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

[weeklycommuter]

Driving will be quicker than today (and more reliable) when the Caxton Gibbet - Black Cat dualling and Black Cat interchange work is done, presumably ahead of the EWR opening. Moreover, the competitiveness will depend on your starting point and destination in Oxford and Cambridge are, given how poorly sited the main stations are (thank you, colleges). A 75 min journey would be much more likely to maximise modal change from road to rail, I'd argue.

The railway will go to Cambridge. If the destination is Cambridge driving will be impossible.

 

[daodao]

I particularly welcome the recognition that EWR can have an immediate productivity benefit for the Cambridge Biomedical Campus.

Immediate?? This line won't actually be built for 10-20 years, if ever. There are plenty more hurdles yet, today was merely the announcement of the preferred route east of Bedford. The route avoids St Neots as well as Sandy and proposes a new station at the tiny hamlet of Tempsford just because that is where the line crosses the Great Northern main line; I suspect this aspect may be revised before firm plans/proposals are submitted.

I'm also very dubious about the potential usage of the line; the proposed 4 tph from Bedford to Cambridge seems excessive.

 

[richieb1971]

There are a few things that worry me that only 1 loop exists in the plans along the whole route and no triangulation junction exists anywhere on the route either. Even the victorians designed a triangle at St John's Bedford.

Now there is talk of 15 to 20 years to build it. That seems a bit exaggerated. Surely it's open by 2030.

 

[weeklycommuter]

I can't see a regular local service lasting on the Marston Vale line. Bedford-Bletchley will form part of the only East-West railway line between London and the Midlands. The demand for longer distance journeys will come to dominate the route. Local services will have to be cut.

April 2021 to March 2022 entries and exits and km to Bletchley: Bedford 2,324,624 27km Bedford St Johns 108,408 26km (1km from Bedford Station) Kempston Hardwick 3,154 20.8km Stewartby 76,872 18km Millbrook 3,618 16.2km Lidlington 9,544 14km Ridgmont 10,604 10.8km Aspley Guise 4,146 8.1km (1.5km from Woburn Sands) Woburn Sands 19,718 6.6km Bow Brickhill 17,046 3.3km Fenny Stratford 7,230 1.7km Bletchley 581,148
I do not understand the point in building a second station in Bedford which will cost a lot of money and slow down the service only 1km or so from Bedford Station on the Midland Mainline. Better just to close Bedford St Johns Station as any users can surely use Bedford Station instead.
Is there any point in keeping Kempston Hardwick with an annual footfall of 3,154 when there is an alternative station Stewartby nearby with a much higher footfall? Or Millbrook with an annual footfall of 3,618? Can users of those stations not use Stewartby instead? Aspley Guise with a footfall of 4,146 is only 1.5km from Woburn Sands. Fenny Stratford with a footfall of 7,230 is only 1.7km from Bletchley Station on the West Coast Mainline. From the footfalls and distances to alternative stations of the existing nine stations Kempston Hardwick to Fenny Stratford inclusive the five stations that it appear should continue to operate and have a better service with East West Rail are Stewartby, Lidlington, Ridgmont, Woburn Sands and Bow Brickhill. I did say this in my response to the last East West Rail consultation.

 

[Clayton]

Great, let’s get on with it! I’m looking forward to getting a train from Oxford to Cambridge for a nice weekend. And the line opens up so many opportunities for connectivity on the main lines it crosses - maybe that will be the biggest driver.

 

[tspaul26]

Immediate?? This line won't actually be built for 10-20 years, if ever.

It means immediately upon opening, not today.

The route avoids St Neots as well as Sandy and proposes a new station at the tiny hamlet of Tempsford just because that is where the line crosses the Great Northern main line; I suspect this aspect may be revised before firm plans/proposals are submitted.

Highly unlikely given the underlying reasons for the selection of Tempsford.

If this was simply a matter of convenience then the ECML station would have been at the St Neots South location because the final preferred alignment is not actually one of those presented on the shortlist in the 2021 consultation - it has been developed to take account of the consultation feedback and other supporting evidence.

I'm also very dubious about the potential usage of the line; the proposed 4 tph from Bedford to Cambridge seems excessive.

4tph (with 8 cars on each train) is only just enough to get people in and out of Cambridge each day under the medium growth scenario in the economic modelling. A further uplift is needed to accommodate higher levels of growth.

