The Gloucester Railway Triangle Action Group (TAG): August 2011

Tuesday 30 August 2011

Letter of objection to Planning Application 11/00902/OUT

The Planning Committee

Gloucester City Council

Herbert Warehouse

The Docks

Gloucester GL1 2EQ

30^th August 2011

Dear Sir,

Planning Application 11/00902/OUT

I write with regard to the planning application for the development of land within the railway triangle at Gloucester by LXB.

Most trains to the north east and to the north west used to stop in Gloucester. They do so no more. The last one was the 07:02 hrs to Edinburgh. Now, to catch the same train one needs to catch the 06:01 hrs and change at Cheltenham Spa; so much for speeding up the trains.

Four platforms at the north east vertex of the triangle would accommodate north – south trains, south – north trains, and trains to and from South Wales. The bulk of the infrastructure would be within the triangle with plenty of space for shops and businesses to be incorporated into the station; perhaps funded by the developer.

A station at the triangle would make an ideal changing point. One could alight from a London – Cheltenham Spa train and just walk across to get a connection to Lydney and beyond. Some trains could stop at both Gloucester stations, as they do in Worcester.

The track work is already in place, together with most of the signalling.

Long distance trains may then, once again, stop in Gloucester. At present, the only ones to do so are those between Gloucester and London Paddington.

I therefore strongly object to the development at the location proposed.

So, I am asking the Planning Committee to, please:

Reject the Planning Application and ask the Developers to investigate land that would not impinge on the best location for a station to serve Gloucester, Gloucestershire and the Forest of Dean but to include provision for a station at the north east vertex.

Insist that a Section 106 Clause be inserted into any planning consent obliging any development to preserve a suitable piece of land, incorporating access, at the north east vertex of the triangle.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully

F B Cowell C.Eng.,M.I.Mech.E.,M.A.Cost E.

Friday 26 August 2011

Letter of objection to planning application 11/00902/OUT

The Secretary,

Planning Committee,

Gloucester City Council,

Herbert Warehouse,

The Docks,

Gloucester GL1 2EQ

Dear Sir,

Ref : Planning Application 11/00902/OUT

I write with reference to the above planning application for development of land within the railway triangle at Gloucester by LXB, and wish to object to these plans for the following reasons.

Small shop keepers in the city centre are already suffering from an over-supply of large supermarkets and a recent survey by The Citizen found that 1 in 8 (12.5%) small retail premises in the city centre are now vacant. This situation can only be exacerbated by the construction of a large supermarket within the triangle of land. Gloucester has already large supermarkets in:-

(a) City centre, Northgate Street, (Sainsbury)

(b) City centre, Bruton Way (Asda)

(d) St Oswald’s (Tesco) (and with a further large expansion planned),

(e) Brockworth (Tesco)

(f) Tredworth (Tesco express)

(g) Abbeydale (Morrisons)

(h) Abbeydale (Tesco express)

(i) Quedleley (Tesco)

(j) Longlevens (Co-op)

(k) Hucclecote (Co-op 2 stores)

This represents 12 supermarkets serving a city population of about 125,000 or about 1 supermarket per 10,000 citizens – surely an over-abundance already?

There has been very understandable and considerable opposition to the construction of yet another supermarket in Gloucester, whilst on the other hand, there is a growing swell of opinion that a new mainline rail station should be built and would bring welcome economic benefits to the city.

The reason is clear - Gloucester is by-passed by many rail services particularly in the Birmingham, Bristol direction where passengers from Gloucester face the inconvenience of changing trains at Cheltenham. This is to the detriment of the potential business and tourist growth of the city. The estimated cost of a new railway station (£30 million) is only about a quarter of the annual amount which the city earns from tourism (£120 million in 2009). A new station therefore represents real value for money and would increase commerce and tourism in the whole county.

With the on-going re-doubling of the track between Kemble and Swindon an enhanced train service from Cheltenham to London is likely to be offered, but it is unlikely that many of these extra trains will call at Gloucester because the current station is not on the main line.

