East-West Rail (EWR): Consultation updates [not speculation]

[richieb1971]

The line is a guideline. Using tools I have you can pull the line outwards and it generates its own curve. Free hand is messier. If you have a pc I can show you how I do the maps. Your input is as valid as anyone elses.

 

[eastdyke]

This is being reported in the media as a result of the current Consultation for the Central section.

Perhaps all affected authorities and other substantial bodies have had more detailed information than is in the full public domain having signed an NDA? [I think that to be quite likely].

The Woodland Trust have chosen to speak out. This is on their website [part quote].

The Woodland Trust has refused to be gagged by the company behind a proposed new railway over outrageous efforts to keep key route information out of the public domain.

The charity has repeatedly asked East West Rail (EWR) for detailed maps of five proposed options for the central section of the railway linking Oxford to Cambridge as they threaten precious ancient woodland.

But EWR has chosen to withhold them unless the Trust signs a non-disclosure agreement promising not to share the details with its legion of supporters.

Director of conservation and external affairs Abi Bunker said:
“Actively withholding information from a public consultation that they know may sway opinion is flawed and inappropriate. We have never been gagged when it comes to standing up for ancient woodland and we are not about to start now.

“EWR’s decision makes a mockery of the planning process. People cannot understand the impacts and make an informed decision if they do not have all the facts.

“With centuries-old woods and trees potentially in serious danger, it is simply unacceptable to hold back important information from a public consultation.”

https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/pr...est-rail-tries-to-silence-the-woodland-trust/

 

[edwin_m]

This is being reported in the media as a result of the current Consultation for the Central section.

Perhaps all affected authorities and other substantial bodies have had more detailed information than is in the full public domain having signed an NDA? [I think that to be quite likely].

The Woodland Trust have chosen to speak out. This is on their website [part quote].



https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/pr...est-rail-tries-to-silence-the-woodland-trust/

The problem here is that as soon as the maps are published people near one of the lines will start claiming their properties are blighted and applying for compensation. This would represent a huge cost to the public purse even if most of the properties will be near lines that are not chosen, so can be sold off again once the choice is made. Compare the early stages of HS2 where details of the options being considered were only published retrospectively once a preferred option had been chosen and a blight compensation scheme opened for those affected by it.

 

[eastdyke]

The problem here is that as soon as the maps are published people near one of the lines will start claiming their properties are blighted and applying for compensation. This would represent a huge cost to the public purse even if most of the properties will be near lines that are not chosen, so can be sold off again once the choice is made. Compare the early stages of HS2 where details of the options being considered were only published retrospectively once a preferred option had been chosen and a blight compensation scheme opened for those affected by it.

I understand that.
I think, in this case, The Woodland Trust having (relatively) few paid staff will find it very difficult to comment on the relative merits of the options. All options are likely to have seemingly adverse effects on many of its diverse sites.
It is therefore easier for The Trust to campaign against the project with respect to all of the options. And in so doing will be unhelpful to EWR.

 

[edwin_m]

I understand that.
I think, in this case, The Woodland Trust having (relatively) few paid staff will find it very difficult to comment on the relative merits of the options. All options are likely to have seemingly adverse effects on many of its diverse sites.
It is therefore easier for The Trust to campaign against the project with respect to all of the options. And in so doing will be unhelpful to EWR.

The original quote implied that Woodlands Trust wanted to go public on their concerns, which would reveal at least parts of the detailed routes (if indeed they have been defined yet). I guess EWR would welcome confidential comments by Woodlands Trust on the environmental impacts, though not necessarily be able to act on them if they considered them to be overridden by othe factors.

 

[DarloRich]

I understand that.
I think, in this case, The Woodland Trust having (relatively) few paid staff will find it very difficult to comment on the relative merits of the options. All options are likely to have seemingly adverse effects on many of its diverse sites.
It is therefore easier for The Trust to campaign against the project with respect to all of the options. And in so doing will be unhelpful to EWR.

It seems to be forgotten by many railway people that for the Wooldand Trust trying to protect trees and woodland is their raison d'être - i noticed this a lot in relation to line side tree felling - it isnt as if there isnt a clue in the name!

