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

[Richard Ingram]

I wouldn't have thought so - this is where the Millard Radio Observatory is, and it is quite a way from Cambourne which is also at the top of the hill. I'd always presumed that if Route E was selected, it would run north of the old route, through Dry Drayton over the A14/M11 and then come in along the busway (ie, the old railway to new platforms at Cambridge North.

I think it was decided ages ago that Cambridge would be approached from the South. Although, I would expect it to be very unlikely it would use any of the old route, as the busway is well used. My guess would be joining around the Shelfords.

 

[si404]

I'd always presumed that if Route E was selected, it would run north of the old route, through Dry Drayton over the A14/M11 and then come in along the busway (ie, the old railway to new platforms at Cambridge North.

Why would you presume that, given a northern approach to Cambridge had been ruled out before we got to this round of route selection, and the maps and text descriptions of the route clearly have a corridor that reaches the WAML south of Cambridge?

 

[richieb1971]

It will be interesting if they decide Bedford Midland is adequate as is.
Wixams is now supported solely by MML (as opposed to a Tamworth style station that could have been under route A)
Going north of Bedford will mean a lot of new bridges and trenches as the land is significantly hillier than route A (less populated though) and will likely be north of Oakley where it branches.


I was kinda liking route A, but E will do. I was getting the vibe that changing to E wasn't ever going to happen after the BCR chose route A.

 

[Verulamius]

Bedford Midland will need a couple of extra platforms I think?

I recall there was a proposal about 10 years ago to knock down part of the station building to add some more through platforms. That was pulled as it was decided that the Thameslink Programme did not require it.

 

[camflyer]

Why would you presume that, given a northern approach to Cambridge had been ruled out before we got to this round of route selection, and the maps and text descriptions of the route clearly have a corridor that reaches the WAML south of Cambridge?

Every route option in last year's consultation used a southern approach to Cambridge as a northern approach was never going to feasible (despite a few loudmouths keep banging on about it) due to the loss of current Busway stops, the amount of engineering work required around Milton Road in Cambridge (a level crossing would have caused chaos) and the trains would have to reverse at Cambridge Central to continue to Ipswich.

There are ways to improve the Busway but ripping it up to replace with a heavy rail link isn't the way to do it.

 

[ashkeba]

Going north of Bedford will mean a lot of new bridges and trenches as the land is significantly hillier than route A (less populated though) and will likely be north of Oakley where it branches.

That looks reasonable on a map. While hillier, they are not mountains. Maybe it will pass close to the south of Bedford Autodrome and Aerodrome to minimise intrustion into the countryside, then make for Colmworth and cross the A1 near Wyboston before heading for Cambourne.

 

[camflyer]

Fair enough - is this decision accompanied by the cash required to do it over the cheapest option?

Edit: It seems Grant Shaps has announced it: https://www.cambridgeindependent.co...HA9VvlQYje6JAHipIyklXYMRF7dREo2e-m3v_hPrbiiOM

I just hope that this isn't used as an excuse to pull funding from the Ox-Cam Expressway. Both schemes are needed.

Once the A248/Black Cat upgrade is finished there will be a good road link between Milton Keynes and Cambridge - and onwards to Norwich and Ipswich. It just seems that the good folk of Oxfordshire aren't so keen on better east-west road links.

 

[DaveN]

The bit from the consultation document about option E said "If EWR were to serve Bedford Midland, this would require works to increase the capacity of the existing station and potentially re-model or re-locate the existing Bedford maintenance depot."

I must admit I'm very surprised that this was chosen instead of option A. The cynic in me says perhaps it is so they can "pause" it in case the "Beeching" re-openings provide better value for money....

 

[ashkeba]

The bit from the consultation document about option E said "If EWR were to serve Bedford Midland, this would require works to increase the capacity of the existing station and potentially re-model or re-locate the existing Bedford maintenance depot."

I must admit I'm very surprised that this was chosen instead of option A. The cynic in me says perhaps it is so they can "pause" it in case the "Beeching" re-openings provide better value for money....

I admit I do not understand that. There appears to be a vast area of tarmac northeast of the current station suitable for station expansion.

 

[richieb1971]

That tarmac is the station car park which is 110% full daily.

 

[Tobbes]

Every route option in last year's consultation used a southern approach to Cambridge as a northern approach was never going to feasible (despite a few loudmouths keep banging on about it) due to the loss of current Busway stops, the amount of engineering work required around Milton Road in Cambridge (a level crossing would have caused chaos) and the trains would have to reverse at Cambridge Central to continue to Ipswich.

I trust I'm not one of said loudmouths...

