Any thoughts on the CAM (Cambridge Autonomous Metro)?

[bspahh]

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/east-west-rail-st-neots-20889114

it says:

The East West Rail proposal would connect Oxford and Cambridge via a number of stations including Milton Keynes and Bedford.- It is being created by the East West Rail company, set up by the government as an arms-length delivery body, which has been consulting on routes that would take the line to the south of St Neots, some of which would also run east of the town.

I look forward to the route that goes from Oxford to Cambridge which doesn't run East of St Neots!

 

[camflyer]

Mayor Nik: "It also makes a request to see the evidence in favour of a southern rather than a northern approach to Cambridge. The proposed southern route has been strongly opposed by some residents in the affected area"

That's because the residents of the north of Cambridge haven't been protesting as there is nothing for them to protest about. It doesn't mean that they would gladly support a northern route.

 

[rebmcr]

That's because the residents of the north of Cambridge haven't been protesting as there is nothing for them to protest about. It doesn't mean that they would gladly support a northern route.

If they carry on avoiding the NIMBYs it'll end up going through Kings College Courtyard!

 

[D365]

How on earth do you serve St. Neots "directly" without an extra pair of tracks?

It's hardly like the existing station is anywhere near to the town centre anyway.

 

[camflyer]

The case for light rail in Cambridge rather than more busways

Cambridge transport: The case for light rail over busways to get city moving

Cambridge Connect and Railfuture East explain their vision for an Isaac Newton Line and Darwin Line instead of the GCP schemes.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

Cambridge Connect has been around for a few years and I've always thought that it was the most sensible and realistic solution to public transport in the Greater Cambridge area.

 

[edwin_m]

The case for light rail in Cambridge rather than more busways

Cambridge transport: The case for light rail over busways to get city moving

Cambridge Connect and Railfuture East explain their vision for an Isaac Newton Line and Darwin Line instead of the GCP schemes.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

Cambridge Connect has been around for a few years and I've always thought that it was the most sensible and realistic solution to public transport in the Greater Cambridge area.

More details and a copy of the same map which is clickable to a version large enough to read: http://www.cambridge-connect.uk/

In 2020/21 we have undertaken a major revision of our proposals, with a keen focus on practical deliverability and reduction of costs. To achieve this, we looked at every aspect of the scheme to identify opportunities for efficiencies. Improvements have been made, and inevitably some compromises. The latest model presented would comprise two light rail lines (the Isaac Newton Line and Darwin Line) serving Cambridge and the surrounding region, extend 40 km in length, include a short tunnel in the historic city core, and would be delivered in two main phases over ten years. The overall cost of £1.4 bn, which includes the tunnel and underground stations, would be spread over the delivery phases, making this latest scheme eminently affordable. We believe the latest plans for the Cambridgeshire Autonomous Metro (CAM) were over-ambitious, with ~150 km of network and ~12 km of complex tunnelling, with a price tag of ~£2-3 bn or more. We also believe that CAM, proposing a form of electric bus, was focused on the wrong technology for a modern metro. We are doubtful whether finance could be raised for such a scheme, and therefore propose a more pragmatic, deliverable, alternative based on the proven and highly advanced technology of light rail.

 

[camflyer]

Still no sign of a Plan B to replace CAM

Councillors have hit out at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough mayor Dr Nik Johnson and warned that “tinkering around with buses, does not and will not deliver the game changing public transport that’s needed”.

‘Scrapping the Cambridge Autonomous Metro leaves us with no plan’

A row has broken out over plans to scrap the Cambridge Autonomous Metro (CAM) proposals.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

 

[eastdyke]

Still no sign of a Plan B to replace CAM

Councillors have hit out at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough mayor Dr Nik Johnson and warned that “tinkering around with buses, does not and will not deliver the game changing public transport that’s needed”.

