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

[DarloRich]

There is a balance to be struck. In the UK, the pendulum has swung too far to the side of NIMBYs, while in China, it's obviously too much on the side of developers.

If someone is adversely affected by a development, they should be fairly compensated. But they should not be allowed to hold up nationally necessary projects for years with endless appeals and consultations.

That sounds like common sense. I agree that some people will anchor down and try their best to stop a project if it means their home is uprooted. Personally my house is somewhere I live. I'm not attached to it. If my home was in the way I would gladly see it demolished in favour of letting the project get the green light.

I'm not saying we should have Chinese law here in the UK. I'm saying that in some cases the greater good should win the day and people should not block progress on the basis of a single or even a few dwellings that sit too close a new alignment.

but that isnt what happens nor has it changed in many years. Not sure how this pendulum hss swung as you suggest

Like for like is fine. 1/2 mile down the road...

noble sentiments. What happens when like for like half a mile a way is £50k more because you have moved into a better area? What happens when like for like is 40 miles away?

 

[Richard Ingram]

You've continued the false dichotomy here, that if Cambourne is served by E-W Rail, the Metro won't exist (even though your scenario has both) - there's zero reason why people would take E-W Rail from Cambourne to Cambridge and change onto the Metro to get to the Science Park if there's the Metro running directly there from Cambourne!

Cambourne on both E-W Rail and Cambridge Metro allows people from Bedfordshire to change there to get to the Science Park and West Cambridge site, rather than having them go via Central Cambridge, or (much more likely) drive. The interchange creates additional benefit and makes public transport more appealing, not the opposite.

That all said, serving Bassingbourn is the better option. What I'm objecting to is that Cambourne is being rejected by people for nonsense reasons, rather than Bassingbourn being pushed for better reasons.

Ah, I see what you mean. but I don't think it is false. While it is possible for both to exist, I think both together would cause a reduction in the ROI, and it is worth taking into account that for the same, or less money, you can serve a greater area in a better way, and get more benefits. From the point of view of Cambridge Connect, there is also the prospect that once EWR is being built via Cambourne, part of their business case disappears. And it is a pretty ambitious project already.

And sorry I wasn't clear in my scenario, I was thinking that if it was EWR alone serving Cambourne, it wouldn't get much custom into Cambridge, as if you have to change to the guided bus, or even the metro that is built, but not all the way out, you are more likely to find another way. Based on this report, I think Cambourne would not be well served by EWR at all.

Perhaps with some changes to the metro plan, Cambourne could be linked to EWR at Sandy, or maybe Route D might be considered so the link could be at Tempsford, and serve Bedford Central. But I'm not sure of EWR having to share tracks with the ECML and the MML.

 

[mr_jrt]

My argument for EWR serving Cambourne over Bassingbourn is quite simple - how far is it to the nearest existing rail station from each site? Bassingborne could possibly be quite well served by a very short bus link to Royston or Meldreth, whilst Cambourne would need a bus link all the way to Cambridge North! That's the real indicator of how much modal shift to high-capacity public transport you can create from each option.

 

[Bald Rick]

There is a balance to be struck. In the UK, the pendulum has swung too far to the side of NIMBYs, while in China, it's obviously too much on the side of developers.

If someone is adversely affected by a development, they should be fairly compensated. But they should not be allowed to hold up nationally necessary projects for years with endless appeals and consultations.

Why do you think ‘the pendulum has swung too far to the side of NIMBYs’?

The principles of the process haven’t changed for decades. What has changed is that we are building a lot more railways, and there are a lot more people affected by them.

 

[Class 170101]

I personally am in favour of route A, although I do understand people who want Bedford Central on the route. But I think Cambourne is not the best use of the project.

Not sure which of A or B is strongest but in terms of Bedford why isn't there room for both stations? Bedford Midland and Bedford (Wixams).

Service from the west terminating at Bedford Midland (or extended northwards) from Bletchley (and beyond) and also a service from Bedford Midland (or north) towards Cambridge as well as a service from Bletchley (and beyond) to Cambridge calling at Wixams and avoiding Bedford Midland?

