-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
East-West Rail (EWR): Consultation updates [not speculation]
- Thread starter aylesbury2
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
route:oxford
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 4,949
How much harm would it cause to the environment, rail network, and people's lives if, within 2-3 years, refurbished Class 365s were operating a twice hourly shuttle service on an electrified, rebuilt route, between Oxford and Milton Keynes?
Ah great the old have a go at a typo because you have no real substance in your argument approach...
You imply it repeatedly - the words in bold from the rest of your post are classic conspiracy theory words...
Now I personally find 11 rather high (though it is believable given they are building the railway cheap), but I find 80-100,000 houses really rather low - isn't the plan a million extra people in the Varsity Arc? 80-100k houses sounds like just one area's figure.
They aren't specific as to where as that is a separate report, and needs to go through the planning process separately - ie they haven't worked out exactly where they are. There's a few options (one massive new city of about 300k, several new large towns of about 80k, lots of smaller new towns of about 20k - and large expansion of MK and Bedford in all options), all of which are E-W Rail centric.
PS: what's 'anal ysis'? Seems skitts law has struck - and I'm definitely not googling that to double check.
doa46231
Member
Darlorich and others consistently criticise me for questioning my scepticism about the value of the Eastern bit of the E-W link.
I'm too stupid and ignorant to understand the underlying principles.
Well what are they?
The crux of the argument seems to be that as hundreds of thousands of new houses etc. are to be built in the 'corridor' the railway is needed.
All sorts of figures are bandied about but they are all ephemeral, ghostly and optimistic and many years in a future which is lengthy and largely unknown, figures plucked out of planning briefs and treated as gospel by those clever people like Darlorich.
Well I'll give you a figure which is not ephemeral.
I've lived in Milton keynes for more than 30 years.
When I moved here the population of the area, including, surrounding towns like Newpor Pagnelll and Stony strarford was roughly 150,000.
It is now roughly 250,000.
I may be stupid but that's an increase of 100,000 people.
In that time usage of the Beds-Bletchley line has been virtually static.
Despite all the negative aspects, you would have thought there would be some increase in usage of a line going bang through an area with a population of a quarter million.
But no. Zilch, nada, nothing!
Darlo himself has said he's scptical about the Cambridge to Bedford scheme.
So what is left of East-West rail?
Just the Oxford/Aylesbury to MK line which I've already said ad infinitum I support wholeheartedly.
So what dont I understand?
The folk living in the villages along the Beds-Bedford line are NOT going to use the train to go to MK, it does'nt go there, despite it being the biggest draw on the line by far.
So it's going to be to Oxford or Aylesbury and points west with a change.
I dont believe that enough people will want to do that by rail to make the scheme viable.
Sorry to be so exasperating and ignorant, but I've only had a state education!
I'm too stupid and ignorant to understand the underlying principles.
Well what are they?
The crux of the argument seems to be that as hundreds of thousands of new houses etc. are to be built in the 'corridor' the railway is needed.
All sorts of figures are bandied about but they are all ephemeral, ghostly and optimistic and many years in a future which is lengthy and largely unknown, figures plucked out of planning briefs and treated as gospel by those clever people like Darlorich.
Well I'll give you a figure which is not ephemeral.
I've lived in Milton keynes for more than 30 years.
When I moved here the population of the area, including, surrounding towns like Newpor Pagnelll and Stony strarford was roughly 150,000.
It is now roughly 250,000.
I may be stupid but that's an increase of 100,000 people.
In that time usage of the Beds-Bletchley line has been virtually static.
Despite all the negative aspects, you would have thought there would be some increase in usage of a line going bang through an area with a population of a quarter million.
But no. Zilch, nada, nothing!
Darlo himself has said he's scptical about the Cambridge to Bedford scheme.
So what is left of East-West rail?
Just the Oxford/Aylesbury to MK line which I've already said ad infinitum I support wholeheartedly.
So what dont I understand?
The folk living in the villages along the Beds-Bedford line are NOT going to use the train to go to MK, it does'nt go there, despite it being the biggest draw on the line by far.
So it's going to be to Oxford or Aylesbury and points west with a change.
I dont believe that enough people will want to do that by rail to make the scheme viable.
Sorry to be so exasperating and ignorant, but I've only had a state education!
Cambridge is a much bigger economic magnet than Bedford and the Central Section will be based on trips to Cambs and on enhanced Oxford-Cambs connectivity.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,493
Post #2647 a day or two ago attempted a summary. They won’t start major work away from the existing railway boundary until the scheme TWA Order is confirmed, expected this year.
doa46231
Member
Even I recogise that.
