Blackpool South - Blackpool Central

[Bevan Price]

The current Blackpool North used to be the excursion (overflow) platforms. The main part of the station was closer to the town centre, the site now being occupied by a supermarket. At one time. most of Blackpool's bus services stopped inside, or close to the adjacent bus station.

I agree it was stupid to close Blackpool Central, although it would have needed some reduction in size. If there was still a double track railway from Blackpool Central, it might have retained some local traffic to/from St. Annes & Lytham; from there to Blackpool South is unlikely to attract much traffic when you have to leave South station and walk to a bus stop, where you catch a bus to the town centre, that bus having originated in Lytham or St. Annes.

However, with due apologies to the residents of East Lancashire, it would be a better overall prospect for the line if St. Annes and Lytham had through (electrified) services to Manchester (assuming that only one train per hour is feasible for the foreseeable future.)

 

[sheff'd victoria]

Just while the matter of ground stability in the Blackpool area is being discussed, what is the latest train of thought with regard to the "fracking" proposals, should full-scale operations commence in that nearby area ?

http://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/c...sters-march-against-fracking-threat-1-5189489

 

[RochdalePioneers]

The other observation is that since the Pleasure Beach closed its south entrance a few years ago, the PB rail station is now at the wrong end of the park - south eastern corner with the entrance half a mile away on the north western corner.

With big crowds there waiting for trains home we always now walk to South station (0.7 miles) to guarantee getting a seat. If the line was extended north of current, reinstating the Lytham Road station would be a good replacement for South. I can see no real obstructions between South Station and Bloomfield Road for a reinstated line, and surely pushing even further north can't be that difficult?

I suspect there would be 2 main objections. 1. Blackpool council has no interest in rail travel as it takes revenue away from its car parks. And 2. You couldn't operate the branch on a skeleton single train section basis with any extensions. There is already minimal recovery time for late running caused by station dwell times, and a longer line would knacker that

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Cliveblackpool]

The other observation is that since the Pleasure Beach closed its south entrance a few years ago, the PB rail station is now at the wrong end of the park - south eastern corner with the entrance half a mile away on the north western corner.

With big crowds there waiting for trains home we always now walk to South station (0.7 miles) to guarantee getting a seat. If the line was extended north of current, reinstating the Lytham Road station would be a good replacement for South. I can see no real obstructions between South Station and Bloomfield Road for a reinstated line, and surely pushing even further north can't be that difficult?

I suspect there would be 2 main objections. 1. Blackpool council has no interest in rail travel as it takes revenue away from its car parks. And 2. You couldn't operate the branch on a skeleton single train section basis with any extensions. There is already minimal recovery time for late running caused by station dwell times, and a longer line would knacker that

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

From Pleasure Beach North Entrance to South Station is only 2 minutes extra walk. (Season Pass** ticket holders can also use the Arena entrance to enter)
Another advantage is shops, Wetherspoons, and takeaways before your journey!

Lytham Road station was originally called South, it was moved to be after the junction with the Marton line.
South Station is a good location.
Close to shopping area, and pubs etc.
Bus Hub, Nos 5, 10, 11, 16, Stagecoach 68 use the Royal Oak stop.
Short walk to Promenade, LRT trams, and No 1 bus

** special offer - half price season pass - http://www.pleasurebeachexperience.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2891
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

4) Re-open Poulton-Fleetwood;

Just read an article (Re RIP Leamside) by Network rail, which is not encouraging.

SRS H.32 Blackpool North Branch NW4005
Burn Naze Branch NW4009
This branch accessed at Poulton-Le-Fylde is an unelectrified single goods line with short loop. Although
formerly a passenger two tack railway the route was last used in connection with services for the Burn Haze
Power Station.
At the time of compilation of this document (August 2011), the route is temporarily out of use with a Network
Change proposal to make this closure permanent.
p 323 http://www.networkrail.co.uk/upload...ute Specifications 2011 London North East.pdf

 

[PR1Berske]

Disappointing if true, but not surprising, this being Britain an' all.

 

[Buttsy]

Just read an article (Re RIP Leamside) by Network rail, which is not encouraging.

SRS H.32 Blackpool North Branch NW4005
Burn Naze Branch NW4009
This branch accessed at Poulton-Le-Fylde is an unelectrified single goods line with short loop. Although
formerly a passenger two tack railway the route was last used in connection with services for the Burn Haze
Power Station.
At the time of compilation of this document (August 2011), the route is temporarily out of use with a Network
Change proposal to make this closure permanent.
p 323 http://www.networkrail.co.uk/upload...ute Specifications 2011 London North East.pdf

I thought the junction pointwork had been renewed in recent years.

