Leicester-Burton line

[Pigeon]

Connecting chord.
How about leaving the Coalville line just to the NW of the Athletics Stadium, passing down the West side of it and then curving round the SW side and South end of that Athletics Stadium and continue NE over the Coalville line to meet the MML just South of the buildings.

Bit close to residential areas perhaps so perhaps easier to blast a way though the industrial buildings in the V of the existing junction.

Still no way to get a reasonable radius unless you go through the residential areas. Not doing that makes the radius even tighter if anything.

 

[mangyiscute]

As a resident of Coalville, I say let’s get on with it. There is an extraordinary amount of complaining in local Facebook groups about how it will ‘kill the town’ or ‘bring in undesirables’, yet the railway (and huge amounts of coal) built this town. The Stephensons even lived here briefly!

unfortunately, people will always complain against things like this - for mainly stupid reasons that we all know are nonsense

 

[Bald Rick]

Looking at the properties concerned, and knowing people in the commercial property valuation business, I reckon if the three units were on the open market they‘d sell for a total of around £10m-£15m. However, if you wanted to persuade the owner to sell them, ie not on the open market (as would be the case here), you’d expect to pay a premium of around 20% on that, plus the sellers costs. The mere fact that the project has been investigated at a cursory level is enough to make the owner a ‘reluctant’ seller (as well he ir she might be, fir an extra few million). Add in your own purchasing costs, and it will be nudging £20m.

Then there will be the issue of the Order required under the Transport and Works Act, regardless of whether the land is already in railway possession or notm- assuming that once you own the property that you want to build a railway. Even for something simple like this, it would be several million, and that assumes you don‘t need similar consent for any other part if the line (which I suspect would be required).

Then there‘s the demolition costs, site remediation, and so on. All told, I’d be surprised if just getting a clean canvas to start building the 1/4 mile of new railway would be less than £30m.

 

[duffield]

As a resident of Coalville, I say let’s get on with it. There is an extraordinary amount of complaining in local Facebook groups about how it will ‘kill the town’ or ‘bring in undesirables’, yet the railway (and huge amounts of coal) built this town. The Stephensons even lived here briefly!

"Undesirables"? What do they mean? A few track-bashers like me?
I guess that's understandable.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Looking at the properties concerned, and knowing people in the commercial property valuation business, I reckon if the three units were on the open market they‘d sell for a total of around £10m-£15m. However, if you wanted to persuade the owner to sell them, ie not on the open market (as would be the case here), you’d expect to pay a premium of around 20% on that, plus the sellers costs. The mere fact that the project has been investigated at a cursory level is enough to make the owner a ‘reluctant’ seller (as well he ir she might be, fir an extra few million). Add in your own purchasing costs, and it will be nudging £20m.

Then there will be the issue of the Order required under the Transport and Works Act, regardless of whether the land is already in railway possession or notm- assuming that once you own the property that you want to build a railway. Even for something simple like this, it would be several million, and that assumes you don‘t need similar consent for any other part if the line (which I suspect would be required).

Then there‘s the demolition costs, site remediation, and so on. All told, I’d be surprised if just getting a clean canvas to start building the 1/4 mile of new railway would be less than £30m.

Would it be better to build a single track tunnel of around 750m, including approaches and crossovers?
I understand this restricts capacity in the longer term, but if the costs of acquisition are that high, surely the difference between a tunnel and building on the surface isn't more than 50%?

 

[m0ffy]

"Undesirables"? What do they mean? A few track-bashers like me?
I guess that's understandable.

Outsiders. Can’t have many of those coming here!

 

[Bald Rick]

Would it be better to build a single track tunnel of around 750m, including approaches and crossovers?
I understand this restricts capacity in the longer term, but if the costs of acquisition are that high, surely the difference between a tunnel and building on the surface isn't more than 50%?

I cant see how that would be less than £100m.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I cant see how that would be less than £100m.

But quicker than a CPO perhaps, especially if contested?

 

[The Planner]

But quicker than a CPO perhaps, especially if contested?

You wouldn''t spend the extra £70 million. You would wait and go through the process.

 

[MarkyT]

"Undesirables"? What do they mean? A few track-bashers like me?
I guess that's understandable.