The rationale for reusing the busway as a rail corridor is that it could open up train/tram-train service options to St Ives and onwards to Huntingdon and/or Ramsey which provide obvious housing growth for greater Cambridge over the next 30 years - with a capacity that the bus does not and will not.

And a true northerly approach through the Science Park means that no reversal is needed to serve Stansted when the capacity is increased, which is likely to be a much greater passenger draw from west of Cambridge than either Ipswich or Norwich.

There are ways to improve the Busway but ripping it up to replace with a heavy rail link isn't the way to do it.

What would you do to the busway?

 

[jfowkes]

That tarmac is the station car park which is 110% full daily.

It looks like any use of Bedford Midland as a non-reversing station for EWR will involve use of the current car park in some form though?
Assuming you want complete separation of the EWR tracks as far north as the end of P1, that takes out the station building, bike racks and a lot of the "thin bit" of the car park.

Not sure where you'd build replacement car spaces except by building upwards.

 

[HowardGWR]

I wouldn't have thought so - this is where the Millard Radio Observatory is, and it is quite a way from Cambourne which is also at the top of the hill. I'd always presumed that if Route E was selected, it would run north of the old route, through Dry Drayton over the A14/M11 and then come in along the busway (ie, the old railway to new platforms at Cambridge North.

Route E shows quite clearly that Cambridge will be approached from the south. see map kindly provided above.

 

[edwin_m]

Good and brave decision - but a detailed map would be really helpful.

They consulted on the "shaded area" maps someone posted earlier today, so the decision only confirms that (barring abandonment or major backtracking) the line will be somewhere in the shaded area marked E. The next stage will be to define the actual line within that area, but when they publish that they will also need to put in place a compensation arrangement for those whose property is close to the route and therefore blighted (unable to sell at market value).

Since this is a fairly serious financial commitment they have to be pretty sure before they take that step. It would probably be accompanied by another round of consultation, aiming to finalise the actual route as quickly as possible to avoid the blight issue applying for a long time over several alternatives.

It looks like any use of Bedford Midland as a non-reversing station for EWR will involve use of the current car park in some form though?
Assuming you want complete separation of the EWR tracks as far north as the end of P1, that takes out the station building, bike racks and a lot of the "thin bit" of the car park.

Not sure where you'd build replacement car spaces except by building upwards.

Agreed. One or two new platforms to the east of P1, probably only connecting to EWR because of the limited space at the south end. They would have to be full length even though EWR trains would be shorter, so that Thameslink could still use the existing platforms alongside. They would then merge into the existing Slow lines between the platform ends and the Bromham Road bridge, losing the siding which is of limited use today as it won't take a 12-car. Quite a lot of car park would be lost, but it ought to be possible to deck over the rest of it or even over some of the sidings south of Ford End Road.

 

[ashkeba]

It looks like any use of Bedford Midland as a non-reversing station for EWR will involve use of the current car park in some form though?
Assuming you want complete separation of the EWR tracks as far north as the end of P1, that takes out the station building, bike racks and a lot of the "thin bit" of the car park.

Not sure where you'd build replacement car spaces except by building upwards.

Upwards is one. Downwards if it's watertight. Then Wixams for Thameslink, Kempston for EWR and possibly a new north Bedford station later. Using limited town centre land for single-level surface car parking seems rather wasteful.

 

[Neen Sollars]

Pleased that something has been announced today, even if by mistake (?) and the full announcement of green light for Bicester to Bedford construction work to commence and the Route E preferred option route will be fully announced on 4th Feb. I can live with the Route E decision it looks one that will tick most of the boxes, and can easily access the Newmarket to Ipswich line.
Regarding parking at Bedford, if the MML connection is made after Stewartby or after Kempston to go north into Bedford Midland, will any redundant land become available for parking if Bedford St John`s closes?
The Route E decision now gives certainty to the designers/engineers of the route at the eastern end of Bicester to Bedford?

 

[jfowkes]

Regarding parking at Bedford, if the MML connection is made after Stewartby or after Kempston to go north into Bedford Midland, will any redundant land become available for parking if Bedford St John`s closes?

It looks to me like route E uses the existing route all the way into Bedford Midland, with no connection to the MML south of the station.

Even if St. John's did close, I'd say it's too far away from Bedford Midland. It would make a really awkward place to put a car park for it.

 

[richieb1971]

I can't see Bedford getting 2 new platforms. More than likely its going to be 1 long platform from 1a, though the building and out to the siding on the north side and attach back on to the up slow. The building will likely be refurbed, moved eastwards etc. The car park won't be affected doing this but you will lose the cycle rack.

 

[Midnight Sun]

Seens that the preferred route is via Tempsford and Camborne with new stations at both places. If Camborne has a raillink, no need for a new slower busway.

