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

[RPM]

The BRC are really being squeezed - EWR on one side and HS2 on the other and sadly I can't see them managing to reinstate either of the lines which would have given them a decent running line i.e. Quainton - Verney Junction or the Brill tramway.

They had several decades on the site and never made any serious proposals to do anything with either line, so I think it would be disingenuous to blame either EWR or HS2.

 

[RPM]

New single track through the station, being aligned to the Up platform. Platforms (which are still owned by Network Rail) will be fenced off with something sympathetic. I think there'll also be fencing between the renewed mainline and the BRC sidings to both sides.

I see the document (dated June 2017) still talks about double track between Aylesbury and Calvert, so I suspect it is out of date. Does anyone have a link to a more recent one that details the descoped scheme?

 

[work-traveller]

Also includes cutting back the up platform face by 240 mm to improve the condition of the platform face, as it is described in the TWA application.

That was the proposal during the 2nd round of consultation. The 3rd round of consultation removed that:

https://consultations.networkrail.c...ppendix A Table of proposed station works.pdf

 

[work-traveller]

They had several decades on the site and never made any serious proposals to do anything with either line, so I think it would be disingenuous to blame either EWR or HS2.

The HS2 HoL committee was petitioned by the BRC. They wanted the realigned Station Road, where is passes over the redundant Quainton/Verney Jct. line, to have a bridge installed. This would be immediately east of the bridge that will be built to accommodate EWR - which is labelled as 'Aylesbury Link Overbridge' on the linked drawing. The committee's view was (and I paraphrase) that the BRC didn't own any of the formation and had no funding - therefore it wasn't a justifiable expenditure of public money to safeguard a project with no prospect of happening.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...ile/529513/C222-ATK-CV-DPP-020-000008-FPD.pdf

 

[Bletchleyite]

At least retaining the station allows for a possible reopening in future e.g. if housing development would make it sensible (and pay for it via planning gain).

 

[swt_passenger]

That was the proposal during the 2nd round of consultation. The 3rd round of consultation removed that:

https://consultations.networkrail.co.uk/communications/east-west-rail-phase-2-round-three-consultation/supporting_documents/Appendix A Table of proposed station works.pdf

Ok thanks, Google only found the earlier stuff unfortunately.

 

[KingDaveRa]

Doesn't sound great for BRC. I'd hazard a guess that any major development in Quainton leading to a station would probably see a whole new one built somewhere, as it'd be a darn sight cheaper to do that than try and get a Grade II listed building back into service. There's housing planned for Waddesdon, so it's always viable for Quainton too.

I recall many years ago the BRC talking about running trains into Aylesbury as a regular thing, but I guess they never really had any formal plans for that (compared to say, Chinnor, who have had to build platforms, track, and all sorts of other stuff), and that's completely dashed any hopes of that - and indeed the Quainton Flyer for that case.

 

[BantamMenace]

I don't know the area at all but location wise is Quainton not ripe for 5,000 new houses? At a conservative 100k margin per house thats £0.5bn potential contribution towards a station and upgraded railway?

If only we had a sort of National Infrastructure committee to do this with public investment so the gains could be reinvested in the railway and local infrastructure.

Before I get shot to pieces for this comment i'm not being serious, but the principle should be explored.

 

[wildcard]

If there is to be development in the Quainton area then its more likely that the planned passive provision for a station on Queen Catherine Road near Steeple Clayton would come into play rather than a new built at Quainton ( say north of the current location ). I wouldn't want the old station to be heavily modernised , no public money would be spent on enlarging it in a period fashion - so new build or leave it alone in my view . I hope whatever platform barriers are going to be installed are removable - to allow for heritage filming and the like. I guess the bubble car specials ( or any form of heritage service to Aylesbury or further ) will no longer be possible and no chance of a reopened Brill tramway to the A41. BRC will be limited in what they might wish to do - lack of funds precludes most ambitions anyway.

 

[DarloRich]

According to the April Modern Railways page 9, Rob Brighouse, Chairman of E-W Rail Co, has suggested using a new alignment between MK and Bedford instead of the existing Bedford-Bletchley line!

Was it the April 1st issue?

No chance - it was only ever a single line in any case, plus there's no obvious route through Newport Pagnell nowadays.

I imagine they're looking at the alignment of the Marston Vale line in which case branching off that in the Woburn Sands / Aspley Guise area and heading due north east could give you a fast, straight line to Bedford it would also give a path away from the Marston Vale stoppers - where you'd hook up to the MML / continue to Sandy is the next question though.

