Wisbech-March line reopening cost increase to £200m

[MarkRedon]

I have no wisdom in this matter, holding only a recent doctorate in information systems management. I merely note that the inflation of costs associated with railway infrastructure is very much higher than other rates of inflation. Saltaire station was reopened in the 1980s for £60,000, which today would not pay for a ticket machine. I am asking a genuine question. Outsourcing away from a single organisation (BR) that could do its own procure and build to an industry structure in which "everything" passes through a network of infrastructure manager, Department for Transport, multiple other stakeholders such as England's Economic Heartland, consultants, engineering companies... leaves us in a situation where railways that could once have been built, no longer can be. Should that not make us angry? Outsourcing is supposed to reduce costs, not in inflate them. No doubt off-thread, but there should be someone with the drive and the clout to ask serious questions like: how can the very high costs of new infrastructure be reduced? On safety standards: rail is held to higher standards than road (but not air). Is that sensible, if it makes rail schemes unaffordable?

 

[joebassman]

It would be interesting to know how the costs compare to other countries with similar safety standards

 

[zwk500]

Outsourcing is supposed to reduce costs, not in inflate them.

A large part of what inflates the UKs costs is the non-standard nature of our network against other global networks. In many cases, the UK pays a premium for external companies to adapt their products to our network. With a fragmented industry we have now, and the high rate of turnover in stakeholders, maintaining a BREL-type internal research and development arm is not a practical proposition. The argument about whether the railway should therefore consolidate once again is for a different thread.

On safety standards: rail is held to higher standards than road (but not air). Is that sensible, if it makes rail schemes unaffordable?

Which risks to life and limb are acceptable, and what price would you put on them?

 

[Bald Rick]

I have no wisdom in this matter, holding only a recent doctorate in information systems management. I merely note that the inflation of costs associated with railway infrastructure is very much higher than other rates of inflation. Saltaire station was reopened in the 1980s for £60,000, which today would not pay for a ticket machine. I am asking a genuine question. Outsourcing away from a single organisation (BR) that could do its own procure and build to an industry structure in which "everything" passes through a network of infrastructure manager, Department for Transport, multiple other stakeholders such as England's Economic Heartland, consultants, engineering companies... leaves us in a situation where railways that could once have been built, no longer can be. Should that not make us angry? Outsourcing is supposed to reduce costs, not in inflate them. No doubt off-thread, but there should be someone with the drive and the clout to ask serious questions like: how can the very high costs of new infrastructure be reduced? On safety standards: rail is held to higher standards than road (but not air). Is that sensible, if it makes rail schemes unaffordable?

It’s a fair challenge; for my entire railway career there have been similar questions asked. They are, of course, being asked now at the very highest levels.

It would be interesting to know how the costs compare to other countries with similar safety standards

An important point here is comparing costs to other railways with similar accounting standards.

On that point, costs in the BR era were accounted for ‘interestingly’. The cost of the station at Saltaire above would have been, effectively, the cost of materials. Design would have been counted as an overhead in the design office. Most if not all of the labour cost would have been in the civil engineers budget. Any engineerigntrains required would have been an overhead. The cost of possessions would have been an overhead and so on.

 

[telstarbox]

So @Bald Rick are you saying that if a council / developer wanted to build a new station on existing plain line (so no new track or civils), they have to fund all the design, possession etc directly and Network Rail don't cover any network development like this?

 

[Bald Rick]

So @Bald Rick are you saying that if a council / developer wanted to build a new station on existing plain line (so no new track or civils), they have to fund all the design, possession etc directly and Network Rail don't cover any network development like this?

Yes, and that’s been the case since BR days if a council / developer wanted to build a new station.

 

[A0wen]

There is the Leigh Sports Village nearby.

Such a well known attraction, I bet 98% of the posters around here have never heard of it. I very much doubt it is of sufficient significance to help support a heavy rail link.

 

[Hey 3]

Such a well known attraction, I bet 98% of the posters around here have never heard of it. I very much doubt it is of sufficient significance to help support a heavy rail link.

Hopefully Leigh gets a train link within its boundaries.

 

[MarkRedon]

Hope takes a long time to die:

From a well-written piece in the Wisbech Standard, with further supporting text, to be found at https://www.wisbechstandard.co.uk/news/wisbech-railway-station-project-update-1-6864756:

"Combined Authority gives progress update on Wisbech rail and predicts minimum two trains per hour to Cambridge...