The case for a new station was given in a letter to Mr Ian Mean, Editor, The Citizen (letter attached), most of which was published on 10 August).

Network Rail appears to have a negative and very limited view of this matter, which is very disappointing in view of the recent McNulty report which predicts a potential doubling of UK rail traffic volume by 2030. (In fact Network Rail were criticised in the McNulty Report for being too centralist and being out of touch with Train Operating Companies and the rail travelling public.)

I also ask you to note that in the minutes of Gloucester City Panning Policy Sub Committee meeting held on Thursday 13 January 2011, at 18:30, the statement is made that the site is contaminated (Agenda Item 2, pages 10, 15, 19, 20, 39). However no mention is made about the degree or nature of contamination, nor I believe is there any mention of any survey results to hand. I am therefore astonished that so much planning work could have been done without a thorough survey of the whole 90 acres of this land.

I find it puzzling that whilst there is no mention of housing in the application title of 11/00902/OUT, there is such a mention in the Council meeting of 13 January 2011. The minutes refer to ‘high quality residential’ (Agenda Item 2, pages 16 and 21, and the Gloucester Renaissance letter of 11 January 2011). How does potential ‘high quality residential [housing]’ square up with [admittedly] contaminated land?

I cannot see how either plans can be drawn up, or timeframe or cost of construction can be given for any development until a full survey has been undertaken and its findings made known and evaluated.

I understand the land in question belongs to Network Rail and is therefore still public property. If so, it should not be sold to third parties without the widest possible consultation and agreement which in my view has not been done.

I therefore wish to register formally my objection to this application and ask the planning committee:-

(a) To recognize that this land is of such long term strategic importance for Gloucester’s connection with the national railway network that the Secretary of State for Environment should call in the application for a public inquiry.

(b) If (a) above is not possible for any reason, to reject the current proposals,

(c) If (a) above is not possible , to immediately safeguard the north east apex of the triangle with a Section 106 clause inserted in the conditions of use of this land for the sole use of becoming a four platformed mainline railway station, the clause remaining in force until such time a new station is constructed,

(d) To immediately ask for help from the Minister of Transport in reversing Network Rail’s present position of refusing to help Gloucester in the building of a new station and also to ask the Minister to consider financing the construction of such a station,

(e) To consider building (in order of importance):

(i) A new four platformed mainline railway station, with parking space,

(ii) A new bus station/terminus with integrated access, parking, etc.,

(iii) A new fire station,

(iv) Possible extensions to Gloucester Royal Hospital,

(v) Cafés, parks, trees and gardens with pedestrian access only,

(vi) Other buildings deemed of benefit to the Gloucester community.

Yours faithfully,

J P N Edwards

Attachment - Letter to Mr Ian Mean, Editor, The Citizen, Gloucester

Mr Ian Mean,

Editor,

The Citizen,

6 – 8 The Oxebode,

Gloucester GL1 1RZ.

Dear Mr Mean,

The Gloucester Railway Triangle – the pressing need for a new station

Gloucester’s railway triangle has an area of nearly 27 acres and is located within surrounding land to give a total area of about 90 acres. Within the triangle there were once railway workshops, sidings, etc.. The regeneration of this land presents the city and its neighbours with a once in a lifetime chance of changing this brown field site for the better, so it is important to have the widest consultation in this matter and above all make the right decisions.

Two of the authors of this article have worked for a total of eighteen years in the railway industry in and around Gloucester.

We believe that the railways are a national strategic asset and should remain and be developed as such. What is required with this development is a leap of intelligent imagination on the one hand and a firm and enquiring mind on the other.

A new main line railway station is required principally because Gloucester is currently off the main Birmingham – Bristol line, which means that trains which call at Gloucester usually have to reverse. Only trains that continue on the Gloucester - Newport route do not have to reverse. This situation means that Gloucester is bypassed by most long distance trains travelling north/south. For example, even the Cheltenham – Gloucester – Paddington trains would be quicker and more convenient with a new station, since the trains entering (or leaving) Gloucester would not waste time and effort reversing direction to continue onwards.

