#ertarail The English Regional Transport Association (ERTA) is a nationwide membership based association independent of management or unions. We are committed to seeking local, conventional rail links restored and improved across the English Regions including and mainly reopenings, rebuilds and select new builds.
In the north, we wish to see the following lines rebuilt: Keswick, Colne-Skipton, York-Beverley, Harrogate-Ripon-Northallerton, Matlock-Buxton/Chinley and finally the Woodhead line.
We are concerned that as population rises and (in normal times) traffic and development inform more of each other, we need to embrace that these select rail links could find a new role in today's society and going forwards.
The past is one thing, but you cannot live on just nostalgia nor scenery. The railways help to reduce road traffic, cut congestion, save precious land and beauty spots from being overrun by endless demands for land for parking, when there's a need for that same land to be used for other things beit employment, housing, landscape or conservation.
I appeal to your support especially reopening the Woodhead line:
1. It would take on the following roads A628 direct, M62, M1, A629, A6018.
2. It would give more rail capacity between Sheffield and Manchester
3. It could handle freight and passenger demand
4. It could have a new tunnel and realignments where necessary or expedient.
5. It would feed and be fed by other local and regional rail links enabling more by rail overall.
6. It is not just a local consideration, but part of a land bridge between Europe/North Sea/Hull and the North East to Liverpool/North west/Atlantic and America potentially, ship to rail and vice versa.
7. Rail is the best way to conserve the best of our National Parks in a sustainable fashion, checking volumes, cutting pollution and informing footfall and spending minus the traffic.
We are concerned about HS3 and High Speed generally, being expensive, serving mainly passenger only, wide gaps between principal stations, leaves all in between to whatever rail exists or default road more. We believe that lines like Woodhead need:
1. Protection from further erosion/intrusion/keeping open for potential re-railing
2. Please round table and apply to the Government's Rail Study Fund for informing a pot to commission a study to evaluate it, compare it and see what is to be gained on and off the rails.
3. We believe in a mindset which seeks to overcome the problems of reopening this rail link, and looks at the wider gains and the throw-away of an asset which stood for many decades and survived Beeching only to be axed under the Serpell Closures of the early 1980's. There was no democracy about the closures, they were implemented often against local people's wishes by stealth and the result is we are poorer and less equipped now in a time and situation whereby we need these strategic rail links and the benefits they afford.
When unlock is lifted and things get back to some sort of normal, we hope to table forums and meetings to bring people together. Meanwhile we urge councils to talk together, work together and put this rail link at the centre of revival and regeneration plans please.
It is an investment in ourselves. Thank you.
Yours sincerely,
Richard Pill
ERTA Chairman
MAKE YOUR VIEWS KNOWN NOW AND STOP A THREAT TO WOODHEAD RAIL ROUTE EVER RE-OPENING DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS 25 MAY
Below see Don Valley Railway’s objection to plans to mlayhigh voltage cables along the potential route of a re-instatement proposal East of Dunford Bridge…
-------------------------
I write as chair of Don Valley Railway. We are a campaign group seeking to reopen to the currently freight-only railway line to passenger traffic between Sheffield and Stocksbridge. This section forms part of the former Great Central Woodhead Rail Route, similar to the section of the Transpennine Trail proposed for undergrounding cables as part of this application.
Many of our supporters feel strongly that Woodhead Railway linking Sheffield and Manchester should not have been closed and that it should be preserved for reinstatement at some stage. In addition, should the Woodhead Rail route be re-opened this will make this will either achieve Don Valley Railway’s objectives or at least make them far easier to achieve, therefore we do not wish to see anything get in the way of this occurring.
In my former capacity working for the Peak Park Transport Forum, BMBC representatives informed me that after closure, their purchase of the route was for the express purpose of preserving it for rail reinstatement.
More lately Sheffield City Region’s transport strategy states that the Hope Valley Line should be used to link the two City Regions, however if this is not possible, that other options should be considered – the only other existing option possible, without considerable infrastructure work, being along this, the Woodhead Route.
