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

[JamesT]

Here's a recording

Good to see the BBC are into recycling, some of the prerecorded bits of that report turned up on this evening’s South Today.

 

[camflyer]

Argh, that was infuriating to watch in places. The person from CPRE who complained that the railway was "going through pristine countryside" - well it's going between Bedford and Cambridge, short of building on top of the A421 and A428 you can't avoid that. The person who emailed in to say they've looked at the Cambridge timetable and think they can make a northern approach work with two tracks - good to know, you should apply to NR to be a planner.

I don't know why EWR are being blamed for not having sufficiently good answers on housing development plans for the next 30 years.How is that their remit?

I did like the person from Dry Drayton who didn't want a northern route. A perfect demonstration that no matter where you put a railway, some people are going to experience disruption.

The CPRE guy was hilarious. Within the space of a few seconds he was complaining about EWR going through both "built up areas" and the "pristine countryside" (no idea how you build a useful railway line which does neither!) before moving on to object to new homes being for people moving to the area rather than for locals. He was the Nimbiest Nimby I've ever seen.

 

[yorkie]

A reminder that this thread is to discuss EWR consultation updates. Thanks

 

[The Planner]

East West Rail are not currently proposing a chord at Bletchley to enable trains from the East to continue North on the West Coast Mainline. Only trains from the West, including Oxford, Aylesbury and possibly freight trains from Southampton, will be able to go to Milton Keynes and continue North on the West Coast Mainline. Freight trains from Felixstowe to South Wales would be able to use East West Rail but the Network Rail study states "Note that all trains between Ipswich and Bristol/South Wales would remain on the Great Eastern and through London."

East West might not be, but NR are looking at it.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

East West might not be, but NR are looking at it.

Really? It has been reiterated constantly in this forum that an east/north chord at Bletchley is unworkable.

 

[BrianW]

It has been reiterated constantly in this forum that an east/north chord at Bletchley is unworkable.

I think you may mean it is currently 'unworkable'? Given enough expenditure and openness to relocation and redevelopment a chord COULD be built.

This may also be relevant in terms of passenger 'traffic' and whether it is worth facilitating it between MK and Cambridge.

I am 'floating' the idea of a kind of an AI-driven tram-cum-Gatwick/T5 etc 'shuttle' Bletchley-MK-Centre maybe Wuppertal-ish if need be? (And perhaps a similar 'high-level' construction for EWR through Bedford?)

And w.r.t. London's Ringways- IIRC they were developed from Abercrombie's 1944 London Plan- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Ringways. Part of one was known as the West Cross Route built White City- Shepherds Bush as M41, since downgraded to A something serving Westfield, and 'spurs' heading north out from the A40 Westway roundabout toward Hampstead ...

So much takes so long it is unsurprising that ideas and priorities change.

 

[richieb1971]

The problem about talking about freight on EWR is that it doesn't specify which part of EWR will be used. Bicester and Oxford are on EWR, Cambridge is on EWR, and everywhere in between is on EWR.

If the freight traffic is coming through Bedford, then perhaps Bedford is the best place for a northern curve, rather than Bletchley. There are now 4 tracks north of Bedford to Glendon and much of the freight can use freight only track in many different directions once north of Kettering. This is a liberty that none of the other northern facing lines have. It also avoids Bedford station, just a nice bit of cream on top of the cake.

 

[Tobbes]

Really? It has been reiterated constantly in this forum that an east/north chord at Bletchley is unworkable.

I'm not sure that anyone is say E-N chord at Bletchley is unworkable, just that it is expensive and may not turn out to be very useful (Cambs-MKC passenger trains notwithstanding). Such a chord could be useful for frieght, but it would presumably be hard to justify on that basis alone.

 

[a good off]

East West might not be, but NR are looking at it.

Indeed, it would bring a massive amount of flexibility. Having extra diversionary routes also makes my job as a controller a lot easier.

 

[Ianno87]

I'm not sure that anyone is say E-N chord at Bletchley is unworkable, just that it is expensive and may not turn out to be very useful (Cambs-MKC passenger trains notwithstanding). Such a chord could be useful for frieght, but it would presumably be hard to justify on that basis alone.

The likely main issues are:
-Quite significant amount of land-take requiredto build it
-If you did build it, whether there is enough capacity on the Slows between Bletchley and MK to be able to make meaningful use of it (and thus justify people having their land/property compulsorily purchased)

 

[edwin_m]

The likely main issues are:
-Quite significant amount of land-take requiredto build it
-If you did build it, whether there is enough capacity on the Slows between Bletchley and MK to be able to make meaningful use of it (and thus justify people having their land/property compulsorily purchased)

From the freight point of view it duplicates the north connection at Nuneaton, in that it allows freight from the east to head north on the WCML. As far as I know that curve has had very little use. It would also allow a MK-Bedford passenger service, but based on the options in the consultation that would probably be a case of the same number of services, but some terminating at MK instead of Bletchley. This would probably result in whatever Marston Vale stations remained, other than Ridgmont and Woburn Sands, losing service to Bletchley.