 

[snail]

Disappointing if true, but not surprising, this being Britain an' all.

Why do you want money spending on a line that no one uses? I thought there were plans by heritage groups to take over the line?

 

[umontu]

Depends on if there is a provision for freight to the Port etc?

I know it's a month late nearly but no one had addressed your question yet.

There's no call for freight to the port at Fleetwood. The port has almost been completed dismantled. There's no available route from where the line ends to the site of the former port.

The estuary is a pain to dredge and hasn't had any done since the ferry's stopped. Heysham is a better port, with more space, and has better links available to motorways, railways and the sea.

That's before you address the other issues with level crossings. Herring Arm Road in Fleetwood is a major issue. Network Rail have said they will not build a level crossing there. Therefore a bridge is the only option. This is one of the many reasons why such a plan would cost £6m at least.

As for D6975's comments: At Poulton there are a number of issues with the current upgrade project. There's not a chance you'll be able to get another platform alongside the current platform at Poulton-le-Fylde. I should know, I've been involved in the planning process for future works at this station. So a new station could be built... But then you'd still have to walk between these platforms like you'd have to down Talbot Road in Blackpool, until the extension is built.

What I fail to understand is why after Fleetwood has had a state of the art light rail system installed, with an relatively cheap fare of £3.50 for a rover ticket, they feel the need to reconnect to a railway that would be further outside the town and less frequent! With considerable cost to the tax payer for what I understand is only for the benefit of football fans. Who mostly make their way to away games on coaches organised by their team!

Why do some people feel that all the hope for Fleetwood lies in the railway? (Not nessesarilly yourself, I realise : ) )

What would be a great idea would be through ticketing, again something I have a little bit of involvement in.

 

[lancastrian]

Some points I'm pondering over:

* If Blackpool Central was reopened in the morning with a terminal island platform and for instance two trains an hour (the existing Colne and one further afield [with the necessary loop further south on the line]) what is the likely level of abstraction from Blackpool North?

* The alignment between South and Central seems essentially unimpeded and presumably in local authority ownership.

* The likely cost (i.e. single track extension, island platform, two-storey station building). The station building should quickly pay for itself in terms of rent accrued from cafés and shops which would likely be keen to orientate themselves around the new station.

* Have walked twice from central Blackpool to Blackpool North after dark and whilst thankfully uneventful I didn't find it the most inviting of walks.

PS: thanks to the posters who suggested further books about Blackpool's railways earlier in this thread.

I will respond to your first two points as I have no answer to the others:

1. I feel that they will be probably almost no abstraction from the Blackpool North services. My reasoning for this is simple, until the line meet at Kirkham, they serve two complete different areas and towns. The line vis the coast serves a number of communities, starting with the parts of South Blackpool near south station. Then you have St Annes, Ansdell, Fairhaven, Lytham, Moss Side and if re-opened Wrea Green. Most of which used to have a decent service through to Manchester Victoria. Local services from Blackpool North used to go thought to East Lancashire, interchange could usually take place at Preston.

2. The area between South and the site of Central is owned by Blackpool Council, as it was their reasoning which caused Central to be closed, so that the Council could have the land between the two stations for development. However that never happened and what we have now got it an over sized car park with a motor way link, the old Marton Rail line.

This to my mind is a line that is crying out for development and improvement to is services and infrastructure.

 

[AndyHudds]

I know it's a month late nearly but no one had addressed your question yet.

There's no call for freight to the port at Fleetwood. The port has almost been completed dismantled. There's no available route from where the line ends to the site of the former port.

The estuary is a pain to dredge and hasn't had any done since the ferry's stopped. Heysham is a better port, with more space, and has better links available to motorways, railways and the sea.

That's before you address the other issues with level crossings. Herring Arm Road in Fleetwood is a major issue. Network Rail have said they will not build a level crossing there. Therefore a bridge is the only option. This is one of the many reasons why such a plan would cost £6m at least.

As for D6975's comments: At Poulton there are a number of issues with the current upgrade project. There's not a chance you'll be able to get another platform alongside the current platform at Poulton-le-Fylde. I should know, I've been involved in the planning process for future works at this station. So a new station could be built... But then you'd still have to walk between these platforms like you'd have to down Talbot Road in Blackpool, until the extension is built.