That is a reflection of how transformational the life sciences cluster at Cambridge could be if the current transport and housing issues can be resolved.

only 1 loop exists in the plans along the whole route

Other loops are being considered, but the exact locations and spec haven’t been confirmed yet.

no triangulation junction exists anywhere on the route either. Even the victorians designed a triangle at St John's Bedford.

Should there be one? What purpose would it serve? Would the additional cost be justified by that putative benefit?

I do not understand the point in building a second station in Bedford which will cost a lot of money and slow down the service only 1km or so from Bedford Station on the Midland Mainline. Better just to close Bedford St Johns Station as any users can surely use Bedford Station instead.

Outright closure of St John’s was considered, but rejected because of the poorer overall connectivity.

They serve different parts of the town centre in different ways and are, in that sense, complementary.

The line needs to be re-aligned anyway so adding the new platforms doesn’t add much marginal cost.

Is there any point in keeping Kempston Hardwick with an annual footfall of 3,154 when there is an alternative station Stewartby nearby with a much higher footfall?

As I posted above, there is quite a significant difference between keeping a station ‘open’ and actually having trains call at it.

I am obviously not at liberty to disclose the details, but various options on this have already been worked through in draft in some detail over the past two years, although no firm decisions have yet been taken pending further technical work.

 

[Bald Rick]

Surely it's open by 2030.

it will be at least three years before the DCO is approved from this point. For reference, see how long it has taken from approval of consent for EWR to opening.

 

[Verulamius]

I thought that the proposal was to increase the Marston line stations to 4 car lengths for the semi fast services. This seems too short if 8 cars are required into Cambridge?

 

[tspaul26]

I thought that the proposal was to increase the Marston line stations to 4 car lengths for the semi fast services. This seems too short if 8 cars are required into Cambridge?

As I have explained above, further work is being done on the Marston Vale line elements so no confirmed decisions have been made on that front as far as this announcement is concerned.

 

[richieb1971]

Just for my own understanding of how this project will be prioritized, will Bedford modernization be done prior to the route work starting? Will work be prioritized in the west and move eastwards or will several teams be working all at the same time?

In the video Richard Fuller (Conservative MP Bedford) states Tempsford is only an EWR station and will not operate as an interchange station. I just get the feeling that if MP's are putting stuff like that out there that even MP's are not privileged to be in the inner circle of developments. If you build an EWR station right next to the ECML and not make it an interchange station it kind of weakens the argument for it being there at all. Tempsford is so small it amounts to 2 or 3 streets of housing at the moment.

 

[tspaul26]

Just for my own understanding of how this project will be prioritized, will Bedford modernization be done prior to the route work starting?

The construction phasing isn’t confirmed yet.

Will work be prioritized in the west and move eastwards or will several teams be working all at the same time?

Not confirmed yet, but it is likely that all of the landward civils will be completed first. This means you can put off the most disruptive works in the built up areas and undertake track laying in one phase.

In the video Richard Fuller (Conservative MP Bedford) states Tempsford is only an EWR station and will not operate as an interchange station. I just get the feeling that if MP's are putting stuff like that out there that even MP's are not privileged to be in the inner circle of developments.

Fuller is a liar and knowingly puts out falsehoods about this project for political purposes.

He’s also not the MP for the Bedford urban area. His constituency is Northeast Bedfordshire i.e. NIMBY-land.

If you build an EWR station right next to the ECML and not make it an interchange station it kind of weakens the argument for it being there at all. Tempsford is so small it amounts to 2 or 3 streets of housing at the moment.

There’s not much around the other potential station location (St Neots South) either.

Tempsford has more scope for new development to come forward in the future and for it to be of a higher overall quality.

 

[MarkyT]

Tempsford has more scope for new development to come forward in the future and for it to be of a higher overall quality.

Looks to be about halfway between Sandy and St Neots on the main line, which are approx 7.5 miles apart, so reasonable as an extra stop on the slows for all stations services. Perhaps fast line platforms might also be incorporated with the possibility of some calls by longer distance services too. That could make it attractive as a mainline railhead for the area for London and destinations north of Peterborough. Being less built up today should make construction easier with fewer 'real' local objections in the area while offering more potential for future housing development. I note an old airfield to the east for example. Tempsford could really become a major new town, with sustainable transport links baked in from the start.