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/stations-new-train-line-cambridge-17657899

New stations will be built in Cambourne and near St Neots as part of the developing Oxford-Cambridge Arc, the government announced.

East West Rail, which connects the two cities, will have one section from Bedford to Cambridge, but specifics of the route were not revealed until yesterday (Thursday).

It will run from Bedford Midland station to a new station south of St Neots, near Tempsford, then onto a new station in Cambourne, before arriving in Cambridge. The journey will take 82 minutes in total.

Minister for future of transport George Freeman, who visited Cambridge yesterday, said: “East-West Rail has the potential to improve rail links to support opportunities for new housing, reduce congestion and pollution, and unlock the economic potential across the region.

“By boosting rail connectivity we can improve access to economic opportunities for people in this area, and boost the quality of life in this vital arc.”

This announcement follows an eight-week consultation held last year on several route proposals, and will lead the government when making a final decision on whether to take this project forward and make an application for a developed consent order, which is the permission needed before carrying out nationally significant projects.

This was the most expensive proposed route, with an indicative up front construction cost of £3.4 billion at 2015 prices. No updated prices have been yet given.

The East West Rail Company will now develop more detailed route proposals, in consultation with residents in the area.

Minister for East West Rail, Paul Maynard, said: “East West Rail could help us revolutionise transport in the Oxford-Cambridge arc, increasing people’s access to job opportunities while making travel quicker, cheaper and easier.

“Today’s announcement, following our £500 million fund to bring back lines and stations lost during closures in the 1960s, shows we’re backing up our commitment to improving access to opportunities across the country.”

South Cambridgeshire MP Anthony Browne said he was “delighted” at the news, adding: “I have been campaigning for this route because it is best for local people, businesses and the environment.

“Commuters in Cambourne and the surrounding villages have been crying out for a rapid and reliable transport link into Cambridge and now they will get it.”

Three of the proposed routes were to go via Bassingbourn (the southern route), and two were through Cambourne (the northern route).

On the other proposed routes, Mr Browne said: “Residents in Bassingbourn will also be relieved.

“There is no commuter need for an additional rail link in this area and the environmental destruction would have been huge.

“Having confirmed this northern route, we can now plan other local transport links in South Cambridgeshire more effectively, so the whole system works together.”

Cambridge MP Daniel Zeichner said he welcomed the announcement, adding: “The route presents major opportunities for jobs and housing and will help ease congestion in the city.

“But let’s go further. There is an opportunity to be bold in the midst of a climate emergency and have an electrified line and put it in public hands and run for the benefit of the public from the outset.

“We also don’t need a road too.”

He described the Oxford to Cambridge expressway, a proposed motorway between the two cities, as a “20th century solution to a 21st century challenge”.

“There is no logic in building a huge new motorway when we should be promoting public transport use,” he added.

“So my message to ministers is scrap the road and make the railway the best it can be.”

 

[mr_jrt]

Does Thameslink really need three platforms at Bedford? Extend 1a as discussed (and renumber as 0?), hand over 1 to EWR, then have 2 & 3 for Thameslink, but build a central reversing siding or two north of the station between the slow lines. Would seem a sensible use of the available land?

 

[eastdyke]

The Government Announcement is here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...ign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate
Anyone thinking this is solely about a Railway Line should look at just who has jointly made that announcement:

From:
Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government, Department for Transport, East West Railway Company Limited, George Freeman MP, The Rt Hon Robert Jenrick MP, Paul Maynard MP, and The Rt Hon Esther McVey MP

The higher cost of the option to be taken forward requires higher funding. To secure that funding then the question of exactly where new housing will be jointly proposed will need to be rather more than we know at present so that mechanisms are put in place to secure at least part of that funding from land value uplift.
Do not expect a DCO submission any time soon!

 

[HowardGWR]

It looks to me like route E uses the existing route all the way into Bedford Midland, with no connection to the MML south of the station.

Even if St. John's did close, I'd say it's too far away from Bedford Midland. It would make a really awkward place to put a car park for it.

With 5,000 users per day, why would it be sensible to close St John's?

 

[richieb1971]

Does Thameslink really need three platforms at Bedford? Extend 1a as discussed (and renumber as 0?), hand over 1 to EWR, then have 2 & 3 for Thameslink, but build a central reversing siding or two north of the station between the slow lines. Would seem a sensible use of the available land?

I've tried to get people in charge to look at the THL situation for at least 2 years. GBRF were complaining 5 years ago about losing so much time trying to get through Bedford. Some of the freight paths have ceased now so perhaps things have lightened up. But simply put THL have 2 platforms at most times in the station, sometimes all 3. Its quite rare to see an empty station even at 3am in the morning.