During 2009/10 Gloucester’s railway station was used by over 1.1 million passengers compared with the figure of nearly 7.9 million for Bristol Temple Meads and over 25 million for Birmingham New Street. Cheltenham had almost 1.6 million passengers in the same period, despite having a slightly smaller population. These figures are worth keeping in mind because the recently published McNulty report identifies the potential of rail traffic to double in the UK by 2030 – now less than 20 years away.

The Gloucester Heritage and Regeneration Company (GHURC) and Gloucester city councillors have been informed by Network Rail that cost is one of the main factors in rejecting proposals for a new station construction. We believe that Gloucester city councillors, our Gloucester MP and the GHURC should have been far more robust in not taking ‘no’ for an answer from Network Rail. Our reasons are easy to find and not too far away, as a web search of Network Rail’s own and other sites reveal recent and future expenditure. For example, Reading station has an ongoing upgrade programme costing £850 million, Newport has had a £22 million revamp, with monies from Network Rail, the Welsh Assembly and Arriva Trains Wales, and Birmingham New Street Station and environs are undergoing a £600 million transformation. Even these sums pale into insignificance compared with the proposed new national high speed rail link HSR2, estimated to cost in the region of £15.8 - £17.4 billion. A new station at Gloucester costing say, £30 million, would be less than 0.2% of the proposed HSR2 link, and certainly much less than the error margins for the HSR2 proposal. These figures are given to indicate what levels of expenditures are being made elsewhere, and we do not suggest that funds are solely from Network Rail’s budget.

As part of the city centre regeneration, the railway triangle could not only accommodate a new railway station, but also a new bus station, hotel, tourist office, café, car and coach parks, a new fire station, and last but not least, a small park with flower beds and trees to welcome visitors to Gloucester. A frequent shuttle service from the triangle to the city centre could be easily incorporated. In our view a ‘railway parkway’ solution is not a realistic option for the city’s needs.

If we as a city are to encourage tourism, business and commerce, we must first have the infrastructure in place such as transport, parking, public toilets, hotels and welcoming open areas with seating places, otherwise visitors will come once, never to return. As a yardstick, Gloucester Cathedral usually has about 300,000 visitors annually, but last year this number rose to 426,000 due to the 2010 Three Choirs Festival and the critically acclaimed Crucible (sculpture) exhibition, the latter attracting around 57,000 visitors during its 9½ week duration. It has been estimated that in 2009 Gloucester attracted about 2 million visitors bringing around £108 million into the local economy. It is therefore imperative that we have the infrastructure in place to transport and make visitors welcome.

We believe the best location of a new railway station would be within and adjacent to the north-east apex of the triangle. A triangular shaped station with four platforms could be dovetailed between existing railway tracks. Objections have been given by Network Rail that they would have to purchase land on the east side of the main north-south line in order to facilitate passengers. We disagree with this argument, and would suggest that only a width of land not much wider than a passenger platform is required on the east side of this track.

Another objection raised by Network Rail against additional trains stopping at Gloucester is the impact they would have upon the existing timetable. In one sense this argument is valid - any new station no matter where it is in the country will have an impact, but on the other hand when one recalls that most trains waiting at large stations such as Bristol Temple Meads and Birmingham New Street are standing stationary typically for ten or more minutes, a small reduction in these standing times at these stations could be re-allocated to permit trains to stop at Gloucester with little effect upon the national timetable. Some trains are timetabled to stand in Bristol and Birmingham for 30 minutes. A moment’s thought will also make one realise that any train which is late has an impact upon the timetable, no matter where the train is!

Now let us turn to what advantages from the rail commuter’s view a mainline station in Gloucester would have. The table below shows the number of trains from Gloucester and Cheltenham respectively with direct links to the stations listed. (Monday 25 July 2011 was chosen as a typical weekday). Note that Cheltenham station is on the main north-south line, unlike Gloucester’s current station.