 

[Richard Ingram]

Not sure which of A or B is strongest but in terms of Bedford why isn't there room for both stations? Bedford Midland and Bedford (Wixams).

Service from the west terminating at Bedford Midland (or extended northwards) from Bletchley (and beyond) and also a service from Bedford Midland (or north) towards Cambridge as well as a service from Bletchley (and beyond) to Cambridge calling at Wixams and avoiding Bedford Midland?

I suggested a similar type of arrangement for Milton Keynes earlier in the thread, I think that sort of service pattern might be good. Maybe instead of terminating, the slow Marston Vale train could reverse at Bedford and continue to Cambridge, maybe stopping at Foxton or Shepreth as well. Although I have no idea if that would actually be useful to anyone. Possibly thinking too far ahead.

 

[richieb1971]

There is a balance to be struck. In the UK, the pendulum has swung too far to the side of NIMBYs, while in China, it's obviously too much on the side of developers.

If someone is adversely affected by a development, they should be fairly compensated. But they should not be allowed to hold up nationally necessary projects for years with endless appeals and consultations.

Agreed. Since most of these dwellings will be farm houses or a small row of homes (I can't imagine a railway going through a suburb) just moving the home by a 100 metres should suffice. Or having 3 spots allocated of which the person affected can choose to move to. Or rehouse them in a home that is already built somewhere else. It would be paid for by the company building the railway and I wouldn't expect the family moving to pay a penny regardless of if the area was more expensive or less expensive.

 

[richieb1971]

Not sure which of A or B is strongest but in terms of Bedford why isn't there room for both stations? Bedford Midland and Bedford (Wixams).

Service from the west terminating at Bedford Midland (or extended northwards) from Bletchley (and beyond) and also a service from Bedford Midland (or north) towards Cambridge as well as a service from Bletchley (and beyond) to Cambridge calling at Wixams and avoiding Bedford Midland?

I think the developers like their straight lines and want a Wixams style station so that the end to end journey times are the fastest they can be. In 30 years time they may want to speed up the journey times and get the kinks out of the line and if the line isn't already straight it creates problems again. Straight lines are always going to be better and its cheaper too.

Having both stations supported by EWR is ok I guess. But from where I am sitting most Bedfordians want Midland on the route without realizing the repercussions of the bottlenecks on traffic, parking and train congestion that will be afforded by the current station. There is absolutely no proof or evidence that BDM is getting any major overhaul at all. Bedford Midland will at least need 2 12 car sidings north of Bedford to accommodate Thamleslink reversals in my humble opinion. Jowett sidings are not appropriate to quickly get trains in and out of the station.

 

[DarloRich]

Agreed. Since most of these dwellings will be farm houses or a small row of homes (I can't imagine a railway going through a suburb) just moving the home by a 100 metres should suffice. Or having 3 spots allocated of which the person affected can choose to move to. Or rehouse them in a home that is already built somewhere else. It would be paid for by the company building the railway and I wouldn't expect the family moving to pay a penny regardless of if the area was more expensive or less expensive.

the process has neither changed nor is new. Sadly the real world is not as black and white as you like to think.

 

[eastdyke]

There are seemingly a number of outstanding candidates here for the Arthur Dunt [sic] Award for Urban Sacrifice
(With my apologies to Douglas Adams)

 

[richieb1971]

The Vale line is getting upgraded crossings. With concrete slabbed steps and a nice metal gate no less.



Taken at Chantry road foot crossing in Kempston today (to see 37611). I would have thought this crossing would be closed post EWR and not worthy of new slabs, bricks and gates.

 

[jfowkes]

Ahh, I have fond childhood memories of that foot crossing. Cycle to the retail park, get a McDonald's, cycle back to the crossing and sit and wait for a train to wave at.

 

[DarloRich]

The Vale line is getting upgraded crossings. With concrete slabbed steps and a nice metal gate no less.



Taken at Chantry road foot crossing in Kempston today (to see 37611). I would have thought this crossing would be closed post EWR and not worthy of new slabs, bricks and gates.