 

[richieb1971]

Temps Ford was a station years ago. It already has a station road and part of the old platform still resides on the down slow.

 

[zwk500]

Perhaps fast line platforms might also be incorporated with the possibility of some calls by longer distance services too.

Fast line platforms are unlikely for a station that is really a local service. Having it as a stop on the services that are all-stations from Stevenage/Knebworth makes sense, but stopping trains on the fast line just as they've cleared the commuter traffic would be an overall downgrade. Also the cost - two islands requires more possessions and space and bridges to get the stations built than a straightforward 2 side platforms.

 

[Tobbes]

Fast line platforms are unlikely for a station that is really a local service. Having it as a stop on the services that are all-stations from Stevenage/Knebworth makes sense, but stopping trains on the fast line just as they've cleared the commuter traffic would be an overall downgrade. Also the cost - two islands requires more possessions and space and bridges to get the stations built than a straightforward 2 side platforms.

That's true, but presumably some thought has gone into the impact of HS2; if the principal Anglo-Scottish services are HS2 focussed, then having first stop out of KX as Tempsford on the fasts for the remaining ECML services may be quite attractive, I'd have thought.

 

[Magdalia]

a new station at the tiny hamlet of Tempsford just because that is where the line crosses the Great Northern main line

Tempsford won't be a tiny hamlet by the time that EWR opens. Read what the report says here:

We’ve concluded that a station on the ECML near Tempsford would perform better than a station at St Neots South even though both locations would be capable of supporting roughly the same amount of new housing and commercial development. However, the Tempsford station would:
• Be more likely to enable this development to come forward due to the more consolidated landownership in the vicinity.
• Facilitate the re-use of the former RAF Tempsford site, achieving better brownfield over greenfield land usage.
• Be expected to achieve greater accessibility for more people due to a lower degree of severance caused by the new A428 dual carriageway, which would be likely to directly impact a development at St Neots; building on the opportunity to strengthen integration of active travel modes.

Looks to be about halfway between Sandy and St Neots on the main line

You have it, 47m42c from Kings Cross.

Tempsford was a station years ago. It already has a station road and part of the old platform still resides on the down slow.

In particular the RAF Tempsford site, which is adjacent to the site of the old station on the up side of the ECML, is key to the proposal.

East Anglia is peppered with old RAF airfields and redeveloping them for housing is not a new thing. Northstowe is the old RAF Oakington. The old RAF Waterbeach is being developed now, hence the proposal to move the station closer to the new development.

It is an interesting question about how much of Tempsford can be completed by the time EWR opens.

Fast line platforms are unlikely for a station that is really a local service.

The ECML platforms would probably be a 21st century version of Arlesey. Nearly all GN/Thameslink trains use the slows north of Hitchin. Sandy and Huntingdon also only have platforms on the slow lines.

 

[zwk500]

That's true, but presumably some thought has gone into the impact of HS2; if the principal Anglo-Scottish services are HS2 focussed, then having first stop out of KX as Tempsford on the fasts for the remaining ECML services may be quite attractive, I'd have thought.

First stop Tempsford and then where? If you're coming from London you can get a train to Cambridge, Bedford, MK or Oxford from the relevant terminal (and vice versa). No, adding the stop into the trains that fun fast to Stevenage and then slow to Peterborough serves the most likely journeys.

 

[gallafent]

Seems odd that if you're running up to St Neots you don't call there, even if it's a separate station on the outskirts with expansion around it.

Definitely … A large amount of new housing, called Wintringham, seems to be being constructed in exactly the right place for such a not-planned station, to the north-east of St. Neot's centre.

 

[al_557]

Just for my own understanding of how this project will be prioritized, will Bedford modernization be done prior to the route work starting? Will work be prioritized in the west and move eastwards or will several teams be working all at the same time?

In the video Richard Fuller (Conservative MP Bedford) states Tempsford is only an EWR station and will not operate as an interchange station. I just get the feeling that if MP's are putting stuff like that out there that even MP's are not privileged to be in the inner circle of developments. If you build an EWR station right next to the ECML and not make it an interchange station it kind of weakens the argument for it being there at all. Tempsford is so small it amounts to 2 or 3 streets of housing at the moment.