The most commercially viable solution is a heavy rail service serving a station centrally located within Wisbech. A two trains per hour service should run between Wisbech and Cambridge to reach the highest Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR)."

[Clearly ignoring BaldRick's fair point above...]

AOwen said:

"
...people "don't like buses", isn't a justification for a rail reinstatement which would be far more expensive both from a capital cost of rebuilding the line as well as the operating costs. And the required subsidy for the rail line would be *far* higher than any bus subsidy.
"

By the same token, much of the British rail network measured in track-kilometres requires and gets very significant subsidy. That's part of a (fragile, Covid-damaged) social contract whereby "we" still value public services - and want well-trained, highly motivated people to provide them. A Wisbech - Cambridge train service would contribute significant economic benefits to a relatively poor area and contribute (slightly) to regional re-balancing. Is it the best investment for Wisbech? Perhaps not. Does bus subsidy promote modal shift? Sadly, not outside the big cities.

 

[Ianno87]

Does bus subsidy promote modal shift? Sadly, not outside the big cities.

It does for the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway....

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It does for the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway....

Is that just the subsidy doing that, or is it that the guided busway (alongside pressure on parking in Cambridge) makes the bus more convenient than that car for some journeys?

 

[Tobbes]

Is that just the subsidy doing that, or is it that the guided busway (alongside pressure on parking in Cambridge) makes the bus more convenient than that car for some journeys?

Nor does it show that the busway would be a better solution than a tramway or heavy rail metro, obviously.

 

[Ianno87]

Is that just the subsidy doing that, or is it that the guided busway (alongside pressure on parking in Cambridge) makes the bus more convenient than that car for some journeys?

The frequency of the bus and its relative journey time reliability, combined with Cambridge's general congestion/parking issues, make it attractive.

 

[Bald Rick]

A Wisbech - Cambridge train service would contribute significant economic benefits to a relatively poor area

Would it, though?

The business case makes clear it would deliver benefits between March and Cambridge (I’d argue not ‘significant’, though), but to Wisbech?

 

[MarkRedon]

It does for the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway....

Is it a bus? Is it a train? No, nor is it Superman... But it is guided reserved trackway LRT that people admit to liking almost as much as their Tesla. Why? It provides reasonably sure, reasonably quick, stress-reduced transport to a congested city which provides many employment opportunities.

Would it, though? The business case makes clear it would deliver benefits between March and Cambridge (I’d argue not ‘significant’, though), but to Wisbech?

Good question to which - surprise! - I have no definitive answer. But elected politicians at both ends of the Wisbech to Cambridge route seem fairly convinced of the merits of a rail link. UK plc has investment appraisal guidelines and against those Wisbech heavy rail stacks up fairly well. A full appraisal of an alternative LRT link Wisbech to March railhead would be a necessary part of the essential fuller investment appraisal. A conventional bus to March would attract very few people out of their cars and add nothing to the attraction of inward investment to Wisbech.

 

[zwk500]

... But elected politicians at both ends of the route seem fairly convinced of the merits of a rail link.

Elected politicians being convinced of something is not a confirmation of the merits (or anything else) of the thing they've been convinced of. I think we've had enough demonstrations over the years of how reliable politicians' judgement is.

UK plc has investment appraisal guidelines and against those Wisbech heavy rail stacks up fairly well.

If UK Plc is getting involved in the funding, then Wisbech will not only have to meet all the criteria, but compare favourably to all other projects across the country that are in contention for the same pot of funding.

 

[trebor79]

IF it was possible to have a half hourly Wisbech - Cambridge service then it would certainly help regenerate Wisbech (and March). Housing in Cambridge is absurdly expensive, and better commuter links to cheaper towns will result in people moving there, and encourage new housing and other developments.

 

[Bald Rick]

UK plc has investment appraisal guidelines and against those Wisbech heavy rail stacks up fairly well

I’m afraid it doesn’t, at all. The business case done for the proponents demonstrates a good case to increase the train service between March and Cambridge, assuming that someone else pays for the necessary works at Ely. Extending that service to Wisbech makes the case considerably worse, as you pay a lot more for it, and gain very little additional benefit. In this case, the whole is worth less than the sum of the parts.

