Campaigners ‘aghast’ that £20m new Reston station in Borders may be served by just eight trains a day

[Starmill]

I'm yet to come across any professionals who seem to be of a genuine opinion that this station is anything other than a terrible idea.

 

[gingerheid]

I'm particularly fond of the inbuilt defeatism (or realism may be a better term) involved in building a station in the middle of nowhere with only 70 parking spaces. The Belford station campaign people must be wishing Belford was in Scotland

 

[Hagbard Celine]

No - it's exactly that.

They've paid for the station, they have a TOC who could serve it and is directly accountable to them. And yet you get this response from Scotrail:

"A spokesperson for ScotRail, whose trains currently run only as far south as Dunbar, said: “It isn’t the plan for ScotRail to serve Reston.

"It is much more efficient for cross-Border operators to serve it and we do not want to impose unnecessary burdens on the Scottish taxpayer."

Basically the SNP are playing politics and hopefully this along with a few other things will blow up in its face fairly soon.

I think they are playing politics and as often in Scotland shooting at an open goal.

For the last few years the loudest cheerleader for Reston Station has been John Lamont, the local tory MP. He was very much against reopening the Borders railway until it happened and became a huge success, in the central Borders if not Midlothian. At that point he changed his views and became an avid supporter of reopenings. Not just Reston station, he also started to campaign hard for an extension of the Borders railway to Hawick and Carlisle.

The SNP don't want to waste >£1bn of Scottish Govt money on a railway which between Hawick and Carlisle would serve a catchment similar in population to Reston. If Reston becomes a £20m white elephant support for Hawick - Carlisle will evaporate unless Lamont can get the treasury to pay for the whole project.

So either Scotland gets a 'free' railway from Tweedbank to Carlisle or Lamont is shown to be an ineffictive eejit. For the SNP it's a win either way.

 

[gingerheid]

If Reston becomes a £20m white elephant support for Hawick - Carlisle will evaporate unless Lamont can get the treasury to pay for the whole project.

It's only only going to work like that if a Reston station served by trains is a white elephant. A Reston that is a white elephant "because trains don't stop there" (with very strong inverted commas) won't be seen to be proof railway stations are a bad idea.

 

[A0]

I think they are playing politics and as often in Scotland shooting at an open goal.

For the last few years the loudest cheerleader for Reston Station has been John Lamont, the local tory MP. He was very much against reopening the Borders railway until it happened and became a huge success, in the central Borders if not Midlothian. At that point he changed his views and became an avid supporter of reopenings. Not just Reston station, he also started to campaign hard for an extension of the Borders railway to Hawick and Carlisle.

The SNP don't want to waste >£1bn of Scottish Govt money on a railway which between Hawick and Carlisle would serve a catchment similar in population to Reston. If Reston becomes a £20m white elephant support for Hawick - Carlisle will evaporate unless Lamont can get the treasury to pay for the whole project.

So either Scotland gets a 'free' railway from Tweedbank to Carlisle or Lamont is shown to be an ineffictive eejit. For the SNP it's a win either way.

MPs of all stripes have cheerlead for various rail re-openings, many of which are off the wall barking mad proposals.

But one MP cannot make the business case - and that's where this one resides firmly at the door of the Scot Gov and Transport for Scotland - there is some question about their diligence in compiling these schemes already and their willingness to throw money at schemes, purely for political ends. On Reston, if they've put in place a scheme where they are now complaining about what the stakeholders (XC and LNER in this case) are only delivering what they have committed to - then questions will rightly be asked about the competence of Transport for Scotland.

And I don't think the UK Gov is going to spend a penny more than it needs to on Scottish infrastructure at the moment - and that definitely doesn't include extending Borders to Carlisle.

 

[Watershed]

And I don't think the UK Gov is going to spend a penny more than it needs to on Scottish infrastructure at the moment

I'd have said quite the opposite - Westminster is quite worried about the prospect of Scottish independence. There have certainly been murmurings about shoving more money in Scotland's direction to try and counteract this.

I wouldn't rule out anything in Westminster's attempt to 'bribe' Scots into voting against independence. So long as they can put a Union Jack on it.

 

[Aictos]

Indeed it's funded by Scottish Govt therefore should be served by Scotrail, the fact it isn't means it's purely done by the Scottish Govt for political reasons so when the station calls are dropped by LNER and Cross Country due to lack of passengers, they can blame Westminster.

I'm for reopenings BUT they must first be proven to have a solid business case, I don't think Reston does after all if it did then surely Colne to Skipton would have been reopened.

