Cambridge island platform "by end of 2011"

[jopsuk]

Finally, an actual timescale for a much needed upgrade to the station.

This is the aerial shot of the station, for those unfamiliar with the location. The non-electrified siding to the east side have all gone.

The current layout has a single long through platform, split into a 12 car and a 10 car platform. There's also two northbound and two southbound bays. At the moment, north and south through trains have to cross paths- plus there are terminating trains using the through platforms. To complicate things, the Kings Lynn service splits northbound and joins southbound.

It's just a pity, for the many, many non-car owning residents in Cllr Herbert's ward that he's letting concern about parking come before utility to his constituents. Then again, NR might not want a second station entrance anyway- it'll be interesting to see the final layout.

Cambridge did, a very long time ago, have an island, but it was just a wooden platform.

 

[gingerheid]

This is really fantastic news! When the proposals were first mentioned a while ago I didn't take it seriously as it's been mentioned so many times before!

 

[jopsuk]

Does anyone know what's going on this weekend? There's no services in any direction from Cambridge all weekend- doesn't appear to be anything going on at the station.

 

[philjo]

I do not know for certain, but as this weekend's closure effects both Royston & Audley End services, I would imagine that it is connected with the works near Addenbrooke's where the 2 new bridges have been built over the railway - one for the new access road from Trumpington to Addenbrooke's & the other for the guided bus.
Presumably one of these will also be used to close the existing pedestrian foot/cycle path over the tracks at this location.

It is a pity that they could not put a new station for local services next to Addenbrookes for easy access to the hosiptal & the new MRC science park that is being built alongside it.

 

[transportphoto]

Finally, an actual timescale for a much needed upgrade to the station.

This is the aerial shot of the station, for those unfamiliar with the location. The non-electrified siding to the east side have all gone.

The current layout has a single long through platform, split into a 12 car and a 10 car platform. There's also two northbound and two southbound bays. At the moment, north and south through trains have to cross paths- plus there are terminating trains using the through platforms. To complicate things, the Kings Lynn service splits northbound and joins southbound.

It's just a pity, for the many, many non-car owning residents in Cllr Herbert's ward that he's letting concern about parking come before utility to his constituents. Then again, NR might not want a second station entrance anyway- it'll be interesting to see the final layout.

Cambridge did, a very long time ago, have an island, but it was just a wooden platform.

Where abouts would the platform go & would it be an extra 2 platforms (on each side of the structure) or just one individually?

 

[Sir_Clagalot]

I thought the bridges for the busway were already in place... Im sure they were this time last year!!

 

[jopsuk]

They are- and the works this weekend have also taken out trains to Ely and Newmarket (and beyond).

As for the location of the new platform- the Cambridge News article (OK, not the most reliable of publications) indicates that it will be platforms 7 & 8- so two faces. Don't know how many tracks will be left- I'd reckon that the existing through track along beside 1 and 4 will have to remain.

 

[GB]

The only place that is feasble is between the Goods Line and the Trough Line.

 

[TheBigD]

The new 245m island platform will go where the 4th track from the platform currently is, the second track from the stabled units. Both platforms will be fully bi-directional etc.

http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&ll=52.193258,0.138767&spn=0.005268,0.014613&t=h&z=17

Platform 5 will also be shortened to 125m to accommodate the stairs and lifts to the new platform.

Also platform 2 at Stansted Airport will also be extended to accommodate 4 car 170's by Dec 2011 as well.

 

[Aictos]

4 car 170s by Dec 2011, great news as 4 cars is the minimum on that route.

 

[thefab444]

I don't know, just because the platform has been lengthened I don't think that will neccessarily mean longer trains.

 

[yorkie]

Cllr Lewis Herbert appears to be one of those "new" Labour types who are more interested in being like Tories and see cars as more of a priority than public transport. Totally unsustainable and foolish.

Good reply on the Cambridge News site:

A pity Councillor Herbert is more worried about car parking issues than the convenience of his constituents who might find it very useful to have a shorter walk to and from the station, especially if ticket purchasing facilities are available on the new platform so that there is no need for people to have go fight their way through the crowds at the main station.

I bet Cllr Herbert wouldn't like it if he could see his car parked on a road just outside his house, but he had to walk literally 'around the houses' for 10 minutes to get to it? No? I wonder why not, as that's the way transport users who live that side of the station are treated at present!