What I fail to understand is why after Fleetwood has had a state of the art light rail system installed, with an relatively cheap fare of £3.50 for a rover ticket, they feel the need to reconnect to a railway that would be further outside the town and less frequent! With considerable cost to the tax payer for what I understand is only for the benefit of football fans. Who mostly make their way to away games on coaches organised by their team!

Why do some people feel that all the hope for Fleetwood lies in the railway? (Not nessesarilly yourself, I realise : ) )

What would be a great idea would be through ticketing, again something I have a little bit of involvement in.

Bit of a sweeping generalisation there mate regarding travelling football fans. Most fans will travel to away games on the train as opposed to organised coaches.I'd rather stick hot pins in my eyes than rather travel on coaches organised by my club, its the train everytime for me for away games.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

There's no call for freight to the port at Fleetwood. The port has almost been completed dismantled. There's no available route from where the line ends to the site of the former port.

The estuary is a pain to dredge and hasn't had any done since the ferry's stopped. Heysham is a better port, with more space, and has better links available to motorways, railways and the sea.

That's before you address the other issues with level crossings. Herring Arm Road in Fleetwood is a major issue. Network Rail have said they will not build a level crossing there. Therefore a bridge is the only option. This is one of the many reasons why such a plan would cost £6m at least.

As for D6975's comments: At Poulton there are a number of issues with the current upgrade project. There's not a chance you'll be able to get another platform alongside the current platform at Poulton-le-Fylde. I should know, I've been involved in the planning process for future works at this station. So a new station could be built... But then you'd still have to walk between these platforms like you'd have to down Talbot Road in Blackpool, until the extension is built.

What I fail to understand is why after Fleetwood has had a state of the art light rail system installed, with an relatively cheap fare of £3.50 for a rover ticket, they feel the need to reconnect to a railway that would be further outside the town and less frequent! With considerable cost to the tax payer for what I understand is only for the benefit of football fans. Who mostly make their way to away games on coaches organised by their team!

Why do some people feel that all the hope for Fleetwood lies in the railway? (Not nessesarilly yourself, I realise : ) )

What would be a great idea would be through ticketing, again something I have a little bit of involvement in.

Some poor decisions were made in the late 60's, eg firstly closing the terminus in Dock Street, and allowing the line serving a port to close.
Now the ferry service is also closed.
One of the reasons given was the shortage of land next to the ferry terminus, and a short sighted Council turning their back to their Railway.
Today, the biggest problem is finding a site for a station in Fleetwood that would be convienient to the public.
If Northern Rail ran the service, a new platform at Poulton would not be needed as the train would go onto Preston.
Alas it may be given over to a hertige group to play trains on the few miles of existing track! (Imo a cycleway would bring far more prosperity)
The LRT tramway is slow!

Central to South station - I have not walked the route, I have been told there are some Storage tanks (United Utilities - 100 ft deep) under part of the car park.

 

[umontu]

Some poor decisions were made in the late 60's, eg firstly closing the terminus in Dock Street, and allowing the line serving a port to close.
Now the ferry service is also closed.
One of the reasons given was the shortage of land next to the ferry terminus, and a short sighted Council turning their back to their Railway.
Today, the biggest problem is finding a site for a station in Fleetwood that would be convienient to the public.
If Northern Rail ran the service, a new platform at Poulton would not be needed as the train would go onto Preston.
Alas it may be given over to a hertige group to play trains on the few miles of existing track! (Imo a cycleway would bring far more prosperity)
The LRT tramway is slow!

Central to South station - I have not walked the route, I have been told there are some Storage tanks (United Utilities - 100 ft deep) under part of the car park.

I feel what happened at Fleetwood was similar to what happened at Central. The car was the future; case in point the linkspan and ferry terminal along with Amounderness way being built. Unfortunately Fleetwood has missed out on a lot of industrial changes. The fish brought in these days is from outside of Fleetwood now to sell at their market!

I feel your comment "Alas it may be given over to a hertige group to play trains on the few miles of existing track!" is slightly disagreeable; mostly the play trains part.

I've heard this frequently about the pwrs. I am involved in this project in depth and I know what is going on and why. Multiple attempts and provisions have been made for a commuter service, all of them have failed. No one can afford to reinstall the line as part of the national network and the future plans for Poulton would not permit the current style of connection. The plans of the pwrs will at least allow the line to remain there if and when a serious mainline project were to begin, indeed the plans would require them to capitulate to such a scheme!

Network Rail have stated they intend to remove the track and dismantle the whole thing. Part of which they began and ceased doing, at the request of the pwrs, in 2011. If this happens then you can forget the line opening at all as the costs will spiral higher.