 

[The Planner]

From the freight point of view it duplicates the north connection at Nuneaton, in that it allows freight from the east to head north on the WCML. As far as I know that curve has had very little use. It would also allow a MK-Bedford passenger service, but based on the options in the consultation that would probably be a case of the same number of services, but some terminating at MK instead of Bletchley. This would probably result in whatever Marston Vale stations remained, other than Ridgmont and Woburn Sands, losing service to Bletchley.

It also allows access to DIRFT and the new terminal thats going to be built near j15 of the M1, though that would never be enough to justify it on its own.

 

[frediculous]

Or 6. The property being purchased was sufficiently distant from the proposed works that it doesn’t come up on the searches.

I bought a house in the middle of Sandy between Dec 2019 and June 2020 and East-West Rail appeared on our searches.

 

[Nottingham59]

Since this particular householder is complaining about demolition then, unless the extra two tracks are over 200 metres wide, unlikely!

Or they could have bought, say, 1 Chesterton Mews, which is 62 metres away from the railway line and yet is currently under threat of demolition.


Yes, that's the house on this row at the end of AWAY from the tracks. "Acquisition and/or demolition may be required if structurally linked to adjacent property." As I said upthread, EWR have been extraordinarily clumsy in how they have presented their case.

 

[mr_jrt]

I think the point is that if when numbers 21+ are demolished #21 needs to also be demolished, then that might then mean #19 might then need to be demolished if it depends on #21, and so on and so on. Somewhat unlikely, but unless you do a survey how would you know? How do you think the householders would react to a surveyor turning up out of the blue and asking to survey their homes for a pending consultation they have heard nothing about?

This is the consultation where they are saying, "we don't think there will be a problem, but we need to survey your homes to be certain."

I'd put money on the only demolitions in this row being #23+

 

[Nottingham59]

when numbers 21+ are demolished #21 needs to also be demolished, then that might then mean #19 might then need to be demolished if it depends on #21, and so on and so on

Yes, that is understood.

I'd put money on the only demolitions in this row being #23+

So would I. Why can't EWR? I pity the poor occupants of Nos. 1-21 whose houses have been blighted by this consultation document.

 

[tspaul26]

Or they could have bought, say, 1 Chesterton Mews, which is 62 metres away from the railway line and yet is currently under threat of demolition.

This was my point: if the householder is concerned about potential demolition then even that house is within the 200 metre buffer for the purposes of the local search.

So would I. Why can't EWR? I pity the poor occupants of Nos. 1-21 whose houses have been blighted by this consultation document.

Should they not identify this issue now and then potentially have it emerge only later if structural survey indicates demolition is in fact required?

They will then be accused of hiding information i.e. the same as the current complaints about freight usage, property demolition, &c.

They’re damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

Yes, that's the house on this row at the end of AWAY from the tracks.

Based on this satellite picture (very useful - thanks) it looks like there are offset party walls every few houses in the terrace.

I’m no structural engineer, but I did work on a very acrimonious case a couple of years ago which was on its face a similar layout. Based on that, the entire lot might well actually have to come down!

 

[Nottingham59]

Based on that, the entire lot might well actually have to come down!

If that's so, then I take back what I said about EWR. But these are relatively modern houses. IF building regulations permit houses to be built where there is a risk of such a domino effect, then they are not fit for purpose.

 

[D6130]

IF building regulations permit houses to be built where there is a risk of such a domino effect, then they are not fit for purpose.

The building regulations or the houses?....or possibly both!

 

[BrianW]

This was my point: if the householder is concerned about potential demolition then even that house is within the 200 metre buffer for the purposes of the local search.


Should they not identify this issue now and then potentially have it emerge only later if structural survey indicates demolition is in fact required?

They will then be accused of hiding information i.e. the same as the current complaints about freight usage, property demolition, &c.

They’re damned if they do and damned if they don’t.


Based on this satellite picture (very useful - thanks) it looks like there are offset party walls every few houses in the terrace.

I’m no structural engineer, but I did work on a very acrimonious case a couple of years ago which was on its face a similar layout. Based on that, the entire lot might well actually have to come down!