In 2013 ahead of cables transferring from the Victorian Woodhead Tunnels to the 1954 built replacement tunnel, a study was undertaken by the Government body that existed at the time, Northern Way. This went into details as to the consideration of how far if at all those plans would compromise the ability to reinstate the Woodhead route as a rail Route.
This study went into detail as to how the tunnels could be used in future for rail and came to the conclusion that it was still possible to develop transport options along the route along side the undergrounding of cables.
For this application a short note has been presented to establish if these works would similarly impact on any future aspiration to reinstate the Woodhead Railway, as speculatively suggested in Sheffield City Region’s Transport strategy.
Within this it claims that… “The Northern Powerhouse Rail Director explained in The Sheffield Star on 4 January 2020, that the Woodhead route has already been looked at and discounted because re-opening it would cost too much; and that Transport for the North is focused on the Hope Valley line for improvements to journey times between Sheffield and Manchester…”
In this regard it is noted that a lack of certainty or scale exists with regards to the City Region aims to improve rail and transport links between Sheffield and Manchester City Regions. Currently a plan for a £30m upgrade of the South Transpennine corridor (Hope Valley Line) which is struggling to be implemented is the sum total of this. For Sheffield City Region to gain the necessary connectivity to flourish it is our view that these are out of scale with aspirations to improve transport links between other city regions.
In comparison with Manchester-Leeds City Region links plans for a £3billlion upgrade of the North Transpennine corridor services are under development, not to mention Northern Powerhouse Rail’s aspirations for a high speed line between Leeds and Manchester via Bradford. It is also worth noting a similar gulf exists between the quality of alternative transport facilities (road) between the corridors; compare the M62 with the A628.
Don Valley Railway would argue that if the Northern Powerhouse Rail Director Quoted’s views are as expressed in this document, they should be discounted as in comparison with other parts of The North of England they do not place an acceptable level of weight on the importance of Sheffield to Manchester City Region links to this part of the North of England and rather than aiding its economic rebalancing are acting against it.
It should be noted also that at the moment there are opportunities to develop large rail schemes. On announcing the go-ahead on HS2 Phase 1 and 2a to Birmingham and Crewe Boris Johnson stated that with regards to the remaining sections to Leeds and Manchester that these will be redeveloped to better fit within Northern Powerhouse Rail aspirations; i.e. better links into northern cities and towns. With this re-visitation, revised plans for rail could be progressed, and this section of former line may make a vital contribution to that process.
To demonstrate that this development does not have consequences that could have negative impacts on the environment and local economies in South Yorkshire and East Manchester, it is assumed that if a proposal comes forward to re-open the line that the public purse should pick up a bill of £35million at current prices. Stating that this will be an insignificant amount if part of the cost of a rail reopening scheme. Please note that this amount is larger than the total current budget allocated to improve the South Transpennine links. With regard to OfGem’s requirement of National Grid to ensure it operates in the interest of its shareholders, it would be preferred if a condition is put in place to ensure that National Grid shareholders pick up this additional cost in the future (rather than taxpayers) should a proposal come forward. In addition, we would require that that amount of money is not included in costs in any Cost-Benefit appraisal analysis of a future scheme.
There is also the matter that the £35,000,000 price tag is almost certain to be much higher as having removed pylons it is unlikely that the Peak District National Park authority would sanction their re-instatement should this occur. Installing new lines via another underground route will be more expensive. For example the £50million scheme to install cables through the Woodhead Tunnel would have cost only £18million if via Pylons. So what they are proposing puts a financial risk on to the public purse in excess of £100,000,000.
Alternatively a plan demonstrating that a rail alignment is retained along the trail, and/or, information detailing that if installed compromising such a route that it is economic and feasible to move the facility at reasonable cost. Ideally this should establish a route alignment to be preserved.
Don Valley Railway object to these proposals and will not withdraw our objection until a workable plan to ensure that the rail alignment is preserved is produced.