‘Scrapping the Cambridge Autonomous Metro leaves us with no plan’

A row has broken out over plans to scrap the Cambridge Autonomous Metro (CAM) proposals.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

mmmm...
Not looking too promising for the new Mayor insofar that he thinks he doesn't need consultants by doing work 'in house' and also that he can 'sell' the CAM idea to other areas of the country!
Looks like 'tinkering around with buses' might be the best that Cambridge will get for the time being.
From New Civil Engineer (3rd Aug 21)

New Cambridgeshire mayor looks to cut consultancy spending​

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority's (CPCA) new mayor is looking to take work in-house and cut spending with external consultants but could re-use work from the scrapped £2bn Cambridgeshire Autonomous Metro (CAM) for “metro-style” solutions in other areas of the county.
The authority suspended work on the ambitious project after Labour’s Nik Johnson won the race to be the new mayor of the combined authority at the local elections in May. Johnson said he hopes to announce more detailed plans in the autumn, however he has vetoed plans to spend £350,000 on consultants to develop new transport schemes in the local area from the CAM project.
He said: “A multi-billion-pound CAM is too expensive and, in my view, not deliverable. It won’t offer a solution to the inequalities that exist across our region. But the work done on the CAM can be used, and the latest thinking on 21st century transport can be just as well deployed in other parts of the county as it can around Cambridge.
“For example, there is real potential for new metro-style solutions for linking March and Wisbech and where cycling and walking infrastructure comes built in [...]
“And I believe we need to be extremely judicious in our use of consultants. At the Combined Authority Board on Wednesday, I did not approve £350,000 of consultancy spend on taking learnings from the CAM to develop new transport schemes in the area. We are reviewing the use of consultants in delivering transport schemes and I would always prefer to see projects worked on in-house whenever possible.”
CPCA has been tasked with a complete rethink of its local transport plan (LTP), which it says will put “compassion, co-operation and community” at the heart of any new masterplan and will see the combined authority work closely with other councils to improve journey times across Cambridge city centre and also with the forthcoming East West Rail project.

According to the CPCA, since the publication of the LTP in January 2020, there have been a number of changes to the transport landscape. That includes the Combined Authority’s approval of the initial recommendations of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Independent Commission on Climate Change, new CO2 and electric vehicle targets published by government, including its Decarbonsing Transport document, and the changes in travel caused by Covid-19. The development work on the revamped plan will take these changes into consideration.
Johnson added: “I want to take those projects to the public to see what they think. So in the autumn, when our transport team has developed more detail on potential improvements, we will be consulting to hear feedback and improve our plans further.”
In March this year, concept designs for the autonomous metro were revealed as part of the ongoing design process.
The designs were drawn up by three teams shortlisted to move the project forward, led by Dromos Technologies, Egis and Mott MacDonald respectively.
Designs included the vehicle, infrastructure and how the system would operate.

The designs were due to inform the project’s next business case which will also evaluate options of extending the metro to Peterborough, Chatteris and Ramsey.

New Cambridgeshire mayor looks to cut consultancy spending | New Civil Engineer

The authority suspended work on the ambitious project after Labour’s Nik Johnson won the race to be the new mayor of the combined authority at the local

www.newcivilengineer.com

 

[Aictos]

How on earth do you serve St. Neots "directly" without an extra pair of tracks?

It's hardly like the existing station is anywhere near to the town centre anyway.

There are such structures known as flying flyovers or dive unders or build a new station to the south of St Neots at Tempsford with the EWR line crossing the ECML overhead with platforms over the ECML like they have at Tamworth.

 

[D365]

There are such structures known as flying flyovers or dive unders or build a new station to the south of St Neots at Tempsford with the EWR line crossing the ECML overhead with platforms over the ECML like they have at Tamworth.

I am well aware that St Neots South is the current plan. My comment was in reference to an opinion that East West Rail should be diverted to service St Neots (the existing station) - whether the slow lines would have the capacity for an additional 2+tph

 

[camflyer]

Deleted. Wrong thread.