But you have already said you are sceptical of the railway being built. So that's a bit of a red herring.
And even if, in the mists of time, it is built why would people use the train in sufficient numbers?
Cambridge may well be a big economic magnet, but it is spread round a wide area. The tech companies etc. are not mainly near Cambridge stations, so the vast majority will use a car.
As I keep saying the big flaw in the whole scheme is that it does'nt serve Milton Keynes or Bedford from the East without a change, which is anathema to most people.
Am I right in saying the one thing I'm too ignorant to grasp is that the huge increase in housing, if ever built, automatically means increased patronage of the railway?
If there are others, please enlighten me!
Dont forget, after Brexit, the last thing people will be buying is houses and train tickets.
They'll be too busy trying to get food and medicines!
My scepticism about the scheme is whether it will maximise the benefits, but I do think that a railway will connect Oxford and Cambs by 2030.
The big housing developments in the Marston Vale and at Cambourne will become dormitories for the economic hubs on the arc- Ox/Cambs/MK. Not serving Cambs-MK directly isn't the ideal, but short of a new line running to the north of MK and approaching MKC from Wolverton, I don't see how this works unless you allow a double reversal (Bletchley and MKC), which isn't attractive.
Jorge Da Silva
Established Member
I think they should provide a Curve from the Marston Vale Line to MKC as part of the Central Section and provide a MKC-Bedford service.
I thought that it didn't fit without lots of demolition?
Jorge Da Silva
Established Member
Sorry had not done my research. Just looked at Google Maps and that looks to be the case.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
They are building the houses now. Many more are planned. I will try to avoid the silly personal stuff as you simply present an open goal. Please give it a rest.
So let me get this straight as it is very confusing to follow your "logic": because the people of Newport Pagnell & Stony Stratford don't drive out of their way to use the Marston Vale line service it isn't worth building a new railway line. Is that correct?
I wonder what the user figures for Milton Keynes and Blethcley ( an Wolverton) have been in the period?
Are you a daily user of the line like me? I have only lived in MK for 9 years but I have used the train every day except Sunday when there is no service as i have no car. There has been an increase in passenger numbers. When i started using the train i was the only peroson getting off or on at Fenny. Now there is 5 or 6 people getting both on an off every morning. The number of free seats on the trains ( which haven't changed in the 9 years i have been a passenger) have decline to the point that in the morning there are often no seats available on the 153. When i started there was plenty of space. Those are small numbers but have been replicated along the line. Personally I believe the number of people not buying a ticket is suppressing the true user figures.
There are many more passengers going to both MK and London ( levels are about the same now) but the main constraint is the slowness of the service NOT the change. The proposed service pattern for the E-W services shows a limited Bedford > Ridgmont > Woburn > Bletchley service that should delver a much more attractive journey time.
But they are already. More and more people are going to MK form the Vale. Like I said my knowledge is only based on daily use of the line. Perhaps you have something better based on your log term residence in the area.
You mean like now where there is a change at Bletchley or Bedford for London? I maintain the change isn't the main limiting factor on the line and it wont be after the new services come on line.
Sigh - this again?
So people wont need a home after Brexit? Bizarre. If anything more homes will be needed down here to accommodate all of the people having to move ( like i had to) from areas with little work to areas with work. That area will be the South East of England. House prices are such that longer distance commuting will be needed to allow people to afford a home and travel to work. Even if house prices in London & SE crash there simply isn't the land to accommodate everyone who will want/need to come.
Last edited:
The total rate of migration into the UK is pretty much the same post June 2016 as it was before - it's simply got more skilled, and more diverse in origin (non-EU migration has grown significantly, outweighing the significant reduction of migration from the EU - though the UK-EU migration balance is still net inflow to the UK). Housing remains much in demand, whether in the EU or not, due to our growing population - and arguably the increase in skilled migration means more demand for housing in high-tech corridors like the Varsity Arc.
Plus, no deal Brexit is apparently going to increase the number of unplanned pregnancies - supposedly nowhere other than the EU manufactures birth control, and it's somehow impossible for non-EU countries to buy products from the EU (I mean look at the high birth rate in Singapore) - that baby boom will need housing in 20 years time!
These are the number of entries and exits for stations on the Marston Vale line reported in https://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/ex...station-usage-time-series-97-98-to-17-18.xlsx (there are no numbers for 2003-04).
The bottom line is the total. I don't know what happened for Bedford St Johns to go from 10140 in 2011-12 to 154976 in 2012-13. Ignoring that, there was a dip in usage to 2003-04 with an increase of about 50% since then.