But elected politicians at both ends of the Wisbech to Cambridge route seem fairly convinced of the merits of a rail link.

Which, I think, says it all.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

A Wisbech - Cambridge train service would contribute significant economic benefits to a relatively poor area...

Yes, it'll drive up house prices in Wisbech as well off people from Cambridge who can commute by train buy up large and relatively inexpensive properties there.

It's going to do bugger all for the Wisbech residents - if you're expecting people from Wisbech to commute into Cambridge, you need to ask yourself, what sort of job are they going to commute to, and do they have the necessary skills and education for the type of job that can pay sufficiently well to cover a season ticket on your new railway line ?

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Yes, it'll drive up house prices in Wisbech as well off people from Cambridge who can commute by train buy up large and relatively inexpensive properties there.

It's going to do bugger all for the Wisbech residents

That's not necessarily true. Wealthy people moving into Wisbech will spend some (maybe even much) of their income locally - with hairdressers, builders, plumbers, local shops, you name it.

Plus it then becomes more attractive to open shops in Wisbech that everyone benefits from. Local schools potentially benefit from the influx of aspirational middle-class parents - the sort who love running PTAs. And so on.

 

[Acfb]

There is lots of housebuilding in South Cambridgeshire district (not so sure about East Cambridgeshire) but I don't think the Cambridge commuter belt extends much beyond Ely and Soham and most of South and East Cambs districts (perhaps Huntingdon to a lesser extent as well, not so sure about Peterborough).

Wisbech seems like a broadly self contained town with people working locally and more in common with other towns in northern Cambs, Lincs and Norfolk. It has good bus links to Peterborough but is poorly connected to March (a slightly smaller town with similar demographics etc) with no evening bus service.

The solution here is probably better bus links to March (and possibly Kings Lynn too) but I don't know about the subsidy issues and demand etc.

 

[yorkie]

Just a gentle reminder that this section of the forum is to discuss actual infrastructure projects and not theoretical / speculative alternatives

Please use the existing https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...er-value-than-a-reopened-wisbech-line.202453/ thread to discuss any alternative options.

Thanks

Edit: someone has contacted us using the report button to say the thread is locked; unfortunately I am unable to unlock it without making a post and the person who reported it has nothing to add. So, if you wish to add anything, please report this post and state you wish to post in that thread and I will make a post to say that you are going to do so Thanks and apologies for any confusion

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Yes, and that’s been the case since BR days if a council / developer wanted to build a new station.

Said developer / promoter would also have to pay Network Rail's self-set Outside Party rates for activites that NR will only accept if NR do them, for anything that NR deems NR to need ... even if NR's own regulator insists otherwise. Despite PPF, if NR take against a scheme (or simply can't be bothered) they will just Filibuster until the promoter runs out of cash / patience / sanity / hair.

 

[telstarbox]

IF it was possible to have a half hourly Wisbech - Cambridge service then it would certainly help regenerate Wisbech (and March). Housing in Cambridge is absurdly expensive, and better commuter links to cheaper towns will result in people moving there, and encourage new housing and other developments.

If it's expensive but well paid residents are buying those houses, then it might not be expensive for them.
If residents are being priced out of Cambridge, it would be better value for public money to build affordable housing in the city, rather than in a town up the road and continue the cycle there?

 

[Ianno87]

If it's expensive but well paid residents are buying those houses, then it might not be expensive for them.
If residents are being priced out of Cambridge, it would be better value for public money to build affordable housing in the city, rather than in a town up the road and continue the cycle there?

Although city housing comes with transport infrastructure needs to support it too.

 

[telstarbox]

It does, but Cambridge is one of the UK cities with the best conditions for car-free development.

 

[Maltazer]

If residents are being priced out of Cambridge, it would be better value for public money to build affordable housing in the city, rather than in a town up the road and continue the cycle there?

It's repeating all the mistakes of London. Wisbech is 30+ miles from Cambridge - there's no sense in encouraging people to commute to work from there.

 

[Ianno87]

It does, but Cambridge is one of the UK cities with the best conditions for car-free development.

"Infrastructure" include cycle infrastructure. (In the good sense, not painted-white-line-on-tarmac-sense).