 

[MarkyT]

I am well aware that St Neots South is the current plan. My comment was in reference to an opinion that East West Rail should be diverted to service St Neots (the existing station) - whether the slow lines would have the capacity for an additional 2+tph

The precise routing in the area has not been settled, yet as indicated by the broad 'bands' in the official material published so far. Another option not so far mentioned might be relocation of the existing St Neots mainline station a little further south nearer Eynesbury (perhaps at B1046 bridge), incorporating the EWR interchange. That could inform final routing choice and avoid having two slow line stops in close succession, while still being largely just as convenient for most existing St Neots station users. The new combined facility could also incorporate fast line platforms for interchange with ECML express services.

 

[Dunnyrail]

The precise routing in the area has not been settled, yet as indicated by the broad 'bands' in the official material published so far. Another option not so far mentioned might be relocation of the existing St Neots mainline station a little further south nearer Eynesbury (perhaps at B1046 bridge), incorporating the EWR interchange. That could inform final routing choice and avoid having two slow line stops in close succession, while still being largely just as convenient for most existing St Neots station users. The new combined facility could also incorporate fast line platforms for interchange with ECML express services.

I think you perhaps need to look at Google Earth Street View to see that South of the current Station near Eynesbury is pretty impractical due to building and distance from Town and habitation other than properties near to Tesco.

 

[option]

Tunnels under Cambridge


East of the Cam is gravels & chalk over clay then sand. Be an interesting (!) tunnelling project, & would cost a fortune on structural monitoring.


There used to be street running trams

Cambridge Street Tramways - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[daodao]

Councillors have hit out at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough mayor Dr Nik Johnson and warned that “tinkering around with buses, does not and will not deliver the game changing public transport that’s needed”.

Tunnels under Cambridge

There is no practical alternative to BRT extensions in Cambridge.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is no practical alternative to BRT extensions in Cambridge.

A street tramway is completely practical. Plenty of places with similar constraints have one, often with narrow 2+1 seated vehicles.

If you can get a full sized bus round, you can get a tram round.

 

[A0wen]

A street tramway is completely practical. Plenty of places with similar constraints have one, often with narrow 2+1 seated vehicles.

If you can get a full sized bus round, you can get a tram round.

Yes, but if you have 2+1 seated vehicles, then you're actually looking at something which is *less* space efficient than a comparable bus which is 2+2 seating.

Add in you need the various bits of infrastructure with a tram which you don't need with a bus.

 

[camflyer]

Yes, but if you have 2+1 seated vehicles, then you're actually looking at something which is *less* space efficient than a comparable bus which is 2+2 seating.

Add in you need the various bits of infrastructure with a tram which you don't need with a bus.

Might be possible if combined with traffic free zones in the city centre but would mean the council losing a lot of income from city centre car parks.

 

[A0wen]

Might be possible if combined with traffic free zones in the city centre but would mean the council losing a lot of income from city centre car parks.

But still doesn't address the point if you go for narrow bodied 2+1 seated trams, which is what was touted, that from a space usage point of view, that tram will have 25% less seating that an equivalent length bus would have, that's before you consider any of the infrastructure needed.

 

[ashkeba]

Might be possible if combined with traffic free zones in the city centre but would mean the council losing a lot of income from city centre car parks.

For how many years must future citizens be punished for the failure of past councils to relocate municipal car parking out of the historic downtown to more appropriate locations?

 

[camflyer]

For how many years must future citizens be punished for the failure of past councils to relocate municipal car parking out of the historic downtown to more appropriate locations?

Cambridge Grand Arcade must be one of the most expensive car parks in the country and must be a money spinner for the council

Grand Arcade car park

The nearest multi-storey car park to the city centre, the colleges and the riverside.

www.cambridge.gov.uk

£30 for 5 hours on a Sunday!

