On 21/04/2017 11:57, NY wrote:
"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
The real shame is that the rights-of-way were not permanently held.
That would have allowed for them to be later re-used for rail, or
bus-ways or bike/walking routes f'rinstance. Such as parts of the Worth
Way in Sussex.

Well said. There should have been a clause which said that any former
transport route should remain a transport route (even if only for
walkers and cyclists) and BR should not have been allowed to sell off
the assets which at the time belonged to the nation (since BR was a
nationalised industry).

By all means save money by not running trains and not employing staff to
do so or to maintain the route to railway standard, but that's as far as
it should have gone. At least where lines have been closed since the
days of Beeching, it was been on the basis of mothballing, with routes
protected against development.

Our local line had the stopping services reduced to one per hour about
10 years ago to free up capacity for non-stopping expresses - making it
even more inconvenient and overcrowded for commuters. What it really
needs is fast and slow lines to allow trains to pass.

Land was reserved for that when the line was built in the 1870s. BR used
to rent the land out to homeowners to extend their gardens and they
could have been taken back at any time. However, in the 1980s they sold
it all off to the homeowners and where there was railway land (ex
sidings, coal yards, station yards, etc.) in and about the towns, they
sold it to developers to build new estates right up to the lineside.

So, once again, a short term cash grab has lead to poor service and no
easy way to improve it.

SteveW