York To Beverley Line - Reopening?

Reopening?

In recent years there has been considerable public support among local residents for the reopening of the line between York and Beverley. There has even been campaigning to this effect, led largely by the Minsters Rail Campaign pressure group who argue that the railway was unfairly closed and that East Yorkshire's roads, particularly the A1079, are struggling to cope with increasing traffic to and from Hull. A report by the Carl Bro Group for East Riding of Yorkshire Council in 2004 concluded that the project was feasible, but would cost around £239 million to build. The council subsequently gave their complete backing to the proposals, however no further developments have taken place.

Due to British Rail's selling off of the line's assets shortly after closure, parts of the trackbed in areas like Huntington, Stamford Bridge and Pocklington have now been irreversibly re-developed for housing. If the line is ever reconstructed at all it would be impossible for it to follow its original route the whole way although should a tramway be built then trams could access the populated areas.

However documents published in 2006 as part of the East Riding of Yorkshire Council's Local Development Framework Transport Development Plan suggest that new routes into and around these existing built up areas have been identified and safeguarded alongside potential sites for new stations. (Specifically See Section 5.5 : "Protecting New Transport Schemes" and Appendix 2 : Maps 5 and 6)

Additionally Section 6.63 of the Council's Core Strategy Document (published for public consultation in spring 2008) states:

...it is recommended that land for the following strategic infrastructure and transport schemes be protected from conflicting development: Railways

• Beverley to York railway route; and
• Rail links to employment land at Melton, Hedon Haven and Cranaby (if allocated).

Though it mentions the possibility of rail links to Carnaby - northwards of Beverley - the allocated land does not include space for a direct northbound connection, even though there is ample space in the proposed location to provide one.