 

[wildcard]

Once the Marston Vale line gets its new trains - are there pathing slots available for a few peak Bedford - limited stop - reversal at Bletchley - MK to test the marketplace right now ? The MK section an extension to an existing service. Say 2 in the morning peak and 2 in the evening ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Once the Marston Vale line gets its new trains - are there pathing slots available for a few peak Bedford - limited stop - reversal at Bletchley - MK to test the marketplace right now ? The MK section an extension to an existing service. Say 2 in the morning peak and 2 in the evening ?

50mph units won't be allowed on the WCML. But if they were, there's plenty of time available in the existing timetable to run to MKC and back on all services. This was planned a while ago but then went quiet.

 

[II]

50mph units won't be allowed on the WCML. But if they were, there's plenty of time available in the existing timetable to run to MKC and back on all services. This was planned a while ago but then went quiet.

They're 60mph capable, aren't they? And Bletchley to Milton Keynes is such a short hop that they wouldn't need any more than that anyway.

 

[Esker-pades]

50mph units won't be allowed on the WCML. But if they were, there's plenty of time available in the existing timetable to run to MKC and back on all services. This was planned a while ago but then went quiet.

What about class 7 freight services?

 

[The Planner]

There are no barriers to speed on the WCML, if it can be timetabled then it can run.

 

[camflyer]

Campaign launched for a direct EWR link to St Neots:
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/st-neots-cambridge-oxford-rail-15939729

The chances of this happening are probably somewhere between zero and none.

 

[si404]

The options that serve Tempsford (and thus run along the ECML for a bit) could allow it with just some points (and could save money if they don't give separate E-W Rail tracks) with no need for chords.

Biggleswade-Bedford and Cambridge-St Neots seems the most useful way of arranging the alignment, in the rather unlikely scenario that they do provide links. Bedford-St Neots would also be useful, but would be a curve - maybe justifiable by freight?

 

[DarloRich]

The line is a guideline. Using tools I have you can pull the line outwards and it generates its own curve. Free hand is messier. If you have a pc I can show you how I do the maps. Your input is as valid as anyone elses.

thanks - i have figured out how to do this with pdf writer. I will have a bash over the weekend!

 

[Neen Sollars]

As seen by the volume of posts on this thread the route of EWR through Bedford is a hot potato. Your views need to be fed in here:

https://www.bedfordindependent.co.uk/im-encouraging-everyone-to-have-their-say-on-east-west-rail/

 

[Railwaysceptic]

As seen by the volume of posts on this thread the route of EWR through Bedford is a hot potato. Your views need to be fed in here:

https://www.bedfordindependent.co.uk/im-encouraging-everyone-to-have-their-say-on-east-west-rail/

Very interesting but not in the least bit surprising that the Mayor of Bedford wants East-West Rail to serve Bedford Midland Station and does not want his station to be bypassed. I live in London, not Bedford, so I don't have a horse in this race, but I agree with him.

 

[Neen Sollars]

Very interesting but not in the least bit surprising that the Mayor of Bedford wants East-West Rail to serve Bedford Midland Station and does not want his station to be bypassed. I live in London, not Bedford, so I don't have a horse in this race, but I agree with him.

I also agree with him and have taken my own advice and submitted my feedback to the EWR consultation. I have made it clear that I too do not have a local connection, but this is a national strategic railway and as a citizen I am entitled to my say. My preferred route is a revised route E: Bedford Midland, Tempsford Area or South of St Neots, Cambourne, then North into Cambridge North via guided busway. North and south chords at Cambs North, new north and south chords at Coldhams Lane Jnc (paid for by EWR East) EWR trains to run from Cambs North, with science park halt, to Oxford Science Park end at Oxford Business Park (Plans drawn).
Route also opens up Norwich, Ipswich and Felixstowe to Oxford and Reading and beyond. Also strategicly links all the NS main lines and opens up new freight and diversionary lines. Not only are the economic benefits great, this route gives additional rail travel possiblities and a better service to the public Ticks all the boxes for me.

 

[camflyer]

I still think Option A is the most likely on cost and engineering grounds but I can see the advantages of Option E to connect Cambourne. I don't really have a view between Bedford Midland/South/Wixams as I don't know enough about the local economy and demographics.