 

[D6975]

And Bristol-Portishead too, traffic congestion on the A369 was horrendous pre covid, the railway service would surely be well used.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed it's funded by Scottish Govt therefore should be served by Scotrail, the fact it isn't means it's purely done by the Scottish Govt for political reasons so when the station calls are dropped by LNER and Cross Country due to lack of passengers, they can blame Westminster.

I'm for reopenings BUT they must first be proven to have a solid business case, I don't think Reston does after all if it did then surely Colne to Skipton would have been reopened.

A station and a whole line are in rather different orders of magnitude. But I do find opening a village halt that isn't even a particularly convenient Parkway just a bit bizarre. What is the business case for this? You'd not close it if it was already there, but I don't get the purpose of building it.

 

[A0]

And Bristol-Portishead too, traffic congestion on the A369 was horrendous pre covid, the railway service would surely be well used.

There is little evidence that "horrendous" traffic congestion leads people to jumping on the train.

It depends where people are travelling to and from - and if the train doesn't match that, they won't switch. And I'll bet even pre-Covid the traffic was only 'horrendous' between 7.30 am and 9am and 4pm-6pm - whereas the infrastructure for a train service has to be there and maintained 24x7 and running a service at peak hours only isn't viable.

Currently Portishead gets 3 buses an hour to Bristol with the fast ones taking 30 mins. The train has to offer a frequency which is attractive a journey time which is attractive - bearing in mind that includes the fact people have to get to the station, whereas the bus might run past their front door.

 

[quantinghome]

The work site for the station is visible on google maps. It's about the same size as the actual village.

Thought I'd then zoom out a bit to see what other population centres it would be a railhead for...

Hmmm.

 

[Aictos]

A station and a whole line are in rather different orders of magnitude. But I do find opening a village halt that isn't even a particularly convenient Parkway just a bit bizarre. What is the business case for this? You'd not close it if it was already there, but I don't get the purpose of building it.

Exactly, what was the business case for it? I bet anything that it wasn't particularly high.

 

[och aye]

The work site for the station is visible on google maps. It's about the same size as the actual village.

Thought I'd then zoom out a bit to see what other population centres it would be a railhead for...

Hmmm.

Eyemouth is probably the only really large settlement nearby.

 

[InOban]

The other settlement often mentioned by the campaigners was Duns which used to be the county town of Berwickshire and is a centre for farming-related businesses.

It beggars belief that they didn't come to an agreement with the farm which uses a track under the railway to use that and a long ramp to reach the Edinburgh platform. The capital and maintenance costs of the lifts and bridge? ludicrous.

I guess that Transport Scotland will be under pressure to instruct Scotrail to send a 385 ecs to Berwick-upon-Tweed (or rather Tweedmouth I think ) to provide a commuter service in the morning. Whether a path can be found, I'll let the train planners on this forum work out.

Of course, I assume that that no Scotrail drivers sign beyond Dunbar, so more costs there...

 

[swt_passenger]

The other settlement often mentioned by the campaigners was Duns which used to be the county town of Berwickshire and is a centre for farming-related businesses.

It beggars belief that they didn't come to an agreement with the farm which uses a track under the railway to use that and a long ramp to reach the Edinburgh platform. The capital and maintenance costs of the lifts and bridge? ludicrous.

I guess that Transport Scotland will be under pressure to instruct Scotrail to send a 385 ecs to Berwick-upon-Tweed (or rather Tweedmouth I think ) to provide a commuter service in the morning. Whether a path can be found, I'll let the train planners on this forum work out.

Of course, I assume that that no Scotrail drivers sign beyond Dunbar, so more costs there...

A pair of long ramps doesn’t conform to present rail standards. It was discussed in the Reston station build thread in the infrastructure forum: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/new-reston-station-progress-updates.212306/

 

[InOban]

I understood that Access regs allowed shallow ramps alternating with level sections. It wouldn't surprise me if the railway gold-plated the regulations.

 

[Starmill]

I understood that Access regs allowed shallow ramps alternating with level sections. It wouldn't surprise me if the railway gold-plated the regulations.

Shallow ramps with landings probably are compliant. One was newly installed at Chessington South not long ago. However it was referred to as a "level footpath" strangely. A bench is also provided part way along it - it is really remarkably long. I imagine trying to fit something like that in at Reston would be near impossible.

 

[InOban]

Having visited the site recently, I don't think that it would be at all difficult.

