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

[DarloRich]

said on here before:

1) chord from fenny(+ double track) toward MKC,through the present bletchley sidings, new station at Milton keynes stadium(for stadium and bowl)
2)tmd/train presentation at stewartby brickworks to replace maintainance and train storage at bedford/bletchley
3)remove st johns curve and have EW come onto MML between kempston and stewartby
4) remodel bedford midland for 6 platform.
6) EW rail to cambridge depart to the north of bedford (slows), intersection with ECML at st neots, station at cambourne.
7) wire it up!. would be necessary for trains anyway as TMD's now relocated.
8) all stations stopper to bletchley at peak/lunch times only(additional train-2 car 15x suitable).
9)standard service would run to MKC instead of bletchley..2-tph
Stopping pattern: (from oxford)MKC-MK Stadium- woburn-Ridgemont-stewartby-bedford midland(to cambridge)
10) removal of as many level crossings as possible with under/over pass
11) uprate for 75mph+ running
12) new traction 90mph minimum cl158-ideally 159 or networker (service would probably need 3 car standard/6 car peak)so as not to obstruct WCML/MML workings on 100mph+ sections

You have mentioned most of this before in post #1252 and it was just as wrong then.

1) You are suggesting taking a junction of the the WCML somewhere near the Watling Street Bridge, knocking down much of an industrial estate and connecting back up with the Marston Vale line somewhere before the Saxon Street bridge near Tesco. This is, of course, and industrial estate in use and recently redeveloped. This also means taking out all of the depot, OTM and freight train stabling. It simply isnt realistic outside of crayonville. The returns versus reversing at Bletchley just don't seem worth the investment. I accept the need for posters here to make lines look "right" but investment decisions, especially those with significant land take required, need to be based on more.

What is the purpose of your Stadium MK station? It would serve no one as you will have knocked down the business units that might have provided passengers. it would serve no housing. It would also be little closer to Stadium MK than Fenny Stratford. Serve the bowl? WOW that car boot on a Sunday ought to generate loads of traffic!

2) Stewartby Brickworks is zoned for housing with 1000 homes planned: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-46739256

3) why are you disconnecting St Johns Curve? What does this achieve? You do realise that most (if not all of the land) you want to use for your new connection to the MML is planned to have housing or commercial units built on it don't you?

4) OK - How do you propose that this is funded?

6) Ok. I have no views on the best route from Bedford to Cambridge.

7) We cant move the depot to your posed site. Also we cant afford the wires.

8) Thanks for chucking us a stopper every now and again. Kind of you. Sadly the 15X's are all spoken for. What about freight?

9) you could do that for a fraction of the price by reversing at Bletchley and not building a new station serving no one!

10) OK - see below re Liddilington. . Woburn Sands will be fun. And expensive.

11) ok - as long as it can be covered in the budget and actually offers some benefit. Also freight needs to be accommodated.

12) or just buy new. the 158/159 will be ancient by the time the Cambrdige section opens!

The level crossings were marginally more of an issue, but again, nothing insurmountable in most cases. Could be nice and fast.

Nice to see local communities so glibbly dismissed. The people of Liddlington, for instance, are not to happy about having their village cut in two by the removal of the crossing and a multi mile detour to get a round via a new bridge.

Yes, the A421 upgrade is a mixed blessing in that sense. Still, that's the Oxford-Cambridge Expressway for you. Welcome to the future :/

Having fast services from MK heading both east and west along EWR would be excellent, certainly. If those were just the through longer-distance services, then it would add maybe 15-20 minutes to through journey times to get up to MK Central, but with careful planning and platforming at Bletchley through passengers could jump off, walk across the platform, and get on the “previous” through service, or something along those lines. Could work well. Alternatively, just build some more terminating platforms at MK and have most (all?) services terminating there from both east and west. With a cross-platform interchange and good timetabling for “through” passengers at Bletchley, this really could work very well indeed.