A common thing in the USA, promulgated by The Cato Institute, Heritage Institute and other similar so-called grassroots think tanks/lobbyists who go around stirring up opposition to all forms of public transport on behalf of big car and oil. When there's a vote on a proposal, often the case in some states, these fake parasites organise groups to knock on doors spreading ridiculous fears using dog whistle language to imply blacks and Mexicans are coming for you, who have no idea how to drive, use existing buses or walk so couldn't possibly come into the particular area without the shiny new transport service being proposed. I suspect Tufton St. organisations and similar in the UK have been borrowing the transatlantic playbook.

 

[m0ffy]

A common thing in the USA, promulgated by The Cato Institute, Heritage Institute and other similar so-called grassroots think tanks/lobbyists who go around stirring up opposition to all forms of public transport on behalf of big car and oil. When there's a vote on a proposal, often the case in some states, these fake parasites organise groups to knock on doors spreading ridiculous fears using dog whistle language to imply blacks and Mexicans are coming for you, who have no idea how to drive, use existing buses or walk so couldn't possibly come into the particular area without the shiny new transport service being proposed. I suspect Tufton St. organisations and similar in the UK have been borrowing the transatlantic playbook.

That sums up what I’ve seen, and far more eloquently. The irony is that Coalville has become a dump because of right wing austerity politics, a lack of environmental enforcement against quarrying companies polluting the air, and the continuing economic and social effects of mine closures almost four decades ago (although this is now wildly off topic for this thread).

 

[Bald Rick]

But quicker than a CPO perhaps, especially if contested?

My estimate of costs above for buying the commercial properties do not assume CPO.

 

[AlastairFraser]

My estimate of costs above for buying the commercial properties do not assume CPO.

OK - how would the costs stack up for CPO?

 

[A0wen]

As a resident of Coalville, I say let’s get on with it. There is an extraordinary amount of complaining in local Facebook groups about how it will ‘kill the town’ or ‘bring in undesirables’, yet the railway (and huge amounts of coal) built this town. The Stephensons even lived here briefly!

unfortunately, people will always complain against things like this - for mainly stupid reasons that we all know are nonsense

Outsiders. Can’t have many of those coming here!

A common thing in the USA, promulgated by The Cato Institute, Heritage Institute and other similar so-called grassroots think tanks/lobbyists who go around stirring up opposition to all forms of public transport on behalf of big car and oil. When there's a vote on a proposal, often the case in some states, these fake parasites organise groups to knock on doors spreading ridiculous fears using dog whistle language to imply blacks and Mexicans are coming for you, who have no idea how to drive, use existing buses or walk so couldn't possibly come into the particular area without the shiny new transport service being proposed. I suspect Tufton St. organisations and similar in the UK have been borrowing the transatlantic playbook.

A common thing in the USA, promulgated by The Cato Institute, Heritage Institute and other similar so-called grassroots think tanks/lobbyists who go around stirring up opposition to all forms of public transport on behalf of big car and oil. When there's a vote on a proposal, often the case in some states, these fake parasites organise groups to knock on doors spreading ridiculous fears using dog whistle language to imply blacks and Mexicans are coming for you, who have no idea how to drive, use existing buses or walk so couldn't possibly come into the particular area without the shiny new transport service being proposed. I suspect Tufton St. organisations and similar in the UK have been borrowing the transatlantic playbook.

It's very easy to dismiss those who don't agree with such schemes as "NIMBY's" or similar and claim it's all about stopping outsiders from moving to somewhere like Coalville, but the reality is that a rail reinstatement will lead to extra development, fundamentally changing the character of the town.

Coalville has a population of ~40k currnently - if it were rail connected you could easily see that increase by 50% as there will be a demand for more housing - it's disingneuous of pro rail campaigners to disregard that or claim it won't happen. It's the inevitable outcome of a rail service being restored - as those who live along the route of EWR will find to thier cost in the coming years. Yet too often all the campaigners focus on is 'oh won't it be nice, you'll be able to get the train to 'x'' - the fact that a large proportion of the residents may not want to go there, and the fact that it will lead to more housing in the area and other developments is glossed over.

Now if you live in Coalville, want to travel by train and don't mind your town increasing in size by 50% then fair enough - but don't expect everyone else to see the world the way you do. Equally such growth puts pressure on local services such as doctors surgeries, school places etc, it inevitably causes additional traffic - yes the train will help you get to Leicester or Derby more quickly, but that's not alot of use for a weekly food shop for a family, so those people moving there will drive to Tesco / Asda / Morrisons / Aldi, will drive to Homebase / B&Q when they want bits for their garden or house etc.