It just doesn't seem practical or cost effective

Bletchley Flyover gets you on to the WCML slows but the problem has always been how to serve MK Central without a reversal.

Trains from Oxford can serve MK without a reversal. Form the Bedford direction they can not - however the plans i have seen suggest that the services will run to avoid such a reversal.

I think there is potential for a new line through Milton Keynes itself. The planners left space for dual carriageways but not all the grid roads are dualled - the H4 Dansteed Way for example. I don’t know the area well enough but it seems there is space through the built up area to put in a new railway alignment from the WCML slows north of MKC which then heads off to the east towards Bedford - if there is the will. Big “if” mind you.

Unlike you, I do know MK reasonably well.

There is nowhere you could branch off tge WCML north of the station and work your way out of MK until you reach the Wolverton area - the old Newport branch being the obvious one but that was only ever single line and ends in a housing area in Newport.

Trying to run north of MK - Haversham / Linford is a no no as that's all flood plain and regularly floods from the Ouse.

The only viable option is as I stated i.e. branch off the Marston Vale around Aspley Guise and build a fast straight line to Bedford where there are few things in the way.

Building railways through MK itself isn't viable.

Agreed - you would have to swing so far north of MK and follow the general route of the A422. The idea of building through MK is fanciful.

Is the curvature bad enough on the MV that a new line would be required? A small laser-targeted intervention around Ridgmont might have helped, but junction 13 of the M1 makes that more complicated, unfortunately. The line from the MV's MML crossing down to Millbrook is really straight as-is though, with gentle curves through Lidlington, so I don't think a new line would wash its face. Perhaps a larger deviation around the north side of Ridgmont/Brogborough could suffice, if required (though it would cost you the stations at Apsley Guise and Ridgmont). That should give a much straighter route, abet I suspect the railway was built where it was for a reason (and I don't have a topographical map to hand!)

The 1:50000 and 1:25000 Ordnance Survey mapping on Bing is very useful for this kind of discussion!

Having access to contours, the line in the Ridgmont area looks to be hugging the lower slopes of the high ground. Going further south into the hills would mean more earthworks and further north may have been a marshy valley bottom at the time the line was built.

Going north of Brogborough looks unlikely, as unless it was a very long diversion the curves would be just as tight as on the existing route, not to mention several major road bridges for the M1 and the roads linking to J13. I guesstimate the existing curve to be about 1200m radius, which should allow about 70mph with appropriate cant, and I can't see avoiding this being worth the huge expense involved.

I wouldn't say the Vale is a twisty route ( other than the curve at Bedford St Johns) and it must be the crossings that are the problem.

The article in Modern Railways mentioned that the large number of level crossings between Bletchley and Bedford was one of the reasons an alternative route had been suggested as the level crossings have an impact on the line speed.
How feasible would it be to run a route that could serve Cranfield University?
I suspect any alternative route would be linked to supporting any other planned housing development in the area.

Some of those level crossings look trivial to close - the one at Ridgmont, in particular. Lidlington looks like a much harder proposition as it would effectively cut the town in half. If the will was there (and the money!) I suspect you could get rid of most of them without much issue.

Going by OS and aerial maps only, I think Apsley Guise is possibly more tricky than Lidlington but all the others look to have enough space around them for a bridge, although some would require a few hundred metres of new road to go behind nearby buildings. There's probably scope to upgrade these two and get rid of all the others - certainly nowhere near the cost of building a new line!

There are also loads of foot crossings to deal with. There are plans in place to deal with many of the foot and level crossings but the bridge works and new roads will be expensive. The plans were shown at local consultation events and may still be available on line somewhere

The big problems are the road crossings at Woburn Sands & Lidldington. Apsely needs a new road and bridge. Closing the crossing at Liddlington will cut the village in half. Closing Woburn Sands will be a massive pita. The crossing at Fenny Stratford can go - IF almost everything between Travis Perkins and Bristow Close ( along Simpson Road) gets bulldozed. That is a lot of housing and businesses to buy up.

 

[edwin_m]

The crossing at Fenny Stratford can go - IF almost everything between Travis Perkins and Bristow Close ( along Simpson Road) gets bulldozed. That is a lot of housing and businesses to buy up.