Where will we build these new terminating platforms at Milton Keynes? How are we going to accommodate the services within the WCML existing capacity and track work?

I would expect, for example, far more people to travel Oxford/Bicester to MK and vice versa than will ever want go all the way to Cambridge, but to make a bald statements, as Bletchleyite did, that there is no demand for travel between Oxford and Cambridge is just plain wrong.

I agree there are people wanting to make a through journey. I suspect they will be less than the more local journeys from, say, Aylesbury to Milton Keynes.

Nowhere and nobody. But you were in my view over-egging the importance of the end to end journey. I was addressing that.

Just like the Marston Vale, then. It's never going to be 12-car full and standing, but demand would increase appreciably if it ran to and from Milton Keynes Central, as was the plan for a while but never happened.

Completion of the housing building plans will also help develop new passengers. The friends group have done a lot to encourage travel on the Vale and numbers are up.

 

[richieb1971]

I got a leaflet through the door the other day stating the 5 routes on the EWR website (which has subsequently been re-engineered).

I sent them an email stating that there needs to be some cooperative efforts on the Wixams/Bedford south Parkway location or locations before a route option is chosen.

Based on facebook friends and groups, its obvious to me that 80+% of responses showed that Bedford Midland being utilized was the preferred option (not necessarily my choice but I stated it all the same). With this in mind it eliminates a lot of the 5 options. So surely Bedford is the starting point of any discussion before any options are chosen east of Bedford.

I also stated that the current railways are in a state and if the roll out of EWR doesn't take expansion, contingency and crossover benefits into consideration it will be another over priced and inflated project that lacks to deliver efficiency or practicality. There are options that could be utilized that would also make the railway better utilized once opened.

Although I would like MKC on the through road of EWR, its unlikely to get traction. Bletchley is near enough to MKC. If traffic demands it, some kind of interconnectivity other than rail can be utilized to make the short journey north.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If traffic demands it, some kind of interconnectivity other than rail can be utilized to make the short journey north.

There is a train service, you know!

 

[richieb1971]

Yes. But what if platforms at bletchley never materialize.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes. But what if platforms at bletchley never materialize.

It would be very silly for them not to. Where are you proposing they should get the bus from? Winslow?

 

[richieb1971]

Yes. Agreed.

 

[DarloRich]

I also stated that the current railways are in a state and if the roll out of EWR doesn't take expansion, contingency and crossover benefits into consideration it will be another over priced and inflated project that lacks to deliver efficiency or practicality. There are options that could be utilized that would also make the railway better utilized once opened.

i am sure the E-W team were delighted to receive your expert feedback.

 

[camflyer]

Greater Cambridge Partnership (nee Cambridge City Deal) have just announced their consultation for a new busway between Cambridge and Cambourne

https://www.greatercambridge.org.uk...-to-cambridge/cambourne-to-cambridge-phase-2/

So it looks like they are sure that EWR will be taking a southern approach to Cambridge.

Apparently this busway will be different to the existing busway in that "technology has moved on" and that there will be "less concrete". Presumably that means "more tarmac".

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/ne...e-cambourne-busway-metro-jamespalmer-15776128

“I think the issue with the busway is people think it’ll be like the busway in Cambridge,” said Mr Blake. “It won’t look the same because technology has simply moved on. There will be far less concrete and far less visual impact.”

The problem with this is that while it may save a few minutes on the A428/A14 as soon as the "busway" hits Cambridge it has to use the same roads as the rest of the traffic. If you are stuck in nose to tail traffic on Milton Road you don't feel like you are on a super efficient mass transit system.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Greater Cambridge Partnership (nee Cambridge City Deal) have just announced their consultation for a new busway between Cambridge and Cambourne

https://www.greatercambridge.org.uk...-to-cambridge/cambourne-to-cambridge-phase-2/

So it looks like they are sure that EWR will be taking a southern approach to Cambridge.

