New county train station a good idea, says Government

Worcester News: Third city station a good idea, says Government Third city station a good idea, says Government

HOPES of a new rail station for Worcestershire have had a huge boost after the Government backed the idea of services from Norton.

The Department for Transport (DfT) has finally showed its hand over Norton Parkway, saying there is a “positive financial and economic case” for it.

It has also urged Worcestershire County Council to continue working on the idea, which has been 30 years in the making.

Norton Parkway would give Worcestershire access to long-distance trains currently bypassing the area, including Birmingham to London services.

The DfT is inviting bids from train operators to run the Cotswold Line, which goes from Worcester to London, from 2013-2028.

A document published for the benefit of operators mentions Norton Parkway for the first time. It says the bidders are being asked to talk to council chiefs over the possibility of running extra services from a new, third station at Norton.

City MP Robin Walker said: “There is clearly a financial case for Norton Parkway and it’s great the information is now being shared with all parties. We need to show the train operating companies this station would be worth the effort – and clearly it would.

“I know the county council has strengthened the business case in recent years and I’m delighted we’ve got to this stage as we all want to see it happen.”

First Great Western, GW Trains, National Express and Stagecoach have been shortlisted as the four bidders for the Cotswold Line, with a winner due to be announced in October.

All have been shown data on Norton Parkway.

If the council can get funding to build the station “at some point during the life of the franchise”, the Cotswold Line operator should look at using it, says the DfT document.

How the station will be paid for is undecided, but the onus will be on the operator to pay most of the costs, with money from the Government and council.

County council deputy leader Councillor Simon Geraghty said: “We’re clearly at the stage now where the case is being made very strongly.”

Comments (19)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:16am Wed 1 Aug 12

keeneye says...

Come on Mr Geraghty so far so good make your mark
Come on Mr Geraghty so far so good make your mark keeneye

11:24am Wed 1 Aug 12

mayall8808 says...

Yet more PR rubbish for this so called project, its been going on now for 30 or more years and what a waste of taxpayers money again going for the convienence of the few, pathetic and Mr Walker, if this can be afforded why cant you get the money into the system getting people back to work instead of just messing with another waste of time?
Yet more PR rubbish for this so called project, its been going on now for 30 or more years and what a waste of taxpayers money again going for the convienence of the few, pathetic and Mr Walker, if this can be afforded why cant you get the money into the system getting people back to work instead of just messing with another waste of time? mayall8808

11:37am Wed 1 Aug 12

MrStJohns says...

mayall8808 wrote:
Yet more PR rubbish for this so called project, its been going on now for 30 or more years and what a waste of taxpayers money again going for the convienence of the few, pathetic and Mr Walker, if this can be afforded why cant you get the money into the system getting people back to work instead of just messing with another waste of time?
Im not sure you’ve grasped the concept of economic benefits, in layman’s terms it basically means a new station would more than likely make Worcester and surrounding areas more attractive to business etc which in turn would provide jobs, which would get people back into work.



Great idea and can only benefit the local economy.
[quote][p][bold]mayall8808[/bold] wrote: Yet more PR rubbish for this so called project, its been going on now for 30 or more years and what a waste of taxpayers money again going for the convienence of the few, pathetic and Mr Walker, if this can be afforded why cant you get the money into the system getting people back to work instead of just messing with another waste of time?[/p][/quote]Im not sure you’ve grasped the concept of economic benefits, in layman’s terms it basically means a new station would more than likely make Worcester and surrounding areas more attractive to business etc which in turn would provide jobs, which would get people back into work. Great idea and can only benefit the local economy. MrStJohns

12:14pm Wed 1 Aug 12

Hwicce says...

Yawn, heard it all before, for 30 odd years now.

I'm afraid I'll believe it when I see it. They can spend £2,000,000,000 on HS2 but can't build a station at Norton for love nor money.
Yawn, heard it all before, for 30 odd years now. I'm afraid I'll believe it when I see it. They can spend £2,000,000,000 on HS2 but can't build a station at Norton for love nor money. Hwicce

1:48pm Wed 1 Aug 12

MrsStJohns says...

MrStJohns wrote:
mayall8808 wrote:
Yet more PR rubbish for this so called project, its been going on now for 30 or more years and what a waste of taxpayers money again going for the convienence of the few, pathetic and Mr Walker, if this can be afforded why cant you get the money into the system getting people back to work instead of just messing with another waste of time?
Im not sure you’ve grasped the concept of economic benefits, in layman’s terms it basically means a new station would more than likely make Worcester and surrounding areas more attractive to business etc which in turn would provide jobs, which would get people back into work.