Perhaps if EWR 'reprofiled' their 'Need to Sell' scheme as 'Would like to sell if the price is right' there would be less opposition? I dare say EWR would find enough people who will buy (in due course?) or rent through a Housing Association. If not already, Bedford will be a great place from which to commute, or in which to work at or from home; it already is. Cosmopolitan- one of the widest range of cuisines- ex WW2 PoWs; River Ouse with rowing, boating; flat for biking ... What's not to like? Clearly the purchaser thought it had a lot going for it. I sympathise of course- hope she can take out some of here rage on her solicitors!

 

[Class 170101]

East West Rail are not currently proposing a chord at Bletchley to enable trains from the East to continue North on the West Coast Mainline. Only trains from the West, including Oxford, Aylesbury and possibly freight trains from Southampton, will be able to go to Milton Keynes and continue North on the West Coast Mainline. Freight trains from Felixstowe to South Wales would be able to use East West Rail but the Network Rail study states "Note that all trains between Ipswich and Bristol/South Wales would remain on the Great Eastern and through London."

The chord at the moment still has limited value in relation to Harwich / Felixstowe because some infrastructure off the route is yet to be suitable for Freight Traffic to run via East West Rail. Any enhancement between Ipswich and Cambridge is likely to be many many years away.

 

[tspaul26]

If that's so, then I take back what I said about EWR. But these are relatively modern houses. IF building regulations permit houses to be built where there is a risk of such a domino effect, then they are not fit for purpose.

Not really my area, but I suppose Building Regs might not necessarily anticipate or require provision to be made for partial demolition of a terrace of houses!

 

[Ianno87]

Not really my area, but I suppose Building Regs might not necessarily anticipate or require provision to be made for partial demolition of a terrace of houses!

It would seem like a very odd requirement for a very specific, and unlikely, set of circumstances.

 

[tspaul26]

Perhaps if EWR 'reprofiled' their 'Need to Sell' scheme as 'Would like to sell if the price is right' there would be less opposition? I dare say EWR would find enough people who will buy (in due course?) or rent through a Housing Association. If not already, Bedford will be a great place from which to commute, or in which to work at or from home; it already is. Cosmopolitan- one of the widest range of cuisines- ex WW2 PoWs; River Ouse with rowing, boating; flat for biking ... What's not to like? Clearly the purchaser thought it had a lot going for it. I sympathise of course- hope she can take out some of here rage on her solicitors!

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if house values go up in this area once East West Rail is up and running. If I worked in Cambridge then a half hour commute from Bedford would be a very attractive proposition.

There’s a potential opportunity here in this respect: buy cheaper at below true value and then, if it’s not demolished, you capture the increase and, if it is demolished, you get full unblighted market value plus loss payment on top i.e. more than market value as compensation!

 

[BrianW]

Not really my area, but I suppose Building Regs might not necessarily anticipate or require provision to be made for partial demolition of a terrace of houses!

Some of you may recall Ronan Point, the tower block in Newham, the corner of which became a 'pack of cards' from a gas explosion. Building Regulations were amended in relation to 'progressive collapse'.
Buildings are obliged to comply with Building Regulations, though many are written as broad 'performance requirements' rather than 'prescriptively' defined methods and supported by 'Approved Documents' showing ways that requirements MAY be met. There is such a thing as a 'right to support' that, for instance inhibits your neighbour digging down next to your property; and the Party Wall Act requires notices to be given and provides for legal process. You don't see raking shores often these days.

 

[mr_jrt]

Presumably you could, with suitable care, reinforce one of those offset party walls prior to demolition from there towards the railway so as to resolve matters without having to pull the whole terrace down?

 

[hwl]

Presumably you could, with suitable care, reinforce one of those offset party walls prior to demolition from there towards the railway so as to resolve matters without having to pull the whole terrace down?

Correct - done many times due to bomb damage...

The most recent rail related case I can think of was at Abbey Wood for Crossrail to slue the SE tracks further south.

 

[Nottingham59]

done many times

They did it in Nottingham with the new tram lines. The mid-terrace wall of the remaining terraced house was reinforced, as can be seen here:

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.co.uk

 

[flitwickbeds]

I bought a house in the middle of Sandy between Dec 2019 and June 2020 and East-West Rail appeared on our searches.

Yep. Our house move (March 2020) to Maulden in Bedfordshire bought up EWR in the searches.

 

[The Ham]

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if house values go up in this area once East West Rail is up and running. If I worked in Cambridge then a half hour commute from Bedford would be a very attractive proposition.

There’s a potential opportunity here in this respect: buy cheaper at below true value and then, if it’s not demolished, you capture the increase and, if it is demolished, you get full unblighted market value plus loss payment on top i.e. more than market value as compensation!

I'd also seek planning permission to extend, as even if I didn't do any works that would increase the value of my property.