	Number of direct trains from (on Monday 25/07/2011)
To	Cheltenham	Gloucester
Birmingham New Street	47	18
Bristol Temple Meads	41	19
Cardiff Central	29	28
Derby	27	13
Exeter St David’s	19	0
Edinburgh	11	0
Glasgow Central	5	0
Leeds	14	0
Liverpool Lime Street	0	0
London Paddington	9	9
Manchester Piccadilly	13	0
Newcastle	11	0
Sheffield	14	0
Worcester Shrub Hill	10	10
Source: National Rail Enquiries

It is seen that Gloucester has far fewer direct trains than Cheltenham to Manchester, Leeds, Derby and Exeter. This represents a huge inconvenience for travellers from Gloucester: it also means that there will be far fewer tourist and commercial business travellers than there could be coming into our county. The loss of this potential business will grow as UK rail traffic, economic growth and populations rise.

In conclusion, we urge that our elected representatives take the request to build a new railway station within the railway triangle back to Network Rail and simultaneously ask the Department of Transport if they would consider contributing to the funding of this project which we believe would be of great benefit to all south west England.

Yours sincerely,

Ray Armishaw

Horton Cameron Ex Railway Worker

Brian Cowell, C.Eng.; M.I.Mech.E.; M.A.Cost E.

Gordon Doyle

Nick Edwards MSc, PhD, M Inst. P.

Marion Pingriff

Ken Pingriff Ex Railway Worker

Copies to:-

Councillor Paul James, Leader, Gloucester City Council, Herbert Warehouse, The Docks, Gloucester GL1 2EQ

Councillor Mark Damian Hawthorne, Leader, Gloucestershire County Council, Shire Hall, Westgate Street, Gloucester GL1 2TG

Mr Chris Oldershaw, Chief Executive, Gloucester Heritage Urban Regeneration Company Ltd., 15 Ladybellegate Street, Gloucester GL1 2HN

The Right Reverend Michael Perham, Bishop of Gloucester, The Chapter Office,
2 College Green, Gloucester GL1 2LR

The Very Reverend Stephen Lake, Dean of Gloucester, Gloucester Cathedral, The Chapter Office,
2 College Green, Gloucester GL1 2LR

Mr Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP (Cotswolds), House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA

Mr Richard Graham, MP (Gloucester), House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA

Mr Martin Horwood, MP (Cheltenham), House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA

Mr Mark Harper, MP, (Forest of Dean), House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA

Mr Laurence Robertson, MP, (Tewkesbury), House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA

Mr Neil Carmichael, MP (Stroud), House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA

Rt Hon Theresa Villiers MP, Minister of State (Rail and Aviation), House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA

Rt Hon Philip Hammond MP, Secretary of State for Transport, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA

The Managing Director, LXB Retail Properties Plc, 2nd Floor, Grafton House, 2-3 Golden Square, London W1F 9HR

Mr Mark Hopwood, Managing Director, First Great Western, Milford House, 1 Milford Street, Swindon SN1 1HL

Mr Andy Cooper, Managing Director, CrossCountry, Cannon House, 18 The Priory, Queensway, Birmingham B4 6BS

Mr Tim Bell, Managing Director, Arriva Trains Wales, St Mary's House, 47 Penarth Road, Cardiff CF10 5DJ

Mr Mike Hodson, Managing Director, London Midland, 102 New Street, Birmingham B2 4JB

The Association of Train Operating Companies Ltd., 3^rd Floor, 40 Bernard Street, London WC1N 1BY

Passenger Focus, FREEPOST (RRRE-ETTC-LEET), PO BOX 4257, Manchester, M60 3AR

The Office of Rail Regulation, One Kemble Street, London WC2B 4AN

BBC Radio Gloucestershire, London Road, Gloucester GL1 1SW

Yours sincerely

Ray Armishaw

Horton Cameron Ex Railway Worker

Brian Cowell, C.Eng.; M.I.Mech.E.; M.A.Cost E.

Gordon Doyle

Nick Edwards MSc, PhD, M inst. P.