Great idea and can only benefit the local economy.
Research on Thame, Warwick & Bristol Parkways showed no benefit to the local community/economy other than those who lived in the sticks and wanted a more convenient train station to park at for their commute to London.

Normal MrStJohns claptrap
[quote][p][bold]MrStJohns[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mayall8808[/bold] wrote: Yet more PR rubbish for this so called project, its been going on now for 30 or more years and what a waste of taxpayers money again going for the convienence of the few, pathetic and Mr Walker, if this can be afforded why cant you get the money into the system getting people back to work instead of just messing with another waste of time?[/p][/quote]Im not sure you’ve grasped the concept of economic benefits, in layman’s terms it basically means a new station would more than likely make Worcester and surrounding areas more attractive to business etc which in turn would provide jobs, which would get people back into work. Great idea and can only benefit the local economy.[/p][/quote]Research on Thame, Warwick & Bristol Parkways showed no benefit to the local community/economy other than those who lived in the sticks and wanted a more convenient train station to park at for their commute to London. Normal MrStJohns claptrap MrsStJohns

1:48pm Wed 1 Aug 12

Fishy says...

Why do we need a new station? Shrub hill is suitably placed on the network and could surely be extended into that derelict goods yard behind it.
Why do we need a new station? Shrub hill is suitably placed on the network and could surely be extended into that derelict goods yard behind it. Fishy

1:59pm Wed 1 Aug 12

well travelled lad says...

it all sounds promising but when the government is wasting money all the time going abroad instead of looking after his own country where is the money going to come from we are in a recession for goodness sake which means a huge shortage of money in my book
it all sounds promising but when the government is wasting money all the time going abroad instead of looking after his own country where is the money going to come from we are in a recession for goodness sake which means a huge shortage of money in my book well travelled lad

3:40pm Wed 1 Aug 12

Fishy says...

MrsStJohns wrote:
MrStJohns wrote:
mayall8808 wrote: Yet more PR rubbish for this so called project, its been going on now for 30 or more years and what a waste of taxpayers money again going for the convienence of the few, pathetic and Mr Walker, if this can be afforded why cant you get the money into the system getting people back to work instead of just messing with another waste of time?
Im not sure you’ve grasped the concept of economic benefits, in layman’s terms it basically means a new station would more than likely make Worcester and surrounding areas more attractive to business etc which in turn would provide jobs, which would get people back into work. Great idea and can only benefit the local economy.
Research on Thame, Warwick & Bristol Parkways showed no benefit to the local community/economy other than those who lived in the sticks and wanted a more convenient train station to park at for their commute to London. Normal MrStJohns claptrap
Bristol already had a station used by cross country trains - Worcester dosn't!
[quote][p][bold]MrsStJohns[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MrStJohns[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mayall8808[/bold] wrote: Yet more PR rubbish for this so called project, its been going on now for 30 or more years and what a waste of taxpayers money again going for the convienence of the few, pathetic and Mr Walker, if this can be afforded why cant you get the money into the system getting people back to work instead of just messing with another waste of time?[/p][/quote]Im not sure you’ve grasped the concept of economic benefits, in layman’s terms it basically means a new station would more than likely make Worcester and surrounding areas more attractive to business etc which in turn would provide jobs, which would get people back into work. Great idea and can only benefit the local economy.[/p][/quote]Research on Thame, Warwick & Bristol Parkways showed no benefit to the local community/economy other than those who lived in the sticks and wanted a more convenient train station to park at for their commute to London. Normal MrStJohns claptrap[/p][/quote]Bristol already had a station used by cross country trains - Worcester dosn't! Fishy

6:36pm Wed 1 Aug 12

MulsanneChap says...

"Norton Parkway would give Worcester access to long-distance trains currently bypassing the city, including Birmingham to London services." Unless I'm mistaken, all Birmingham to London services are either from New Street to Euston via the West Coast mainline or Snow Hill to Marylebone via the Chiltern Line, not the Cross Country Line which Worcester Parkway would be on.

Rather than build a new dedicated station which would only have the rail service benefit of attracting Cross Country services, why not make a concerted effort to bring these services to Shrub Hill Station, a station that is ideally located and is readilly and easily accessible by all modes of travel for all residents of Worcester. It's city centre location is also ideal for visitors. The station has the capacity for extra platforms, and extra parking could be made available too if car use to the station is to be encouraged.