Code:
1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18
Fenny Stratford 28394 22465 21539 18697 16502 19864 18507 18683 16734 18418 17662 15580 17344 21308 21268 26424 27134 27416 24974 22634
Bow Brickhill 25019 23548 23772 21262 21835 24928 22415 19336 26993 28648 31640 26938 35894 33638 34116 36836 40918 43016 40626 38846
Woburn Sands 65020 54818 52047 46634 47998 45743 42382 40544 39119 46377 44670 38958 45602 47428 40466 42828 42408 44674 38942 46606
Ridgmont 9488 7462 13178 23658 27075 24297 28021 26503 29064 29346 28822 24028 23008 24330 24816 27396 35428 37200 34388 36450
Lidlington 27289 24703 23627 24053 22523 19911 16257 20236 20772 26863 24902 21028 24800 26652 26184 25980 28742 25794 27326 27510
Millbrook 10201 8618 8305 9193 9638 10928 11744 12828 13671 12303 13972 12758 13172 15962 14736 16460 16384 16084 13654 11324
Stewartby 9983 10195 9732 14360 17570 15957 16529 18637 19135 17268 18872 15502 14734 15556 14696 16012 32330 36326 36976 48412
Kempston Hardwick 2551 887 1983 2014 2562 3152 2955 4088 4394 6775 8252 6350 6284 7316 5626 7032 7712 10022 11806 9842
Bedford St.Johns 124 251 327 340 644 710 470 361 942 12106 14068 11908 12168 10140 154976 162880 173191 178636 183826 186638
Total 178069 152947 154510 160211 166347 165490 159280 161216 170824 198104 202860 173050 193006 202330 336884 361848 404247 419168 412518 428262
Last edited:
DarloRich
Veteran Member
@bspahh - thanks - i honestly don't trust those figures at all. There is so much short distance ticket less travel on the Vale simply because of the nature of the route that i think the true numbers are higher. I also think the numbers DO show how the slight timetable changes to make the change ( both North and South) at Blethcley better had an impact. The dip in the middle years shown is due, imo, to a period of absolutely terrible reliability and publicity and closures for upgrade works. The users group have done good work in recent years to promote the line, improve the stations and generally show someone gives a stuff.
( St Johns i think is due to a change in recording methodology)
( St Johns i think is due to a change in recording methodology)
doa46231
Member
"You Think" That gives me great confidence.
Not very successful were you!
I thought you were a bit more intelligent than that. That was not the logic of my post
No it's not correct.
I should have inluded Stony Stratford, Woburn Sands and a few other places to imply that it was the area around MK that had the population increase.
Didn't realise you couldn't work that out.
My goodness, we'll need a big taxi soon!
What about all the other services?
Station usage figures estimate the number of passengers using Woburn Sands in 2018 (probably the busiest station on the line), Was 128 per day, roughly the same as in 2012.
Hardly suggests a huge increase in passengers.
Perhaps your crystal ball will give us the figures for the next 5 years as it gives us for completion of the line. (sigh)
You dont do jokes do you!
Ok, let me be clear. My evidence-based assessment is that we have reached a political tipping point in favour of EWR with the creation of the SPV delivery vehicle (whatever we think of that as an idea) and the process for issuing the TWAO; any future Tory/Tory-lead government will continue the programme because cancelling it would be embarassing in any area which a future Tory party needs to be strong and overcome its Brexit legacy (Oxford/Cambs/much of the arc were heavily remain), and that a future Labour-led government would continue it because it will be an advanced project that cancelling would look ridiculous given their attachment to a narrative of investment in public services.
Ergo, I expect to be able to travel direct from Cambs to Oxford by rail via Bedford by 2030 (and hopefully rather sooner).
Happy now?
DarloRich
Veteran Member
But you didn't. You suggested two places without a station or obvious links to the line in question ( being as they are in completely the wrong direction!) as evidence why people living in a village with a station on the line in question wouldn't use their station! Sadly, I am not clairvoyant so can only base my views on what you actually post! What you posted was nonsense.
What on earth are you on about? What other services? We have one train per hour in each direction. As I have said I suspect the station user figures are not accurate. They don't count all the passengers travelling for free. I know several get on at Woburn Sands every day ( and yes i have told LNWR and the gaurd) and buy a ticket at best twice a week.
As I said I use the train every day ( do you?) and have seen the numbers increase. You can mock the small numbers involved at Fenny Stratford all you like. If that % of passenger increase is reflected at all stations on the line we would all be very happy. The numbers are small in the grand scheme of things but fairly large for a rural line with a poor service. As I said, there are often no seats on the morning train. There were when I started getting the train but there aren't now. Perhaps they are all imaginary people on the train. Perhaps a number of seats have been taken out of the train or perhaps, as I think, the number of users has gone up.