Give it a few years and they'll be regretting not getting the rails down and the OHLE up. A light rail (i.e. off-the-shelf tram based) network would be hugely better.

 

[Kettledrum]

Cambridgeshire as a county has made a habit of investing in busways and putting tarmac over routes that could have been re-opened as light or heavy rail. Why are we even thinking of connecting East-West rail to an area that has such anti-rail policies?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Cambridgeshire as a county has made a habit of investing in busways and putting tarmac over routes that could have been re-opened as light or heavy rail. Why are we even thinking of connecting East-West rail to an area that has such anti-rail policies?

A fair point. Though at least converting busways to trams is cheaper than if they'd put houses on them.

 

[DaveN]

I So surely Bedford is the starting point of any discussion before any options are chosen east of Bedford.

Just because most people think that "through Bedford" rather than Bedford South makes most sense, doesn't mean it will be chosen.
Remember these types of consultations are normally just "window dressing".

Route A with Bedford South is the cheapest (and will give the quickest end-to-end times) so unless someone comes up with a large amount of money, it is the one that will be chosen.

 

[si404]

Route A with Bedford South is the cheapest (and will give the quickest end-to-end times) so unless someone comes up with a large amount of money, it is the one that will be chosen.

Indeed, the only Bedford South route remotely comparable to its Bedford Midland equivalent is the one that basically goes up to Black Cat, does a 180 to serve Tempsford and Sandy, before heading east to Bassingbourn. Unless Tempsford is guaranteed to be a large development, Route A via Sandy does the job (other than ruling out cheap-and-easy Cambridge-Peterborough and Stevenage-Bedford track work, which would be rather useful for having the development arc be a broader brush stroke rather than a narrow line) for far less than either option.

And, if Bletchley is good enough for MK, Wixhams is good enough for Bedford...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed, the only Bedford South route remotely comparable to its Bedford Midland equivalent is the one that basically goes up to Black Cat, does a 180 to serve Tempsford and Sandy, before heading east to Bassingbourn. Unless Tempsford is guaranteed to be a large development, Route A via Sandy does the job (other than ruling out cheap-and-easy Cambridge-Peterborough and Stevenage-Bedford track work, which would be rather useful for having the development arc be a broader brush stroke rather than a narrow line) for far less than either option.

And, if Bletchley is good enough for MK, Wixhams is good enough for Bedford...

They think Bletchley is good enough for MK. It really isn't, much as centring the service on that would benefit me personally. It needs to go to MKC.

I'd run all the services reversing/terminating at MKC. Post-HS2 there should be paths, and if you wanted another couple of extra platforms at MKC there's tons of room on the "platform 0" area of the car park.

 

[Kettledrum]

Greater Cambridge Partnership (nee Cambridge City Deal) have just announced their consultation for a new busway between Cambridge and Cambourne

https://www.greatercambridge.org.uk...-to-cambridge/cambourne-to-cambridge-phase-2/

So it looks like they are sure that EWR will be taking a southern approach to Cambridge.

It would be a real shame if another busway prevented a sensible rail re-instatement (again!). Ironically I also read:
"Cambridgeshire bus services in “crisis” as number of journeys hit 12-year low". See:

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/ne...bridge-bus-crisis-stagecoach-whippet-15773298

 

[camflyer]

It would be a real shame if another busway prevented a sensible rail re-instatement (again!). Ironically I also read:
"Cambridgeshire bus services in “crisis” as number of journeys hit 12-year low". See:

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/ne...bridge-bus-crisis-stagecoach-whippet-15773298

From that article

Mr Hamilton has said that increasing parking fares in Cambridge would encourage people to use buses more, which would give public transport the investment it needs to improve.

Well, Cambridge already has some of the most expensive parking in the country but that hasn't "encouraged" people to use buses more. I only rarely uses buses in Cambridge as it's usually quicker to walk.

If Cambridge really want to do something radical to get people moving then they need to make the city centre as car-free as possible.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If Cambridge really want to do something radical to get people moving then they need to make the city centre as car-free as possible.