I know there is a lot of support for a northern approach to Cambridge using the guided bus way but I really can't see it happening do to the cost and having to deal with the Milton Road crossing. A northern approach with services joining the existing line between Waterbeach and Cambridge North while keeping the busway intact might be an option but you would still need the extra curves to take services east to Ipswich and Norwich. I can't see any logic in EWR services which don't call at Cambridge [Central]

 

[Long10]

Whilst Option A looks good in terms of cost and journey time there is the issue of the three ancient woodlands between Bedford and the A1 (just west of Northill) two of which would be almost impossible to miss. Unfortunately it is only when you restore the background to the Consultation Maps that the situation becomes evident. There is strong opinion both locally and from wider afield regarding preserving and protecting these woodlands.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

. . . . . I can't see any logic in EWR services which don't call at Cambridge [Central]

Not calling at Cambridge would be even more absurd than not calling at Bedford Midland!

 

[Neen Sollars]

Not calling at Cambridge would be even more absurd than not calling at Bedford Midland!

Going via the north from Cambourne, would mean you could call at Cambs North and Cambridge Central (if you wanted to).

 

[camflyer]

Going via the north from Cambourne, would mean you could call at Cambs North and Cambridge Central (if you wanted to).

But that would involve a reverse for services to Newmarket, Ipswich and Norwich and it wouldn't serve any new Cambridge South station. I just don't see where the land is for new curves.

A southerly approach is just a lot simpler for through services.

 

[bspahh]

I also agree with him and have taken my own advice and submitted my feedback to the EWR consultation. I have made it clear that I too do not have a local connection, but this is a national strategic railway and as a citizen I am entitled to my say.

Let your local MP know as well. There won't be any route built without a lot of goodwill

My preferred route is a revised route E: Bedford Midland, Tempsford Area or South of St Neots, Cambourne, then North into Cambridge North via guided busway. North and south chords at Cambs North, new north and south chords at Coldhams Lane Jnc (paid for by EWR East) EWR trains to run from Cambs North, with science park halt, to Oxford Science Park end at Oxford Business Park (Plans drawn).

How would your route cross Milton Road in Cambridge, and the junction near Cambridge Regional College? I don't think you'll get new level crossings, and a tunnel doesn't come cheap.

Replacing the guided busway means you can cross the A14 and get into Histon. You still have to cross the old A14 and the new A14M. Your too late to get those crossings built with the current roadworks, and the cost and disruption of crossing them with a railway is going to be a tough pitch for politicians to agree to.

 

[Neen Sollars]

Let your local MP know as well. There won't be any route built without a lot of goodwill



How would your route cross Milton Road in Cambridge, and the junction near Cambridge Regional College? I don't think you'll get new level crossings, and a tunnel doesn't come cheap.

Replacing the guided busway means you can cross the A14 and get into Histon. You still have to cross the old A14 and the new A14M. Your too late to get those crossings built with the current roadworks, and the cost and disruption of crossing them with a railway is going to be a tough pitch for politicians to agree to.

Hi bspahh, I will contact my local MP but as I have just contacted him concerning another pressing matter at hand this week, I will leave it until after March 29th.
Regarding the northern route into Cambridge, I think the matter has been discussed previously on this thread and found to be feasible, but I will let others with local knowledge reply.

 

[Neen Sollars]

But that would involve a reverse for services to Newmarket, Ipswich and Norwich and it wouldn't serve any new Cambridge South station. I just don't see where the land is for new curves.

A southerly approach is just a lot simpler for through services.

Hi camflyer, I take your point, but to dive south from Cambourne into Cambs Central just does not look right and will miss my target of connecting the science parks. The Newmarket/Ipswich and Norwich through trains would not touch Cambs Central they call at Cambs North.
There would be no reversing EWR trains at Cambs Central, they could start and stop there. But I would start EWR trains at Cambs North, run a shuttle between Central and North. No new heavy rail station Cambs South, light rail/metro service to Cambs Central into a mini interchange. Coming onto the Norwich - Stanstead line at Coldhams Junction you could in future have 2 tph locals from Mildenhall (proposed large development) and 2 tph from Ipswich one GA and one EWR and perhaps one freight tph. One local to North the other to Central, EWR to North and GA to Central. The hourly EWR train from Norwich calls at Camb North on its way to Oxford.
You have direct hourly Ipswich to Oxford and Norwich to Oxford EWR as per the spec, as well as 1tph local from Mildenhall running into Camb North all current stopping services there will feed passengers onto EWR.