View attachment 60646

The crossing still has to be safe to use and fit for purpose. Also it is the end of the financial year. Amazing what gets fixed then!

 

[petersi]

the process has neither changed nor is new. Sadly the real world is not as black and white as you like to think.

No but is useful for a minster that wishes to ‘cancel’ a project.
Some on Twitter are suggesting the minster is looking for reasons to ‘cancel ‘ even to Bletchley

 

[richieb1971]

I think the minister should be cancelled.

 

[DarloRich]

No but is useful for a minster that wishes to ‘cancel’ a project.
Some on Twitter are suggesting the minster is looking for reasons to ‘cancel ‘ even to Bletchley

That might happen but it wont be because of compulsory purchase or any such silliness. We don't know the post Brexit financial environment. If the economy tanks funding may not be available. This is the reality of public funding.

 

[richieb1971]

2 pictures taken Friday 29/3/19 approximately 09:30-10:00 at Bedford Midland. Any freight or EWR trains would have to wait if BDM is put on the EWR network. Not even rush hour.

PS, in the first shot, the 1 car unit sits in platform 1A. I think it had left by the time I took photo number 2.

 

[DarloRich]

Becuase, of course, no operating practices or infrastructure changes would be made ro facilitate new services...........

 

[Bald Rick]

Becuase, of course, no operating practices or infrastructure changes would be made ro facilitate new services...........

Quite! I mean what if an EWR service was timetabled to arrive 10 minutes earlier or later?

 

[Grumpy]

View attachment 60911 View attachment 60912


2 pictures taken Friday 29/3/19 approximately 09:30-10:00 at Bedford Midland. Any freight or EWR trains would have to wait if BDM is put on the EWR network. Not even rush hour.

.

Not sure what qualifies as rush hour. However looking at Realtime Trains for 0730-0830 yesterday morning, one train departed platform 1a, three from platform 1, three from platform 2, one from platform 3 and four from platform 4. Seems like a nice quiet country station.

 

[richieb1971]

P1 had a freight go through southbound and 2 minutes later in came in a 700 from the south. Yes if Bedford gets an upgrade or they can facilitate the extra workings that's great. But as people say money is short, there is political unrest, lots of uncertainty and nobody has stated that if EWR goes through Bedford that Bedford will get any upgrades. Not expensive ones anyway. I posted those pics to prove that at times Bedford is busy and freight is already affected. If those HS2 freight come down the MML next year we will see what happens then.

 

[bengley]

Not sure what qualifies as rush hour. However looking at Realtime Trains for 0730-0830 yesterday morning, one train departed platform 1a, three from platform 1, three from platform 2, one from platform 3 and four from platform 4. Seems like a nice quiet country station.

For what length of time during that hour were the platforms occupied?

 

[DarloRich]

P1 had a freight go through southbound and 2 minutes later in came in a 700 from the south. Yes if Bedford gets an upgrade or they can facilitate the extra workings that's great. But as people say money is short, there is political unrest, lots of uncertainty and nobody has stated that if EWR goes through Bedford that Bedford will get any upgrades. Not expensive ones anyway. I posted those pics to prove that at times Bedford is busy and freight is already affected. If those HS2 freight come down the MML next year we will see what happens then.

Agreed that if nothing changes supporting e-w services will be very hard indeed

 

[richieb1971]

For what length of time during that hour were the platforms occupied?

I wasn't there at that time. I was there 0920 until almost 1100. My train to Leicester was cancelled so I had to wait

Let's not forget EWR will use the one track linking to the branch that 12 car units use to reverse into jowitt sidings. None of the other sidings can house a 12 car unit. I'm game for two sidings being built north of Bedford near bromham lower farm road. There is room and it has been proposed by another person in the consultation process. Not an issue if we get the new station south of Bedford if course.