Being rail connected isn't all positive - and those who may not think it's a good idea and don't support it aren't being unreasonable.

 

[MarkyT]

It's very easy to dismiss those who don't agree with such schemes as "NIMBY's" or similar and claim it's all about stopping outsiders from moving to somewhere like Coalville, but the reality is that a rail reinstatement will lead to extra development, fundamentally changing the character of the town.

Coalville has a population of ~40k currnently - if it were rail connected you could easily see that increase by 50% as there will be a demand for more housing - it's disingneuous of pro rail campaigners to disregard that or claim it won't happen. It's the inevitable outcome of a rail service being restored - as those who live along the route of EWR will find to thier cost in the coming years. Yet too often all the campaigners focus on is 'oh won't it be nice, you'll be able to get the train to 'x'' - the fact that a large proportion of the residents may not want to go there, and the fact that it will lead to more housing in the area and other developments is glossed over.

Now if you live in Coalville, want to travel by train and don't mind your town increasing in size by 50% then fair enough - but don't expect everyone else to see the world the way you do. Equally such growth puts pressure on local services such as doctors surgeries, school places etc, it inevitably causes additional traffic - yes the train will help you get to Leicester or Derby more quickly, but that's not alot of use for a weekly food shop for a family, so those people moving there will drive to Tesco / Asda / Morrisons / Aldi, will drive to Homebase / B&Q when they want bits for their garden or house etc.

Being rail connected isn't all positive - and those who may not think it's a good idea and don't support it aren't being unreasonable.

I never claimed it was all positive. House prices would likely change with a good transport link of whatever type. That may suit those who want to sell but could start to price out some new buyers. The area might become yet another where children of current residents have to move away to afford housing. It is complicated but I suspect there are professional protesters against rail schemes out there who are not residents of the affected areas. Their motivation for fomenting issues is questionable and it's certainly possible they are being steered by particular interest groups.

 

[A0wen]

I never claimed it was all positive. House prices would likely change with a good transport link of whatever type. That may suit those who want to sell but could start to price out some new buyers. The area might become yet another where children of current residents have to move away to afford housing. It is complicated but I suspect there are professional protesters against rail schemes out there who are not residents of the affected areas. Their motivation for fomenting issues is questionable and it's certainly possible they are being steered by particular interest groups.

Bit in bold - quite alot of the "pro rail" campaigners (or protestors to use your word) are espousing and promoting schemes in places they don't live as well.

 

[m0ffy]

It's very easy to dismiss those who don't agree with such schemes as "NIMBY's" or similar and claim it's all about stopping outsiders from moving to somewhere like Coalville, but the reality is that a rail reinstatement will lead to extra development, fundamentally changing the character of the town.

Coalville has a population of ~40k currnently - if it were rail connected you could easily see that increase by 50% as there will be a demand for more housing - it's disingneuous of pro rail campaigners to disregard that or claim it won't happen. It's the inevitable outcome of a rail service being restored - as those who live along the route of EWR will find to thier cost in the coming years. Yet too often all the campaigners focus on is 'oh won't it be nice, you'll be able to get the train to 'x'' - the fact that a large proportion of the residents may not want to go there, and the fact that it will lead to more housing in the area and other developments is glossed over.

Now if you live in Coalville, want to travel by train and don't mind your town increasing in size by 50% then fair enough - but don't expect everyone else to see the world the way you do. Equally such growth puts pressure on local services such as doctors surgeries, school places etc, it inevitably causes additional traffic - yes the train will help you get to Leicester or Derby more quickly, but that's not alot of use for a weekly food shop for a family, so those people moving there will drive to Tesco / Asda / Morrisons / Aldi, will drive to Homebase / B&Q when they want bits for their garden or house etc.

Being rail connected isn't all positive - and those who may not think it's a good idea and don't support it aren't being unreasonable.

Coalville has expanded in size enormously over the past decade, but our infrastructure hasn’t kept up, and the town centre has seen the same problems as other, similar sized towns. Enhancing the public transport offering could reduce the growing pressures on the A511, but to maximise this effect, the Leicester connection would be needed.

