A Guildford to Horsham railway line won’t​ re-open if Bramley residents have anything to do with it.

Now that The Rutland Group has been given the go-ahead to build 1,800 homes, (and another 800 in the Local Plan) at Dunsfold Aerodrome some of the Eastern villages are calling for the railway line to be re-opened.

Screen Shot 2018-03-21 at 21.10.52.png

Screen Shot 2018-03-21 at 21.11.05.pngGovernment plans could see the old Guildford to Horsham railway line reopened after a new transport strategy was announced recently.  

Following years of debate on whether the rail route should be revived, Transport Secretary  Chris Grayling’s latest scheme has paved the way for potential progress.  

Fresh proposals mean councils can now recommend that previously culled stations be brought back to life.

Mr Grayling said plans to expand the network were made in order to aid housing growth and produce more jobs across Britain. So he must mean the Guildford to Horsham line through Cranleigh?

NO SURPRISE – THERE THEN!

Presumably, Bramley residents whose homes back onto the route of the canal are happy to have their des res’s down by the riverside! But not on the other side of the tracks?

4 thoughts on “A Guildford to Horsham railway line won’t​ re-open if Bramley residents have anything to do with it.

  1. NEVER believe that our Waverley councillors can possibly take a view for the overall good. They are only concerned with ganging up against Cranleigh and, to a lesser extent, Farnham in order to dump all development there, in order to conserve their own little kingdoms. Of course the line should be re-opened despite the fact that it may initially run at a loss. Whatever happened to providing a public service in this country? The reason for Grayling’s thinking is that rail travel countrywide is on the increase and that, when a line exists, people are using it more in order to avoid the underfunded and pathetically maintained road system.
    Let us just hope that Surrey County Council will not be involved, although they have conducted feasibility studies based solely upon profitability. They seem to think that painting a few lines or adding the odd mini roundabout will solve everything.

    Like

    • Well Said – Just been reading about it and as said – SCC are far too busy saving the pennies and don’t give a stuff about all the new residents that will be moving to Cranleigh and DP – But to be fair – (I can be sometimes) – I think this should be concidered a Central Government Funded exercise – If they are going demand more and more homes in rural locations – they HAVE to provide the infrastructure to cope with it. Filling a few pot holes and changing phasing on a few junctions on the A281, will not make a huge difference despite what was said by the Inspector. Yes Shalford will make a difference but that won’t be until the 500th home on DP is OCCUPIED so that is potentially 500 – 800 more cars and that is before all the new residents in Cranleigh………Any Inspector can mitigate the traffic issues, but will not have to live with them, many of his comments on the A281 were highly selective.

      From Wikipedia

      Cranleigh Line Possible reopening
      Buchanan report
      In 1994 Surrey County Council commissioned a report from Colin Buchanan and Partners aimed at identifying worthwhile rail infrastructure improvements in the county to allow new or modified services to be introduced. The aims of the report were threefold: to relieve pressure on the roads, to improve rail’s share of modal split and to encourage the use of the rail network as part of a balanced transport system.
      The report estimated that around 500 car users could transfer to rail each day. The cost of reinstating the line between Guildford and Cranleigh was projected at £24 million which would include the base, civil, electrical, engineering and signalling works. It did not include land acquisition costs, legal costs and bridge works. The reinstatement of the bridge over the River Wey was costed at £750,000.
      The report concluded that, based on a preliminary analysis of the line’s potential returns, re-opening would not be feasible. The line was, according to the report, likely to recoup only 3% of the capital investment in the first year of re-opening, and this without taking into account its operating costs. British Rail usually insisted on a figure of at least 8% before investing capital into re-opening a line. Nevertheless, the County Council decided to commission a detailed economic feasibility study by British Rail into the line’s potential for re-opening, and looked into the possibility of using a light railway or tramway substitute.
      BR report
      British Rail Projects carried out the first part of an extensive two stage study in early 1996.[citation needed] It reported that the costs of re-opening would be far less than those estimated by Buchanan – £13.4 million if electrified, £11.1 million for diesel working and £14.1 million for a light rail service. Figures are based on a single track service running hourly workings. The results of the first stage persuaded Surrey County Council to allow the second stage of BR’s report to be undertaken; this would look at the economic and environmental aspects of the service, including how many potential users it would be likely to have.
      The study, carried out between April 1996 and March 1997, evaluated two scenarios – either an hourly service or a half-hourly service, each with a journey time of around 12 minutes compared to 25 minutes for the same trip by car during the morning rush hour. As part of the study 4,000 travel diaries and 3,835 questionnaires were sent to residents in Cranleigh, Bramley and Wonersh, and 200 face-to-face interviews were to be conducted. The results showed that amongst the 882 replies to the questionnaires, only 12% of journeys were made to Guildford or London, with the majority of journeys made to other parts of Surrey which could not be directly reached by re-opening the line. The research also found that although it would be possible to persuade bus users to transfer to rail, the same could not be said of car users.[9]
      The study concluded the costs of re-opening the line (estimated at around £14.24 million) would not be recouped by the railway itself. Even if the capital investment did not have to be repaid, the line would only make a profit after 4 years (running one train per hour) or 15 years (2 trains per hour). The line would require substantial public sector investment which could not be justified, the business case for the line’s re-opening being negative.
      RDS report
      At the same time that Surrey County Council were considering the results of the BR report, the Railway Development Society (later Railfuture – North Downs) published a report pointing out the benefits of the line’s reopening and suggested four alternative plans by which this could be achieved.[10]
      ATOC Report
      In June 2009 the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) called for the Cranleigh line to be reopened from Guildford to Bramley and Cranleigh as part of a number of additions to the existing rail network proposed in the Connecting Communities report. ATOC estimated an indicative capital cost of £63 million and a benefit-cost ratio of 1.7 to 1.[11] Citing the increase in passenger numbers in recent years, and the desire for the public to adopt more sustainable transport, ATOC hypothesised that the line and stations could be opened between 2014 and 2019.

      Like

    • If Surrey County Council continues its present abysmal maintenance of our road network, it will have no other option than to support the re-opening of the Horsham to Guildford railway line. Because, quite simply we won’t be travelling anywhere, safely.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s