With Cambridge being a thinking man's city, a hefty congestion charge or even car ban from the centre accompanied with the provision of a 100% electric bus system (and I mean a system - coordinated journeys and through ticketing) could do very well. Couple with further cycling improvements and you'd be onto a winner, I guess.

 

[camflyer]

With Cambridge being a thinking man's city, a hefty congestion charge or even car ban from the centre accompanied with the provision of a 100% electric bus system (and I mean a system - coordinated journeys and through ticketing) could do very well. Couple with further cycling improvements and you'd be onto a winner, I guess.

Cambridge may be one of the wealthiest cities in the country with some of the best minds on the planet but the eternal problem is that those great minds don't tend to be on the City Council. Add in the University which is capable of vetoing anything it doesn't like and you have a city which should be at the forefront on innovation still messing around with ineffective bus lanes.

There are plenty of similarly sized European cities which have are now virtually car free enabled by cheap, frequent and reliable public transport.

 

[richieb1971]

i am sure the E-W team were delighted to receive your expert feedback.

Yes they were extremely happy with my feedback.

https://www.bedfordindependent.co.u...XOGw8fwA2s0Yq-j4XZZ_JC6QJIpLX81860QhJKlGHIGQk


Concerns have been raised about three of the proposed routes for the new East West rail line and how they could affect plans for the highly-sought after Wixams train station.

However, the East West Rail Company says that if Wixams gets a train station it will most likely be the ‘Bedford South’ station spoken about in proposed routes: A, B and C.

Read: East West Rail reveal five route options for Bedford to Cambridge line

Bedford’s Mayor, Dave Hodgson, raised concerns while commenting on the consultation of the routes, saying: “A station to the south of Bedford would delay or even threaten the already long-awaited Wixams station altogether.”

But, a spokesperson for the East West Rail company said: “If one of the three routes with a new station to the south of Bedford is chosen as the preferred route and Wixams station goes ahead, there would be a strong case for EWR using this new station…

“If Wixams does not go ahead, we would create a new station somewhere else in the broad area to the south of Bedford. We’ll continue to work closely with Network Rail and Bedford Borough Council as plans for a station at Wixams progress.”

Regardless, all leading political parties in Bedford say they believe the East West route, which will connect Oxford with Cambridge, should come through Bedford’s existing Midland Road Station.


Click on image for full size…




Bedford Mayor, Dave Hodgson (Lib-Dem), maintains that routes D and E are the best options: “This is a passenger railway, so it should stop where passengers are and where passengers can get to…
“Let’s maximise the benefits of this excellent project by having it serve local people and employers, and let’s all support that by speaking up for a route via Bedford.”

Conservative Mayoral Candidate, Cllr Carofano agrees: “The best route for Bedford would be option D which would, with the associated investment, enable us to improve our often gridlocked traffic flows, carry out the revival of the long neglected Midland Road area and generally help boost the Town Centre.

“It is not however the cheapest or most convenient of the three options and we will have to lobby for it very strongly as a Council.

“The point must be made also that the ridiculously prolonged consultation process is not helping the Council formulate a comprehensive transport strategy which is now long overdue.”

Bedford and Kempston MP, Mohammad Yasin (Lab), said he too would prefer the route to go through the existing station on Midland Road: “I’d obviously prefer this new service to run from Bedford Station.

“But I do recognise that a new rail link will bring extra traffic into the town too, and so works should take this into account and include improved facilities for rail users.

“It’s important that as many people as possible respond to the consultation.”

MP for North East Bedfordshire, Alistair Burt (Con), added that it was important everyone takes part in the consultation: “This is an exciting and ambitious project that will link communities and reduce travel costs and journey times between them.

“It will help create opportunities for businesses to grow and create jobs, and support housing growth in the area.”

Five routes are now being consulted on with Bedfordians being encouraged to take part to make sure their voices are heard.