 

[rdlover777]

BBC's article on this uses a 3d render of a 370 painted metalic sand blue

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-51312450

East West Rail Company (EWRC) hopes the route between Bedford and Cambridge will go via St Neots and Cambourne.

If it is backed by the government two stations, one for Tempsford or St Neots and one for Cambourne, would be built as part of the plan.

Simon Blanchflower, of EWRC, said it was the "most popular option" with people who responded to a consultation.

The line will be the final stage of the Oxford-Cambridge Arc, "supporting economic growth" and "improve passenger access" the government said.

Trains already operate on the section between Oxford and Bicester after it was completed in 2016, following a major upgrade of an existing rail line.

Construction in the second part of the project, between Bicester and Bedford, has begun and should be completed by 2023.

• 'Mothballed' rail link back on track
• Oxford-Cambridge rail link gets £110m
• Second phase of rail scheme announced

It is hoped the third and final phase, from Bedford to Oxford, would be finished before 2030.

Mr Blanchflower, chief executive of EWRC, said: "Of the five route options we consulted on, people were really positive about the one we have chosen.

"The line would bring people closer to opportunities for jobs and homes and bring friends and family closer together."

Mayor of Bedford Dave Hodgson, said the announcement "places Bedford at the heart of this key new infrastructure."

Councillor Ryan Fuller, executive leader of Huntingdonshire District Council, said: "This decision has been long in the making and we are delighted that East West Rail has chosen Route E which brings the potential for greater prosperity to all parts of Huntingdonshire, a choice that is best suited to our residents and businesses."

The final decision on "whether to take this project forward" lies with the government, the rail company said.

 

[Ianno87]

Every route option in last year's consultation used a southern approach to Cambridge as a northern approach was never going to feasible (despite a few loudmouths keep banging on about it) due to the loss of current Busway stops, the amount of engineering work required around Milton Road in Cambridge (a level crossing would have caused chaos) and the trains would have to reverse at Cambridge Central to continue to Ipswich.

There are ways to improve the Busway but ripping it up to replace with a heavy rail link isn't the way to do it.

I'm sure some prefer the Northern route for no other reason than their personal grudge against the Busway (in spite of having never seen nor used it, nor appreciating quite how successful it is)

 

[eastdyke]

And now a written Statement to Parliament from Grant Shapps:
https://www.gov.uk/government/speec...ign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate
In particular the last sentence:

In advance of submitting the application for development consent order, we will confirm that there are no material changes that might have affected our preferred route choice.

Full quote:

Today I am announcing the preferred route for the Bedford to Cambridge section of the East West Rail line between Oxford and Cambridge. This follows a public consultation last year on 5 route options.

The preferred route, route E from the consultation would link Bedford Midland, a new station between Sandy and St Neots, a new station at Cambourne and Cambridge station. The route would provide improved connectivity between towns and cities across the Oxford-Cambridge Arc, improving passenger journey times and supporting the Oxford-Cambridge Arc to fulfil its economic potential as a world-class strategic innovation Arc.

The Bedford to Cambridge section of East West Rail has been designated a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project.

The preferred route will now be the focus for further development. This further development work will include environmental and engineering studies to identify potential route alignments on which the railway could run, within the preferred route option and will lead to the government making a final decision on whether to take this project forward, and to make an application for a developed consent order. In advance of submitting the application for development consent order, we will confirm that there are no material changes that might have affected our preferred route choice.

Published 30 January 2020

 

[Railwaysceptic]

With 5,000 users per day, why would it be sensible to close St John's?

As many as that? I am surprised. I thought it was just a handful.

 

[Ianno87]

As many as that? I am surprised. I thought it was just a handful.

Usage stats are 189k per year.

Divide by 312 days per year (no Sunday service), it's more like 600 per day.

No doubt discuss accurate allocation between St Johns and Midland.

 

[ABB125]

It will run from Bedford Midland station to a new station south of St Neots, near Tempsford, then onto a new station in Cambourne, before arriving in Cambridge. The journey will take 82 minutes in total.

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/stations-new-train-line-cambridge-17657899
82 minutes to get between two cities about 30 miles apart (as the crow flies) seems an incredibly long time. Obviously the rail route will be longer, but if it's as much as 40 miles long, that's an average speeds of only 30mph. Surely we can do better than that, especially on a new build railway with a linespeed of 100(?)mph?

 

[Ianno87]

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/stations-new-train-line-cambridge-17657899
82 minutes to get between two cities about 30 miles apart (as the crow flies) seems an incredibly long time. Obviously the rail route will be longer, but if it's as much as 40 miles long, that's an average speeds of only 30mph. Surely we can do better than that, especially on a new build railway with a linespeed of 100(?)mph?

82 minutes seems more believable as the journey time from Oxford, and just some typically dodgy Cambridge News reporting.