 

[jopsuk]

I've never quite worked out why the Labour councillors around here are so pro-car.- they generally seem to find the negatives in any improvements to the railway station, to bike infrastructure etc, especially if it will inconvenience drivers. Does, though, tend to be a line that plays well in the Cambridge Evening News.

 

[gingerheid]

Improvements at Ely as well (though freight orientated)

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_elynews/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=482174

Interesting views on Cambridge Labour. I've tried to take Labour councillors in Cambridge to task on what they are actually for. At the last council elections I got a leaflet which, if you were to distil it to the facts, said they were against 17 things and listed 9 problems to which they offered no solution, but only named one thing they were fo;, one solution. (Which, by the way, was free range chicken in school meals).

I tried asking him what he was actually for, and I tried asking him what the justification was for some of the things he was against (most of it was just nimbyism).

He's no longer a councillor; the Greens won that ward from him.

I suppose they are just an opposition party with no prospect of any sort of power (are they third or fourth party in Cambridge?); and what oppositions with no prospect of power do is say they are against anything at all the people in power do while offering no or unrealistic solutions to problems.

 

[jopsuk]

They're second- by a long way. 28 Lib, 11 Lab, 1 Green, 1 Tory, 1 Ind. County Cllrs for the city are 11 Lib, 2 Lab and 1 Green. MP was Labour until 2005.


Mindyou, nothing indicates Network Rail have even suggested a footbridge connection.

 

[gingerheid]

Is the Hitchin flyover still planned too? If yes, and if any of these things actually happen, the future really is looking up for Cambridge!

 

[jopsuk]

there's supposedly plans available for what they're going to do- but I can't find them. One thing I have heard that does concern myself and many others is the footbridge plans- or rather the planned access. Network Rail have proposed 1.6m*1.6m lifts, identical to those installed recently at Audley End. An adult bike will have to be placed diagonally to fit in such a lift, making it akward to carry more than one or to accomodate other passengers. Meanwhile, the stairs will be merely 50% wider than those at Audley End.

This will be chaos. Even without the bike factor, this sounds like a whoilly inadaquetly small access. Add in the large numbers of bikes that use the station every day with little incident, and you've a recipe for mayhem.

 

[Bonemaster]

I've never quite worked out why the Labour councillors around here are so pro-car.- they generally seem to find the negatives in any improvements to the railway station, to bike infrastructure etc, especially if it will inconvenience drivers. Does, though, tend to be a line that plays well in the Cambridge Evening News.

Given the poor positioning of Cambridge station for anyone who wishes to arrive at the station by car, I am not surprised by opposition to enhancements that may make access even more difficult, and much of the opposition to access from Rustat Road maybe well placed in that for much of the city that side of the line is much easier to access by car. Many cities would love to have the cycle infrastructure that Cambridge has, but sadly such schemes are well down the agenda when it comes to council spending.

I do sadly feel that capacity problems could be much better served at Cambridge by the long mooted station at Chesterton Junction, which now being more than 20 years since it was first proposed must look as doubtful as the East West Rail Link ever making Cambridge. This would not only serve the science park, but take away the nightmare of getting to Cambridge railway station who does not wish to cycle if you happen to live on the wrong side of the river, as well as if turn back facilities were provided enable platform space to be freed up at Cambridge station.

And as for the councilor on about parking, I have never seen people get as angry as they do when people park outside there houses, I've known cars keyed and physical altrications occur over this issue as it makes residents blood boil, it no wonder that an ex councilor is using this issue in the local press as its a much easier vote winner in the local constituency where he maybe standing for re-election, than backing the existing proposals.

 

[jopsuk]

Update on this: picture of how it'll look. Seems the current arrangement for platforms 1&4 will be retained, with no platform on the "avoider" track parallel to those, and the island tracks beyond that.
Edit: found a bigger version

 

[LE Greys]

Update on this picture of how it'll look. Seems the current arrangement for platforms 1&4 will be retained, with no platform on the "avoider" track parallel to those, and the island tracks beyond that.
Edit: found a bigger version

Looks like most modern station additions, efficient but ugly, although they seem to have made some concessions to the Eastern Counties architecture of the original building. The through road is rather surprising, but might be useful, and I suppose it avoids the need to pull up the scissors. I'm slightly unclear as to how long the new platforms are, but they don't seem to be as long as the existing station. Not sure whether that is good or bad.