If your poorly expressed post refers to the planned new E- W services they will be filled up by people living in the thousands of new houses being built. Some of those are being being built now. OBVIOUSLY not every new resident will use the train but some will especially those going to London or Milton Keynes even with the change that you think, wrongly imo, is the main factor limiting use. ( I maintain the main limiting factors are the slow journey time and the poor service frequency)
That was a joke? I couldn't separate it from your "serious" postings!
Very good! Once a route and funding have been finalised for Bedford to Cambridge part I will be more comfortable that this section will be built. The first section will almost certainly be built ( Noting that nothing is certain when relying on public finance)
Given that typically you have 2.4 people per dwelling you'd need about 400,000 homes to gain 1 million people.
The thing is with severally thousand of pounds being available from each home in the form of developer funding the amount of government funding drops significantly.
For instance £5,000 per home would add £0.5 billion in contributions to the project.
However there's also the extra passengers which get added. For instance at 2% rail usage that's about 5,000 extra rail users. At £1,000 spend per year that's an extra £300 million over a 60 year period.
If we assume a £2.4bn price tag that's 1/3 of the project cost (which assuming no extra services required) is covered by other funding sources.
hooverboy
On Moderation
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 1,372
it's only industrial estate, with plenty of spare industrial estate in the same vacinity.Sorry had not done my research. Just looked at Google Maps and that looks to be the case.
it is much easier to relocate these than it is residential areas.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Where is this spare industrial estate? It honestly isnt anywhere as simply or easy as posters here constantly state!
I think it is actually easier to relocate domestoc dwellings!
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Which is yet another reason why not running from the Marston Vale to MKC is utterly, utterly nuts.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
There's tons of spare land around MK. Designate some as an industrial estate.
It is far easier to relocate businesses, the reasons being:
1. Businesses tend to lease rather than own premises
2. Businesses (other than small retail/service businesses, which aren't what are posing an issue here) are generally not emotional about their premises; they don't spend years building them up to how they like them and building an emotional attachment to them. If someone comes to them and says "we'll pay you the full cost of relocating to new premises located relatively nearby plus a bit" they will generally not object.
FWIW, the warehouses in the way are mostly large ones and so are likely to be populated by large businesses (one of which is Ikea Full Serve - I can't see them objecting providing costs are all paid!)
So I don't think there would be a big barrier to this at all and I could see it having substantial benefits.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
I disagree. I have worked for people and business being moved and worked moving people and businesses out. Based on my experience it is much harder to move businesses than residential homes. There are arguments about everything in relation to business moves. Domestic moves are much easier to arrange. Obviously domestic moves are much more emotional however the price to be paid is quite simple to calculate and the replacement options are varied and easy to arrange.
It also isn't as easy as simply designating land as an industrial estate. If only it was!
Class 170101
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 7,959
Unless a curve could be constructed within the confines of existing railway land at Bletchley Carriage Sidings (remodelled or closed) the only other option would be a tunnel with a portal probably just north of the A5 near to Standing Way at the WCML end whilst at the other end it would be between Bow Brickhill and Fenny Stratford again near the A5. But frankly that would be expensive and the BCR terrible.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I don't agree. I think the industrial estate is entirely viable, and the benefits of the Marston Vale (and EWR) services being MKC-Bedford instead of Bletchley-Bedford significant. Even though it would be less convenient for me!
I don't agree. I think the industrial estate is entirely viable, and the benefits of the Marston Vale (and EWR) services being MKC-Bedford instead of Bletchley-Bedford significant. Even though it would be less convenient for me!
The land for such a N-E curve through those warehouses would cost between £20m-£50m depending on the lease terms. Plus the cost of the purchase process (add 10-20%). Definitely cheaper than a tunnel. But not cheap either.
Do you think a N-E curve is likely, @Bald Rick ?
DarloRich
Veteran Member
No. Not without extra funding being made available
hooverboy
On Moderation
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 1,372
not just that.
right.
with residential areas you also need to worry about enhanced environmental and noise restrictions legislation.
Given a suitable relocation(maybe Network rail co compulsary purchase on other "dormant" areas of the site, offer to set up new warehouses and gift them a few years free rent...that sort of package most industrial owner would deem as sufficient recompense)
..the move would not be that big a deal.
..plus it is only a handful of entities you deal with....in tems of residential every one individually can object
Last edited:
- Status