 

[tbtc]

In simple terms:
£20,000,000 cost
20,000 annual usage (as per Railfuture estimate)
= £1,000 per use

BUT the asset has a life of, say, 50 years before major maintenance
= £20 per use

£40 per return passenger journey to cover the capital outlay.

Then there are financing costs, ongoing maintenance costs, costs of calling at the station (brakes, fuel etc).

Also the mantra is that faster journeys have a positive effect/value. The reverse therefore must be equally valid and the slower journeys faced by existing passengers on long distance services will have a negative effect/value.

Alternatively:
50 commuters, making 200 trips per year each, gives 20,000 annual usage (10,000 departs, 10,000 alights)
So 10% of the village population need to become commuters (in reality they would be drawn from a wider area than the village itself) or 50 new houses need to be built.

Also, this is assuming that the "Reston to Edinburgh" passengers aren't people who previously paid higher fares for the longer "Berwick to Edinburgh" journey (e.g. if you in Berwickshire you might currently use Berwick for trips to Edinburgh but a new station allows you to swap it and drive to Reston for the shorter /cheaper journey - so not only are the Reston - Edinburgh tickets just cannibalising existing demand, the revenue from them will be lower too

For the last few years the loudest cheerleader for Reston Station has been John Lamont, the local tory MP. He was very much against reopening the Borders railway until it happened and became a huge success, in the central Borders if not Midlothian

Has the Borders line been a "huge success"?

Or is it more that it's initial passenger numbers were higher than expected, but after five years of operation they were in line with expectations (i.e. there was a faster take up of demand, rather than taking five years to reach those levels, but after five years the passenger numbers are where they were expected to get to after five years)?

If Reston becomes a £20m white elephant support for Hawick - Carlisle will evaporate unless Lamont can get the treasury to pay for the whole project

This is the problem - even if we pretend that the £20m is "free" (and doesn't come from the railway budget, there isn't an "opportunity cost" of another station/line that could have had this money spent on it instead), a £20m white elephant is going to be used to dismiss future rail projects.

Just as people on here like to use the fact that a couple of stations beat their expected passenger numbers ("and even though my proposal has a terrible business case, they said the same about a project that did do better than expected" etc), all it takes will be one big flop to ruin the case for any future scheme - e.g. you might want a station/ line at St Andrews/ Glenfarg/ Hawick/ Peterhead/ Ballater but the "...but what about Reston" argument will crop up time and time again

This is why I'm reluctant to support some of the schemes that get discussed on here - not because I'm anti-openings but because I'm anti-BAD-openings (because I know where that'll lead). Much better to focus on projects with good cases, so that their success makes it easier for the next project, a virtuous circle (rather than the vicious one that we may be heading for)

 

[Hagbard Celine]

For the last few years the loudest cheerleader for Reston Station has been John Lamont, the local tory MP. He was very much against reopening the Borders railway until it happened and became a huge success, in the central Borders if not Midlothian.

Has the Borders line been a "huge success"?

Or is it more that it's initial passenger numbers were higher than expected, but after five years of operation they were in line with expectations (i.e. there was a faster take up of demand, rather than taking five years to reach those levels, but after five years the passenger numbers are where they were expected to get to after five years)?

I was referring to the central borders and not the line as a whole.

In the first complete year following opening (16/17) Tweedbank achieved 909% of annual forecast trips, which grew by a further 0.2% in 17/18 and 1.6% in 18/19.

Galashiels achieved 639% of forecast numbers, growing by a further 2.9% in 17/18 and 1% in 18/19.

Stow achieved 477% of forecast numbers, growing by 3.5% in 17/18 and 2% in 18/19.

19/20 numbers are available but were affected by the pandemic so are not directly comparable.

So yes, this is a huge success. Midlothian could have been too, if the rolling stock had been available

 

[Starmill]

I was referring to the central borders and not the line as a whole.

In the first complete year following opening (16/17) Tweedbank achieved 909% of annual forecast trips, which grew by a further 0.2% in 17/18 and 1.6% in 18/19.

Galashiels achieved 639% of forecast numbers, growing by a further 2.9% in 17/18 and 1% in 18/19.

Stow achieved 477% of forecast numbers, growing by 3.5% in 17/18 and 2% in 18/19.

19/20 numbers are available but were affected by the pandemic so are not directly comparable.

So yes, this is a huge success. Midlothian could have been too, if the rolling stock had been available

It's unclear what the integrity of the baseline being compared with there is though isn't it.