Given the poor positioning of Cambridge station for anyone who wishes to arrive at the station by car, I am not surprised by opposition to enhancements that may make access even more difficult, and much of the opposition to access from Rustat Road maybe well placed in that for much of the city that side of the line is much easier to access by car. Many cities would love to have the cycle infrastructure that Cambridge has, but sadly such schemes are well down the agenda when it comes to council spending.

I do sadly feel that capacity problems could be much better served at Cambridge by the long mooted station at Chesterton Junction, which now being more than 20 years since it was first proposed must look as doubtful as the East West Rail Link ever making Cambridge. This would not only serve the science park, but take away the nightmare of getting to Cambridge railway station who does not wish to cycle if you happen to live on the wrong side of the river, as well as if turn back facilities were provided enable platform space to be freed up at Cambridge station.

And as for the councilor on about parking, I have never seen people get as angry as they do when people park outside there houses, I've known cars keyed and physical altrications occur over this issue as it makes residents blood boil, it no wonder that an ex councilor is using this issue in the local press as its a much easier vote winner in the local constituency where he maybe standing for re-election, than backing the existing proposals.

The Dons have a lot to answer for, don't they? Well, they are supposed to be improving access from Hills Road, but I'm not sure what else they can do other than plonking a multi-storey car park out the front somewhere. The new station up at the junction is a good idea, if they can find some way to connect it to Newmarket Road.

 

[Aictos]

With regards to that building which caught fire this year, if it's not in regular use - just buy the land and plonk a multi story car park on the land,

 

[shinkansen1966]

Is the Hitchin flyover still planned too?

Exactly, what is the time scale for the Hitchin flyover ? Often travel through the bottleneck on EC or FCC trains, myself. The upgrade is soooo overdue.

 

[philjo]

The legal notices for the acquisition by Network Rail of some of the land required in Hitchin whilst they do the works appeared in the local paper last week.

I think work is due to start in Autumn 2011 (unless the timetable has slipped) - I know the local papers had said it would take about 27 months.

 

[jon0844]

27 months? Bloody hell, what are they going to do that will take that long?

 

[Bonemaster]

The Dons have a lot to answer for, don't they? Well, they are supposed to be improving access from Hills Road, but I'm not sure what else they can do other than plonking a multi-storey car park out the front somewhere. The new station up at the junction is a good idea, if they can find some way to connect it to Newmarket Road.

Sadly the chance of having a proper access form Newmarket road would be zero due to the river and common land on both sides of the railway line. I can remember as a child proposals or a bridge across this land hitting very strong local opposition, and I cant imagine that anything has changes in the meantime. Without land purchasing in the Cowley Road / Science park area access from Milton Road is appalling to any proposed station at Chesterton Junction

With regards to that building which caught fire this year, if it's not in regular use - just buy the land and plonk a multi story car park on the land,

Chances of a multistory car park on the site in my opinion are zero, developers will snap it up at a price the railway just can not afford and use it as either retail or more likely housing, not to mention it would still be a pain in the backside to get to by car, I can not think of any railway station of a similar or larger size so badly positioned in a city.

 

[jopsuk]

The through road is rather surprising, but might be useful, and I suppose it avoids the need to pull up the scissors. I'm slightly unclear as to how long the new platforms are, but they don't seem to be as long as the existing station. Not sure whether that is good or bad.

I'd reckon the new platforms will be twelve carriage. At a guess, 1 and 4 will be used primarily for "down" through services/terminators heading for the carriage sidings, with the new platforms being for "up" services. Part of the point is to reduce the number of up and down services that have to cross each other.

 

[jopsuk]

So, they're currently ripping up the sidings opposite platforms 1/4 (including the electrified ones that are normally used for stabling), and the track in platform 5 has been shortened- all presumably preparatory work for the new platforms and bridge?

 

[Jonny]

I do not know for certain, but as this weekend's closure effects both Royston & Audley End services, I would imagine that it is connected with the works near Addenbrooke's where the 2 new bridges have been built over the railway - one for the new access road from Trumpington to Addenbrooke's & the other for the guided bus.

Don't you mean misguided bus? Buses should never be a long-term solution where a train can be used.

 

[317666]

The reason for the shortened track in Platform 5, is that that's where the steps and lift for the footbridge over to Platforms 7 and 8 will be.

 

[tbtc]

The reason for the shortened track in Platform 5, is that that's where the steps and lift for the footbridge over to Platforms 7 and 8 will be.

Interesting. Will this affect the length of trains which can use Platform 5?