You can take part in the consultation online at: eastwestrail.co.uk/haveyoursay

There will also be a consultation event where you can see the plans up-close and speak to the East West Rail Company at Scott Hall, Barford Avenue MK42 0DS on 15 February, from 3.30pm to 7.30pm.

 

[hooverboy]

Just because most people think that "through Bedford" rather than Bedford South makes most sense, doesn't mean it will be chosen.
Remember these types of consultations are normally just "window dressing".

Route A with Bedford South is the cheapest (and will give the quickest end-to-end times) so unless someone comes up with a large amount of money, it is the one that will be chosen.

might be the quickest, but is not maximum footfall.

you optimise footfall by linking up as far as humanly possible to centres that people want to/need to travel to,with the minimum of connection times and inconvenience.
having to wait the extra 10/15 minutes at bletchley/ bedford south to get into MK/Bedford centre IS NOT the minimum of inconvenience.

that's ultimately going to be the difference between using the train or the same in car commuting time not subjected to the ravages of nature...and risking traffic jams.

it means serving mainline regional and long distance hubs with a useful rail/bus interchange for local travel.

footfall is revenue at the end iof the day.that is what pays for the railway and peoples wages.

likewise with bus routes.
bedford midland is terrible for connections, bletchley is also useless, and cambridge is just as bad.
there is no integration with the rail network in any of the above.
MKC does have a good bus connection.

yes i know someone will pipe up,"well bedford bus station is only 5 minues walk away". my point is people are inherently lazy, and impatient.
they can't be bothered to walk, and equally can't be bothered to wait for,let alone pay for, a taxi

 

[hooverboy]

Indeed, the only Bedford South route remotely comparable to its Bedford Midland equivalent is the one that basically goes up to Black Cat, does a 180 to serve Tempsford and Sandy, before heading east to Bassingbourn. Unless Tempsford is guaranteed to be a large development, Route A via Sandy does the job (other than ruling out cheap-and-easy Cambridge-Peterborough and Stevenage-Bedford track work, which would be rather useful for having the development arc be a broader brush stroke rather than a narrow line) for far less than either option.

And, if Bletchley is good enough for MK, Wixhams is good enough for Bedford...

see my previous post.
If they want to maximise revenue then luton to stevenage via the airport would be far more efficient...actually luton to stansted airport via stevenage and bishops stortford would be better
..and funnily enough they are playing monorails from parkway to luton airport because there is no joined up thinking(again council and private sector vanity project of limited use)
if you have ever tried a journey by national express from luton to stansted airports it is, well, unreliable.

 

[richieb1971]

Route C1 through Wixams is the most likely route choice. I do believe that after the Jacobs survey of routes costing God knows how much money that a public consultation is going to overturn that view. A Wixams in the style of Tamworth station seems to me to be the best choice overall. I am of the opinion that using the mainlines at Bedford will spiral the cost because the situation will cause bottlenecks. Not only is BDM positioned badly as it is, but its platforms and structure have to be positioned between Ford end road bridge and Bromham road bridge. It doesn't allow for much expansion on length and there is hardly any provision to increase the width for more platforms.

Lets say for arguments sake that BDM takes 1000 more passengers a day due to EWR. Thats a potential of 20%-30% increase in car parking needed right there. Where is it going to be? If you multi storey the car park it will mean closing the current car park for more than a year. If Wixams is the desired choice, parking will be relatively easy to put in.

A Wixams station with the potential to accelerate quickly will mean shorter A-Z run times. Going through BDM will slow down the traffic no end. What happens if all platforms are occupied at BDM, that will mean trains stuck at lights in Kempston and Bromham respectively. I just can't see NR/THL/EMT/EWR all trying to fit into the paths available.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Lets say for arguments sake that BDM takes 1000 more passengers a day due to EWR. Thats a potential of 20%-30% increase in car parking needed right there. Where is it going to be? If you multi storey the car park it will mean closing the current car park for more than a year.