And if extra jouney times are an issue for the Cross Country operator while travelling to/from Shrub Hill via Norton juncton and Stoke Prior junction, why not upgrade the line from these junctions to Worcester to enable trains to travel faster, up to their 125mph operating speed. I doubt the cost of lime improvements would be any more than building a new parkway-type station.
"Norton Parkway would give Worcester access to long-distance trains currently bypassing the city, including Birmingham to London services." Unless I'm mistaken, all Birmingham to London services are either from New Street to Euston via the West Coast mainline or Snow Hill to Marylebone via the Chiltern Line, not the Cross Country Line which Worcester Parkway would be on. Rather than build a new dedicated station which would only have the rail service benefit of attracting Cross Country services, why not make a concerted effort to bring these services to Shrub Hill Station, a station that is ideally located and is readilly and easily accessible by all modes of travel for all residents of Worcester. It's city centre location is also ideal for visitors. The station has the capacity for extra platforms, and extra parking could be made available too if car use to the station is to be encouraged. And if extra jouney times are an issue for the Cross Country operator while travelling to/from Shrub Hill via Norton juncton and Stoke Prior junction, why not upgrade the line from these junctions to Worcester to enable trains to travel faster, up to their 125mph operating speed. I doubt the cost of lime improvements would be any more than building a new parkway-type station. MulsanneChap

11:42pm Wed 1 Aug 12

John Herbert Smith says...

There are two problems. Firstly, Worcester probably can't support more than two stations - it's not that big a city, so Shrub Hill would have to close. Not too bad for many, but is there capacity at Foregate?

Secondly, there is no guarentee that CrossCountry would stop. The Cardiff to Nottingham trains don't even stop at Ashchurch and the Bristol to Manchester ones avoid Gloucester to save time. What makes people think they'd want to stop.

The gov would have to force the TOC to stop in the franchise agreement.
There are two problems. Firstly, Worcester probably can't support more than two stations - it's not that big a city, so Shrub Hill would have to close. Not too bad for many, but is there capacity at Foregate? Secondly, there is no guarentee that CrossCountry would stop. The Cardiff to Nottingham trains don't even stop at Ashchurch and the Bristol to Manchester ones avoid Gloucester to save time. What makes people think they'd want to stop. The gov would have to force the TOC to stop in the franchise agreement. John Herbert Smith

7:32am Thu 2 Aug 12

mayall8808 says...

Normal MrStJohns claptrap

I agree i think he has missed concept?
It wont happen it will not be cost affective and why not upgrade whats already in exsistence?
Normal MrStJohns claptrap I agree i think he has missed concept? It wont happen it will not be cost affective and why not upgrade whats already in exsistence? mayall8808

9:30am Thu 2 Aug 12

well travelled lad says...

wouldn't it be a better idea to completley upgrade shrub hill to a high standared rather than to let it go to wrack and ruin and to put it back to a lovely station than the eyesore it is at the moment it doesnt have a good impact on worcester. The railways charge enough for the trains so they could afford to put it back to how it should be i.e put a glass roof isn't it over the rails
wouldn't it be a better idea to completley upgrade shrub hill to a high standared rather than to let it go to wrack and ruin and to put it back to a lovely station than the eyesore it is at the moment it doesnt have a good impact on worcester. The railways charge enough for the trains so they could afford to put it back to how it should be i.e put a glass roof isn't it over the rails well travelled lad

10:22am Thu 2 Aug 12

worcswolf says...

Before the station is built you need to get a commitment from the train operating companies to actually serve the station. I cannot see that happening. Their are plans for a new station and electrification down to bromsgrove in the next 5 years and the cost of the land at Norton alone will be a stumbling block. Shrub hill upgrade with parking in the old goods yard would be better with better platform lengths upto Birmingham would be better use of any money.
Before the station is built you need to get a commitment from the train operating companies to actually serve the station. I cannot see that happening. Their are plans for a new station and electrification down to bromsgrove in the next 5 years and the cost of the land at Norton alone will be a stumbling block. Shrub hill upgrade with parking in the old goods yard would be better with better platform lengths upto Birmingham would be better use of any money. worcswolf

10:39am Thu 2 Aug 12

brooksider says...

worcswolf wrote:
Before the station is built you need to get a commitment from the train operating companies to actually serve the station. I cannot see that happening. Their are plans for a new station and electrification down to bromsgrove in the next 5 years and the cost of the land at Norton alone will be a stumbling block. Shrub hill upgrade with parking in the old goods yard would be better with better platform lengths upto Birmingham would be better use of any money.
Doesn't Stennard Harrison own the land where the proposed station will be?
If so, price is not a problem as it will be in his interests to make it happen.
[quote][p][bold]worcswolf[/bold] wrote: Before the station is built you need to get a commitment from the train operating companies to actually serve the station. I cannot see that happening. Their are plans for a new station and electrification down to bromsgrove in the next 5 years and the cost of the land at Norton alone will be a stumbling block. Shrub hill upgrade with parking in the old goods yard would be better with better platform lengths upto Birmingham would be better use of any money.[/p][/quote]Doesn't Stennard Harrison own the land where the proposed station will be? If so, price is not a problem as it will be in his interests to make it happen. brooksider

7:35am Fri 3 Aug 12

mayall8808 says...

