-sighted decision – the demonstration on January 8 really is our last chance.”

John Skidmore, the council’s interim director of corporate strategy and commissioning, said Government guidelines mean Local Plans could only include schemes which were “deliverable” during their timespan, and the “high level” of funding needed meant the authority did not believe the rail line would be possible in this time.

He said: “The council does, however, remain broadly supportive of reopening the line. The council cannot outline a protected route for the 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.”

Comments (6)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:56am Wed 11 Dec 13

old_geezer says...

So it's Catch-22, then. By not including it ER make it undeliverable, and because it's undeliverable ER can't jnclude it.

Also a classic case of lack of political will - if THAT were in place, a workaround would rapidly be found.
So it's Catch-22, then. By not including it ER make it undeliverable, and because it's undeliverable ER can't jnclude it. Also a classic case of lack of political will - if THAT were in place, a workaround would rapidly be found. old_geezer

10:20am Wed 11 Dec 13

Garrowby Turnoff says...

Waste of time protesting. It won't happen and the benefits of disrupting A1079 road traffic with endless level crossings or expensive bridging/tunnels makes the futile scheme pie-in-the-sky.
Waste of time protesting. It won't happen and the benefits of disrupting A1079 road traffic with endless level crossings or expensive bridging/tunnels makes the futile scheme pie-in-the-sky. Garrowby Turnoff

11:21am Wed 11 Dec 13

old_geezer says...

Garrowby: the proposed route doesn't cross the A1079.
Garrowby: the proposed route doesn't cross the A1079. old_geezer

11:25am Wed 11 Dec 13

Ignatius Lumpopo says...

Garrowby Turnoff wrote:
Waste of time protesting. It won't happen and the benefits of disrupting A1079 road traffic with endless level crossings or expensive bridging/tunnels makes the futile scheme pie-in-the-sky.
Absolutely right, I'm afraid. Just look at the mass of building that has taken place on the old trackbed. No-one will put up with level crossings any more so new bridges - and the attendant earthworks - would be required. How much will two embankments and a bridge over both the A1237 and the A64 cost ? The previously well-sited stations in major population areas are no longer accessible, so Stamford Bridge and Pocklington would end up with 'parkway' stations... unless you knock down all the houses that potential rail-users in those towns currently live in. Which sort of misses the point...
[quote][p][bold]Garrowby Turnoff[/bold] wrote: Waste of time protesting. It won't happen and the benefits of disrupting A1079 road traffic with endless level crossings or expensive bridging/tunnels makes the futile scheme pie-in-the-sky.[/p][/quote]Absolutely right, I'm afraid. Just look at the mass of building that has taken place on the old trackbed. No-one will put up with level crossings any more so new bridges - and the attendant earthworks - would be required. How much will two embankments and a bridge over both the A1237 and the A64 cost ? The previously well-sited stations in major population areas are no longer accessible, so Stamford Bridge and Pocklington would end up with 'parkway' stations... unless you knock down all the houses that potential rail-users in those towns currently live in. Which sort of misses the point... Ignatius Lumpopo

1:37am Thu 12 Dec 13

Magicman! says...

“The council does, however, remain broadly supportive of reopening the line."

How?? How is the council supportive of reopening the railway if they're going to start building houses on the route?!

That's like me going up to a homeless person and saying "I am supportive of your attempts to get a stable life" and then I nick his flatcap of money!
[quote]“The council does, however, remain broadly supportive of reopening the line."[/quote] How?? How is the council supportive of reopening the railway if they're going to start building houses on the route?! That's like me going up to a homeless person and saying "I am supportive of your attempts to get a stable life" and then I nick his flatcap of money! Magicman!

8:08pm Mon 30 Dec 13

Maltonian says...

This route should never have closed. It was a fast, well-constructed line and not a sleepy rural branch. Today it would be a hugely popular line for commuters and would have provided the only fast route north from Hull and Beverley. But reopening is never going to happen as there are too many obstacles all across the old route, and there isn't a political will, or the finance. Sad but true. Look how long they've been talking about building 2 simple wooden platforms and a car park at Haxby - at least a 20 year project.
This route should never have closed. It was a fast, well-constructed line and not a sleepy rural branch. Today it would be a hugely popular line for commuters and would have provided the only fast route north from Hull and Beverley. But reopening is never going to happen as there are too many obstacles all across the old route, and there isn't a political will, or the finance. Sad but true. Look how long they've been talking about building 2 simple wooden platforms and a car park at Haxby - at least a 20 year project. Maltonian

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