Again going just by the map, but how about connecting Simpson Road to Bilton Road or even a new roundabout on Bletcham Way to give access (including HGV) to those premises north of the railway, and putting a HGV ban on Staple Hall Road? With the crossing closed (with a footbridge for pedestrian/station access) couldn't Bristow Close be served from the south?

 

[DarloRich]

Again going just by the map, but how about connecting Simpson Road to Bilton Road or even a new roundabout on Bletcham Way to give access (including HGV) to those premises north of the railway, and putting a HGV ban on Staple Hall Road? With the crossing closed (with a footbridge for pedestrian/station access) couldn't Bristow Close be served from the south?

I think the consultation plans sought to minimise the need for new roads. However there isnt really anything to stop your idea. The bottom end of Bilton road opens out into car parks for the various industrial units. Your junction with Simpson road would be very close to the canal and the bridge so might need some jiggery pokery. Bilton ROad itself is not wide and is a right pita to use due to park cars and people using it as a cut to miss out the big roundabout at Tescos. it would need some sensible controls and planning Knowing Staple Hall Road the residents are already unhappy about its use as a cut so would very much be in favour of vehicle bans!

If i recall correctly Bristow Close would have been the foot of the access ramp for the road bridge. All of the buildings on both sides of the road form there to beyond lock view lane would go.

Bow Brickhill is also a bit of pain due to the adjacent rounabouts but on the Fenny Stratford side there is lots of farm land for new roads. Less so on the Red Bull Racing side.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Having looked at an aerial view and being quite familiar with the area, I think doing as suggested would be quite easy - there is barely anything in the way, the canal is on the other side, and traffic lights are already present there. This would seem a reasonably easy solution to the problem of lorry access to the two builders' yards.

I would say that a pedestrian footbridge with ramps would be necessary, though (or an underpass, but I suspect the lie of the land would make a bridge easier), it's really quite a long walk round (and would probably kill the pub's trade).

 

[DarloRich]

Having looked at an aerial view and being quite familiar with the area, I think doing as suggested would be quite easy - there is barely anything in the way, the canal is on the other side, and traffic lights are already present there. This would seem a reasonably easy solution to the problem of lorry access to the two builders' yards.

I would say that a pedestrian footbridge with ramps would be necessary, though (or an underpass, but I suspect the lie of the land would make a bridge easier), it's really quite a long walk round (and would probably kill the pub's trade).

There was a footbridge and road bridge suggested irc so i would hope the footbridge would be built if the road was diverted. You would need a new junction just before the canal bridge and that might be the biggest issue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There was a footbridge and road bridge suggested irc so i would hope the footbridge would be built if the road was diverted. You would need a new junction just before the canal bridge and that might be the biggest issue.

The canal bridge is quite hump-backed and already traffic light controlled, so I don't think that would be much of an issue. You would just extend the traffic light control to be 3 way.

(I'm very familiar with this piece of road, I used to cycle to work that way when I worked in Wavendon)

 

[DarloRich]

The canal bridge is quite hump-backed and already traffic light controlled, so I don't think that would be much of an issue. You would just extend the traffic light control to be 3 way.

(I'm very familiar with this piece of road, I used to cycle to work that way when I worked in Wavendon)

agreed - however i think you might have to open the junction out a bit especially if it is to be the route for HGV deliveries. I am also unsure what the weight limit on the bridge is.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Looking at Bow Brickhill, it appears on the MK side of that bridge it's a classic "single carriageway built with space for dualling" so I don't think there would be any issues with a bridge at all.

Woburn Sands would be extremely difficult and there aren't really any ways around, and there is development right up to the crossing. I think this would in practice have to be an underpass (possibly single lane plus footpath/cycleway with traffic lights) at great cost.

Aspley Guise similar. Bedford Road could be bridged, it's farmland. Ridgmont similarly. Lidlington would again have to be an underpass at massive cost due to development all around the crossing. Marston Road, bridge would be fine. Millbrook, again bridge. Same with Stewartby.

Surprised there are so many, I can see why some feel a new alignment might be cheaper.

 

[Bletchleyite]

agreed - however i think you might have to open the junction out a bit especially if it is to be the route for HGV deliveries.

Probably so but there's plenty of room with nothing but a car park and some trees on it.

I am also unsure what the weight limit on the bridge is.

Doesn't really matter, the HGVs would not go that way.

 

[DarloRich]

Looking at Bow Brickhill, it appears on the MK side of that bridge it's a classic "single carriageway built with space for dualling" so I don't think there would be any issues with a bridge at all.