 

[hooverboy]

I wasn't there at that time. I was there 0920 until almost 1100. My train to Leicester was cancelled so I had to wait

Let's not forget EWR will use the one track linking to the branch that 12 car units use to reverse into jowitt sidings. None of the other sidings can house a 12 car unit. I'm game for two sidings being built north of Bedford near bromham lower farm road. There is room and it has been proposed by another person in the consultation process. Not an issue if we get the new station south of Bedford if course.

I suspect if BDM is selected for east-west rail,that stretch will be modified.....EWR connection to MML at elstow/kempston onto the slows and use current tracks up as far as the maintainance yard/scrapyard....then construction of new road overbridge and river bridge crossing.....approach will be basically parallel to existing thameslink to arrive on new platform 1/1x(in place of 1a).

st johns will likely close.
there is no space for extra track there as it goes right through a small new build housing plot and 15mph single track curve will be a massive bottleneck on ewr.

 

[richieb1971]

I can't see that happening. It's more likely the wixams Bedford south will be built.

 

[70014IronDuke]

I suspect if BDM is selected for east-west rail,that stretch will be modified.....EWR connection to MML at elstow/kempston onto the slows and use current tracks up as far as the maintainance yard/scrapyard....then construction of new road overbridge and river bridge crossing.....approach will be basically parallel to existing thameslink to arrive on new platform 1/1x(in place of 1a).

st johns will likely close.
there is no space for extra track there as it goes right through a small new build housing plot and 15mph single track curve will be a massive bottleneck on ewr.

Of course, the current single track through Bedford St Johns (new) is inadequate for an enhanced E-W rail. That would have to be sorted out.

But how can you make any connection at Elstow? The difference in heights between the two lines will prevent that. Plus, I imagine, buildings by the side of the MML. (I haven't been there for donkey's years, so don't know the current situation.)

The only way to do a connection would be to divert the Marston V line onto the MML somewhere between Millbrook- Stewartby, I'd have thought.

If I've got it right, people are saying BDM as it stands won't have capacity for the additional East-West services without a significant rebuild? But the capacity problems are caused by the need to terminate and hold Thameslink trains at BDM (along with stopping some MML trains)?

I've said it before, but I'll say it again - rather than some expensive rebuild of BDM in its constrained location - let's do it properly - build a new Oakley/Milton Earnest/Bedford North PKWY and terminate and turn Thamelsink trains, or most of them, there. Fulfilling plans originally mooted back in the mid-1980s.

This frees up space at BDM and slashes road traffic into north Bedford every morning as commuters from the northern catchment area would use the new station rather than drive into Bedford.

 

[jfowkes]

I know this is pure speculation and won't happen, but just to indulge my curiosity: what about building a new station at the Bedford St. Johns location and terminating/reversing there? Looks like there is enough physical space for it.

It puts a station in Bedford and keeps extra traffic off the MML. The link to Bedford Midland could be kept and used for some EWR trains if the extra capacity was ever found there.

 

[richieb1971]

I proposed in the consultation that St Johns be upgraded to a full working station like back in the day. There are currently 3 places around the station that can be used for parking. The old station land is still unused and has access to the new station. The bit that has access at the end of the Prebend St which was trees for 30+ years, although someone has cut them down and laid some paving. I would be interested to know what that land is being used for. The third place is the hospital car park which can be extended closer to the track.

I've said it before, but I'll say it again - rather than some expensive rebuild of BDM in its constrained location - let's do it properly - build a new Oakley/Milton Earnest/Bedford North PKWY and terminate and turn Thamelsink trains, or most of them, there. Fulfilling plans originally mooted back in the mid-1980s.

This frees up space at BDM and slashes road traffic into north Bedford every morning as commuters from the northern catchment area would use the new station rather than drive into Bedford.

I like this idea a lot.

 

[DarloRich]

Is Bedford st John's not a full working station today? Did I imagine getting off there the other day?

Personally I think @70014IronDuke makes a very good suggestion. I dont know that end of Bedford well enough to comment on practicalities but the key has to be to move the thameslink trains out of the station at Bedford.

Ps do posters honestly believe that if ewr was to serve Bedford nothing would be dine to upgrade the single track available between st John's and midland?