Richard Fuller was voted out of Bedford in 2017 and replaced by Mohammad Yasin of Labour. He was elected as MP for North East Bedfordshire in 2019

 

[WesternBiker]

Outright closure of St John’s was considered, but rejected because of the poorer overall connectivity.

They serve different parts of the town centre in different ways and are, in that sense, complementary.

St John's is also very convenient for the adjacent Bedford hospitals site, though I don't know how much of a traffic generator it is.

 

[Brissle Girl]

4tph (with 8 cars on each train) is only just enough to get people in and out of Cambridge each day under the medium growth scenario in the economic modelling. A further uplift is needed to accommodate higher levels of growth.

If that's the level of service then it really will be a scandal if it's not electrified from the outset.

 

[Steve Harris]

Definitely … A large amount of new housing, called Wintringham, seems to be being constructed in exactly the right place for such a not-planned station, to the north-east of St. Neot's centre.

The West end of the 'Witringham' development is literally a stones throw from the current St Neots Station. So it doesn't need a new station as the current station is/will be within walking distance. (Some houses have already been built btw, and as E-W rail is years off, I doubt any of 'Witringham's' residents will readily switch to rail, what with the upgrade of the A428 coming first).

 

[MarkyT]

The West end of the 'Witringham' development is literally a stones throw from the current St Neots Station. So it doesn't need a new station as the current station is/will be within walking distance. (Some houses have already been built btw, and as E-W rail is years off, I doubt any of 'Witringham's' residents will readily switch to rail, what with the upgrade of the A428 coming first).

There's nothing to stop future stations from being added, either in the plans before construction or subsequently as the settlements develop. It would be useful to identify some candidate locations though, for access safeguarding purposes and to ensure there are straight and level sections of track in the vicinity.

 

[LUYMun]

Seems as though there isn't a direct rail connection between the ECML and the EWR at Tempsford. I'm not speaking in the sense to have through passenger running, but perhaps a spur could be envisaged to link the two lines?

 

[zwk500]

Seems as though there isn't a direct rail connection between the ECML and the EWR at Tempsford. I'm not speaking in the sense to have through passenger running, but perhaps a spur could be envisaged to link the two lines?

Between which directions? Cambridge traffic can reach the ECML at Hitchin and Peterborough anyway, so it's either North/West or South/West, and which major traffics are wanting to leave or join the ECML there?

 

[MarkyT]

Seems as though there isn't a direct rail connection between the ECML and the EWR at Tempsford. I'm not speaking in the sense to have through passenger running, but perhaps a spur could be envisaged to link the two lines?

There needs to be a reason for such a connection. If a purpose is identified and a business case made for some as yet unenvisaged traffic then such a connection might be added later. There are examples of interchange stations on the network where lines cross and connect yet there is no physical track connection between them nearby. Shotton and Tamworth spring to mind.

 

[59CosG95]

There needs to be a reason for such a connection. If a purpose is identified and a business case made for some as yet unenvisaged traffic then such a connection might be added later. There are examples of interchange stations on the network where lines cross and connect yet there is no physical track connection between them nearby. Shotton and Tamworth spring to mind.

Tamworth did have a connection between the southbound WCML and northbound XCR but that's long since been lifted.

 

[Roger B]

The update is up

East West Rail | Route Update Announcement

This page hosts key information and documents for the Government's route update announcement on East West Rail.

eastwestrail.co.uk

The route is via Templesford and Cambourne on the northside.

East of Bedford that's almost GWResque (GWR = Great Way Round)!

 

[Magdalia]

There needs to be a reason for such a connection. If a purpose is identified and a business case made for some as yet unenvisaged traffic then such a connection might be added later. There are examples of interchange stations on the network where lines cross and connect yet there is no physical track connection between them nearby. Shotton and Tamworth spring to mind.

A more relevant comparison is Sandy, where the old LNWR route from Bletchley/Bedford to Cambridge crossed the ECML. Even though there was a shared station there were no connections, apart from a west to north curve that was built during World War II but rarely used in peacetime.

 

[D365]

Definitely … A large amount of new housing, called Wintringham, seems to be being constructed in exactly the right place for such a not-planned station, to the north-east of St. Neot's centre.

The local councillors were arguing against St Neots South, apparently due to visual and noise pollution that would negatively affect a planned 10,000 house development in the southeast of St Neots. Seems they got what they wanted