Woburn Sands would be extremely difficult and there aren't really any ways around, and there is development right up to the crossing. I think this would in practice have to be an underpass (possibly single lane plus footpath/cycleway with traffic lights) at great cost.

Aspley Guise similar. Bedford Road could be bridged, it's farmland. Ridgmont similarly. Lidlington would again have to be an underpass at massive cost due to development all around the crossing. Marston Road, bridge would be fine. Millbrook, again bridge. Same with Stewartby.

Surprised there are so many, I can see why some feel a new alignment might be cheaper.

the consultation suggested a lot of new roads and bridges just out of the villages. The idea was to close the central crossing and the associated foot crossings and put everyone over one bridge. The problem with Liddlington was that there wasn't a foot bridge offered and the new road was a long round trip!

 

[DarloRich]

Doesn't really matter, the HGVs would not go that way.

they might if you open up new routes out of the industrial estate. It just needs planning and managing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

the consultation suggested a lot of new roads and bridges just out of the villages. The idea was to close the central crossing and the associated foot crossings and put everyone over one bridge. The problem with Liddlington was that there wasn't a foot bridge offered and the new road was a long round trip!

I certainly think a ramped footbridge or pedestrian/cycle underpass is necessary for all closures of level crossings in towns.

If nothing else a station footbridge would be needed.

 

[work-traveller]

If there is to be development in the Quainton area then its more likely that the planned passive provision for a station on Queen Catherine Road near Steeple Clayton would come into play rather than a new built at Quainton ( say north of the current location ). I wouldn't want the old station to be heavily modernised , no public money would be spent on enlarging it in a period fashion - so new build or leave it alone in my view . I hope whatever platform barriers are going to be installed are removable - to allow for heritage filming and the like. I guess the bubble car specials ( or any form of heritage service to Aylesbury or further ) will no longer be possible and no chance of a reopened Brill tramway to the A41. BRC will be limited in what they might wish to do - lack of funds precludes most ambitions anyway.

I believe the intention is to install de-mountable railings to the front of the platforms for occasional use by charter services - and I guess filming.

The latest series of Endeavour used the Up platform and associated buildings in one episode. But in the same episode the scene where a live (contemporary) railway was needed was clearly filmed elsewhere. This would suggest that the BRC is favoured for static filming and not anything involving running trains.

 

[work-traveller]

East West Rail 'Site Visit'
Opportunity to travel from Aylesbury to Bicester, via Claydon.

Buckinghamshire Railway Centre - 10th June 2018

• work-traveller
• 24 Apr 2018
• 1

'Royal British Legion Fun Day
Sunday 10th June 2018, 10:30am-5pm
Special Railtour: Aylesbury - Quainton - Calvert - Claydon Junction - Bicester Village
Rare Opportunity to travel the freight only line between Aylesbury and Bicester Village
Railtour ticket cost: £5 adult, £2.50 child (under 5 years free)'

 

[KingDaveRa]

I somehow expect that'll be very well attended. i presume it brings you back?! Is it just going to be trundling back and forth along that route all day?

 

[work-traveller]

I somehow expect that'll be very well attended. i presume it brings you back?! Is it just going to be trundling back and forth along that route all day?

I believe a return trip is the intention. Last time I did it (last summer), the OXD east of Claydon Junction was looking a touch overgrown.

 

[KingDaveRa]

There's colour-light signals up there? I suppose that was for the (very) occasional bin-liner which used to go that way?

 

[work-traveller]

There's colour-light signals up there? I suppose that was for the (very) occasional bin-liner which used to go that way?

Operated locally from the Claydon box, for access to Calvert via Bicester. I don't think FCC have had deliveries from the West of England for some time now though.

 

[KingDaveRa]

As far as I know it's just spoil trains now from London to cap off the landfill. Even then I think that's on the wane. It's about the only freight I ever see round these parts; be a shame to see all freight stop on the lines, which it inevitably will when the landfill is finally closed.

 

[aylesbury]

Friend of mine back in the seventies was signalman at Claydon Jct he enjoyed his days there ,this was when the Bin Liner came from Bristol to the tip.Usualy see four freights passing through Aylesbury per week with GB 66,s on front used to see Cornish Rlw locos but not now.

 

[The Planner]

Freight wont stop along there, FCC are building a new depot which will likely feed the waste to power station there. Bicester to Claydon is due to close come autumn for E-W and HS2 work.