 

[Ianno87]

Cambridge Grand Arcade must be one of the most expensive car parks in the country and must be a money spinner for the council

Grand Arcade car park

The nearest multi-storey car park to the city centre, the colleges and the riverside.

www.cambridge.gov.uk

£30 for 5 hours on a Sunday!

And people queue to get into it. Insane.

 

[rebmcr]

£30 for 5 hours on a Sunday!

I get a whole YEAR of resident's parking in the Kite zone for £98.25 — that's a heck of a lot more Sunday hours for a fraction of the cost!

 

[eastdyke]

And people queue to get into it. Insane.

And more than a few of them will be Blue Badge Holders, they get 3 hours free. I totally understand priority places for Blue Badge Holders but not the free.

 

[HSTEd]

Tunnels under Cambridge


East of the Cam is gravels & chalk over clay then sand. Be an interesting (!) tunnelling project, & would cost a fortune on structural monitoring.

And likely still a better option than having a fight over street tramways with people as politically and socially connected as the people in central Cambridge.

Engineering problems are easy to solve than political ones, almost every time.

 

[option]

And likely still a better option than having a fight over street tramways with people as politically and socially connected as the people in central Cambridge.

Engineering problems are easy to solve than political ones, almost every time.

Very expensive engineering problems.
Transport tunnelling is £20-40m/km, & that's just the tunnel. Any station boxes, fit out etc is on top.

A street-running tram system is ~£20m/km, & that includes the vehicles.


Market Hill to the station is 1.7km straight line.
Even if you only got to Gonville Place/Regent St with a street-running tram, you've more than halved that distance.

Want to get the tram further in? Shove it up Regent St as far as Sidney St.


If Cambridge want to fund the 100%+ extra cost themselves, then they can go for it.

 

[HSTEd]

Market Hill to the station is 1.7km straight line.
Even if you only got to Gonville Place/Regent St with a street-running tram, you've more than halved that distance.

Transition from tram to underground running has serious disadvantages compared to either mode, so transitions between them in an urban area tend to be avoided historically.

The tram can't just teleport from the street into the tunnel so you end up with a sloping trench that is effectively dead space that can't be used at all, far more disruptive to the surrounding environment than either a tram track or a metro line.

If Cambridge want to fund the 100%+ extra cost themselves, then they can go for it.

Since we don't live in a brutal dictatorship, you will spend vast sums of money fighting the inevitable legal actions and protests against a tram scheme.

It sounds like a lot of money for a tunnel until you get into years long protracted legal battles with high power lawyers and nothing actually being built.

Ultimately, the only reason we have a HS2 Chiltern tunnel is because the political capital of taking the cheapest engineering route was too expensive - there is no technical reason for the tunnel to exist after all.

 

[camflyer]

Very expensive engineering problems.
Transport tunnelling is £20-40m/km, & that's just the tunnel. Any station boxes, fit out etc is on top.

A street-running tram system is ~£20m/km, & that includes the vehicles.


Market Hill to the station is 1.7km straight line.
Even if you only got to Gonville Place/Regent St with a street-running tram, you've more than halved that distance.

Want to get the tram further in? Shove it up Regent St as far as Sidney St.


If Cambridge want to fund the 100%+ extra cost themselves, then they can go for it.

I would have though the biggest problem would be taking vehicles off Hill Road, always one of the busiest in the city, to make way for a tramway. That's before you start putting trams on the arterial roads.

The Cambridge "Ring Road" has always been something of a local joke.

 

[eastdyke]

Very expensive engineering problems.
A street-running tram system is ~£20m/km, & that includes the vehicles.

Metrolink's Trafford Park extension (5.5km) was over £60m/km

Just saying ....

 

[camflyer]

Metrolink's Trafford Park extension (5.5km) was over £60m/km

Just saying ....

The 3 mile extension of the Edinburgh tram to Newhaven is looking at being over £200m and that is a lot less controversial than any Cambridge tramway would be.