How much time and money has been spent over the 30 plus years by W County C to get nowhere on this, its a complete nonstarter it will not be cost effective and its only support is by the few.
How much time and money has been spent over the 30 plus years by W County C to get nowhere on this, its a complete nonstarter it will not be cost effective and its only support is by the few. mayall8808

12:56pm Mon 6 Aug 12

Marrowman says...

Sorry mayall8808, I think you're probably wrong. It seems to be Worcs CC's number 1 transport priority (looking at their local transport plan), so I'm guessing that must mean that all the Councillors (and their constituents) must want it.

The reason Shrub Hill isn't suitable isn't the station itself. It is the long section of single-track line between Droitwich and Bromsgrove, as well as the steep curves in Droitwich which would cost an absolute fortune to rebuild to modern standards required by intercity rolling stock. As such, building a 'Worcestershire' Parkway station at Norton would be a cheaper way of giving South Worcestershire access to cross-city services.

Personally, I think it's a total joke that Worcester has no direct access to intercity rail services. I'm glad that national government recognises it.

I also think it's a total joke that Worcester News keeps wibbling on about a 'Norton Parkway' - hello?!? Why on earth would you want to align a strategic station like this with tiny little Norton? (I can only guess one of your reporters lives there, and so wants his/her house price to rise accordingly...) This is a station for the people of Worcester and South Worcestershire: give it the cred it deserves please.
Sorry mayall8808, I think you're probably wrong. It seems to be Worcs CC's number 1 transport priority (looking at their local transport plan), so I'm guessing that must mean that all the Councillors (and their constituents) must want it. The reason Shrub Hill isn't suitable isn't the station itself. It is the long section of single-track line between Droitwich and Bromsgrove, as well as the steep curves in Droitwich which would cost an absolute fortune to rebuild to modern standards required by intercity rolling stock. As such, building a 'Worcestershire' Parkway station at Norton would be a cheaper way of giving South Worcestershire access to cross-city services. Personally, I think it's a total joke that Worcester has no direct access to intercity rail services. I'm glad that national government recognises it. I also think it's a total joke that Worcester News keeps wibbling on about a 'Norton Parkway' - hello?!? Why on earth would you want to align a strategic station like this with tiny little Norton? (I can only guess one of your reporters lives there, and so wants his/her house price to rise accordingly...) This is a station for the people of Worcester and South Worcestershire: give it the cred it deserves please. Marrowman

12:54pm Tue 7 Aug 12

MJI says...

Gloucester - since down to one station very slow to serve as trains have to reverse.
.
Worcester loop is slow to use.
.
Two county cities bypassed by lots of trains as they cause too much of a slow down.
.
Most stop at Cheltenham, so a station on the main line will be very usefull
Gloucester - since down to one station very slow to serve as trains have to reverse. . Worcester loop is slow to use. . Two county cities bypassed by lots of trains as they cause too much of a slow down. . Most stop at Cheltenham, so a station on the main line will be very usefull MJI

10:14pm Tue 7 Aug 12

Essinay says...

Do not under-estimate the extent to which train services are micro-managed by the Department of Transport. If it decides that a station is needed then the operators WILL stop there. Make no doubts about that: it will be built into their licences. I suspect that the detractors of the idea don't travel by train to the north, beyond Birmingham, or to the south west or to south Wales. If they did they would see the station as invaluable.
Do not under-estimate the extent to which train services are micro-managed by the Department of Transport. If it decides that a station is needed then the operators WILL stop there. Make no doubts about that: it will be built into their licences. I suspect that the detractors of the idea don't travel by train to the north, beyond Birmingham, or to the south west or to south Wales. If they did they would see the station as invaluable. Essinay

6:28pm Sat 11 Aug 12

well travelled lad says...

I think that another station would be a bad idea as those who cannot afford their own transport and who live in the town which is far more than those living in Norton wouldnt get any use out of it at all so i still say upgrade Shrubb Hill station it is sadly neglected since it was vandalised back in the past by so called bosses by demolishing the roof on a listed building and it has not been rectified or looked after since
I think that another station would be a bad idea as those who cannot afford their own transport and who live in the town which is far more than those living in Norton wouldnt get any use out of it at all so i still say upgrade Shrubb Hill station it is sadly neglected since it was vandalised back in the past by so called bosses by demolishing the roof on a listed building and it has not been rectified or looked after since well travelled lad

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