 

[Bald Rick]

OK - how would the costs stack up for CPO?

a bit more, but not much.

 

[chorleyjeff]

Did you not read the previous discussion that I provided a link to?

Why would getting planning permission and CPO cost millions - unless the land to be acquired has a very high development value ?
How much did it cost to for trackwork and signals to reinstate the Todmorden chord ? That may provide a guide.

 

[Bald Rick]

Why would getting planning permission and CPO cost millions

Because it does. (from someone who has been involved in several)

 

[A0wen]

Why would getting planning permission and CPO cost millions - unless the land to be acquired has a very high development value ?
How much did it cost to for trackwork and signals to reinstate the Todmorden chord ? That may provide a guide.

Because when you're using CPO the costs go way beyond the cost of the building and land.

The businesses who need to be relocated would be able to claim costs of relocation, potentially loss of business and disruption to the business. If you have a company with a a £2m turnover - and that's the kind of turnover you'd have from the companies affected there, you can easily see the costs mounting up.

 

[Mr. SW]

Would a certain amount of costs be offset by the improvements being made and planned for the South Leicester area such as four-tracking/junction improvements/electrification? Presumably this would not necessarily apply to the whole line, but even in part? Hmm?

 

[AlastairFraser]

Why would getting planning permission and CPO cost millions - unless the land to be acquired has a very high development value ?
How much did it cost to for trackwork and signals to reinstate the Todmorden chord ? That may provide a guide.

I don't think Todmorden required acquisition of any property (trying to build on any free plot in a lot of the area would be interesting, given the very sharp terrain).

a bit more, but not much.

Perhaps some of the quarry users along the Ivanhoe line would consider making a contribution to a CPO based plan.

 

[zwk500]

Would a certain amount of costs be offset by the improvements being made and planned for the South Leicester area such as four-tracking/junction improvements/electrification? Presumably this would not necessarily apply to the whole line, but even in part? Hmm?

Not a significant amount. You might save something for the junction changes but the land purchase isn't going to be touched by it.

You could reasonably squeeze a 4-car platform on the freight headshunt to give a relatively quick reversal while serving an extra area of South Leicester. Much cheaper than a chord.

 

[MarkyT]

Bit in bold - quite alot of the "pro rail" campaigners (or protestors to use your word) are espousing and promoting schemes in places they don't live as well.

It's the use of lies and fear tactics I object to. A known tactic in the USA when a ballot measure for funding a transit project is launched and they think it will be effective is for certain organisations to flood the town with door knockers armed with copious publications and then use the aforementioned fear tactics to attempt to persuade people to vote against. No pro-rail organisation has the reach and funding to do that sort of direct sustained campaigning.

 

[zwk500]

Perhaps some of the quarry users along the Ivanhoe line would consider making a contribution to a CPO based plan.

Why would they? Their trains can run via Burton and Castle Donnington or run round at Knighton Jn.

 

[MarkyT]

You could reasonably squeeze a 4-car platform on the freight headshunt to give a relatively quick reversal while serving an extra area of South Leicester. Much cheaper than a chord.

And it gives the train somewhere to await its path across the main line that is less noticeable for passengers than a random stop between stations. Possibly somewhere to short turn and even fully detrain in event of extreme late running or other incident. Exit onto Knighton Lane E, many bus routes nearby.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Why would they? Their trains can run via Burton and Castle Donnington or run round at Knighton Jn.

Flexibility, especially if they were asking for extra paths.

 

[A0wen]

Flexibility, especially if they were asking for extra paths.

Still doesn't make sense - the Coalville line isn't exactly over-run with trains now and an hourly passenger service isn't exactly going to change that.

So if you're a quarry owner who's being asked to pay up for rail improvements which don't actually benefit you, you might just decide not to ship your goods by rail any linger and save yourself some money.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Still doesn't make sense - the Coalville line isn't exactly over-run with trains now and an hourly passenger service isn't exactly going to change that.

So if you're a quarry owner who's being asked to pay up for rail improvements which don't actually benefit you, you might just decide not to ship your goods by rail any linger and save yourself some money.

Given the salary of goods wagon drivers at the moment, it would take a lot for people to switch.
It's less about the Coalville line itself, more about the ability to head directly through Leicester and east towards the ECML.