 

[Neen Sollars]

I was just wondering, why was Cambridge North station ever built? It looks a substantial station on a substantial area of land a lot of which is unused? I will do some research.

Does Cambridge Central have the capacity to handle the increased trains that EWR Central and EWR East propose to run into it?

 

[bspahh]

I was just wondering, why was Cambridge North station ever built? It looks a substantial station on a substantial area of land a lot of which is unused? I will do some research.

It was built partly to ease the load on the main Cambridge station. These are plans for 7600 homes on that unused land, with 7000 jobs, a hotel etc.
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/new-town-size-saffron-walden-14442451
https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/consul...a-action-plan-issues-and-options-consultation

Does Cambridge Central have the capacity to handle the increased trains that EWR Central and EWR East propose to run into it?

The plans are to have a Cambridge South station near Addenbrookes, which will probably mean 4 tracks between there and the current Cambridge station. There is plenty of space at Cambridge if they needed to build extra platforms. Potentially there could be a new station entrance to the East.

 

[Neen Sollars]

It was built partly to ease the load on the main Cambridge station. These are plans for 7600 homes on that unused land, with 7000 jobs, a hotel etc.
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/new-town-size-saffron-walden-14442451
https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/consul...a-action-plan-issues-and-options-consultation



The plans are to have a Cambridge South station near Addenbrookes, which will probably mean 4 tracks between there and the current Cambridge station. There is plenty of space at Cambridge if they needed to build extra platforms. Potentially there could be a new station entrance to the East.

bspahh, Thanks very much for your response. Very interesting I will research that info. Given the scale of the development I can see why the consultation did not rule out the northern approach from Cambourne. One of the EWR plans talks of its ability to connect to hubs for speedy onward travel. One contributor here eastdyke has mentioned how longer journeys lead to increased performance risk (unexpected delays) which is why I would only run EWR services from Cambs North or Central to Oxford. Looking at Cambs North site I can see platforms on a southerly curve but only, at a push, a northerly curve with no platforms. So no direct route for Norwich to Oxford, change at Cambs North for EWR. Will ponder on.

 

[camflyer]

The plans are to have a Cambridge South station near Addenbrookes, which will probably mean 4 tracks between there and the current Cambridge station. There is plenty of space at Cambridge if they needed to build extra platforms. Potentially there could be a new station entrance to the East.

There have been proposals for a eastern entrance to Cambridge [Central] as part of the redevelopment of the Clifton Road industrial estate but a lot will dependant on whether the Royal Mail are willing to move out.

https://www.railfuture.org.uk/east/...mbridge-Station-Eastern-Entrance-proposal.pdf

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/cambridge-train-station-greater-anglia-15564720

There is probably scope for a north to east curve in Cambridge but it would mean losing some of Coldham's Common so would be sure to raise local protests and I'm not sure what the business case would be for services which bypassed Cambridge Central.

I really don't see how you get a southbound curve from Cambridge Central/South to services eastwards.

So, sorry. While I would love to see a northern approach myself I just don't see how if could be viable.

 

[sammorris]

Very interesting but not in the least bit surprising that the Mayor of Bedford wants East-West Rail to serve Bedford Midland Station and does not want his station to be bypassed. I live in London, not Bedford, so I don't have a horse in this race, but I agree with him.

I'm slightly surprised in the consultation to see that the option of entering Bedford as the Marston Vale Line currently does (heavily upgraded, obviously), reversing at Bedford Midland and taking the 'original' route to the East is ruled out, without any explanation as to why.

Presumably there's some reason that this has been ruled out - without the benefit of specialist knowledge, it seems like a viable option, on the face of it. It looks much cheaper than the option of continuing through Bedford Midland to the north.

Does anyone know what this reason is?