No, it won't. All the south WCML car parks were double-stacked within weeks. The modular car parks are VERY quick to put up.

Bedford is a key origin/destination. Not serving its main station is absolutely nuts - penny pinching that will be regretted later. Just like not going to MKC with services to/from the east.

 

[richieb1971]

I am not a fan. Bletchley looks horrible, as does Tamworth. It looks temporary.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am not a fan. Bletchley looks horrible, as does Tamworth. It looks temporary.

They're both quite bleak stations, but that doesn't mean they couldn't be rebuilt to something nicer.

I do however think Wixams is a really stupid, penny-pinching idea.

 

[Elecman]

I am not a fan. Bletchley looks horrible, as does Tamworth. It looks temporary.

And Lichfield even worse

 

[hooverboy]

Route C1 through Wixams is the most likely route choice. I do believe that after the Jacobs survey of routes costing God knows how much money that a public consultation is going to overturn that view. A Wixams in the style of Tamworth station seems to me to be the best choice overall. I am of the opinion that using the mainlines at Bedford will spiral the cost because the situation will cause bottlenecks. Not only is BDM positioned badly as it is, but its platforms and structure have to be positioned between Ford end road bridge and Bromham road bridge. It doesn't allow for much expansion on length and there is hardly any provision to increase the width for more platforms.

Lets say for arguments sake that BDM takes 1000 more passengers a day due to EWR. Thats a potential of 20%-30% increase in car parking needed right there. Where is it going to be? If you multi storey the car park it will mean closing the current car park for more than a year. If Wixams is the desired choice, parking will be relatively easy to put in.

A Wixams station with the potential to accelerate quickly will mean shorter A-Z run times. Going through BDM will slow down the traffic no end. What happens if all platforms are occupied at BDM, that will mean trains stuck at lights in Kempston and Bromham respectively. I just can't see NR/THL/EMT/EWR all trying to fit into the paths available.

I think if done correctly BDM would be looking at several orders of magnitude higher than your expected numbers.
I think peak time usage alone will handily exceed an extra 1000 passengers per day.
hence the need for through platforms 5+6

definitely 2 platforms required for MML fasts
definitely 2 required for GTL standard running
1 required as GTL reserve(as and when needed)
leaves 1 or 2 for EWR and/or freight passing

 

[richieb1971]

I just wrote to the Lib Dem MP stating that land owned by NR at the end of Prebend street is growing trees currently (for the past 30 years) and could be used as a car park. Its besides the current St Johns station which means access to it is very easy because it can touch the station. On the other side of the current St Johns station is another piece of land which the old St Johns used to sit on. That land is also growing trees and could be utilized as a car park from the opposite side. Again it can touch the current St Johns station without any issues at all. Utilizing this wasted land you could potentially stop half the trains at St Johns and let the 2 stations share the EWR workload.

What do you think?

 

[cle]

I would expect that a curve would be re-opened to allow services from the Bedford direction to MKC. That, or a quick reversal in Bletchley lower level - which has been mentioned for Marston Vale services for years. And the flyover obviously used for through trains - can't see a problem there.

Bedford doesn't offer the same options though. I think best, although not cheapest - is a proper rebuild increasing platforms, moving TL terminators out of the way, and allowing EWR trains to join the MML itself, as well as connections and the benefits of a hub. I'd expect more than the 2tph to Corby would materialize also.

 

[ac6000cw]

Cambridgeshire as a county has made a habit of investing in busways and putting tarmac over routes that could have been re-opened as light or heavy rail.

It (pragmatically) used what investment money was available from central government at the time to create a sensible, well used, improvement to the local public transport system. Or would you prefer they had said 'it's a light rail system or nothing' and ended up with nothing? (like Leeds did perhaps?)

It would be a real shame if another busway prevented a sensible rail re-instatement (again!)

If you look at the proposed routes for the 'Cambourne to Cambridge public transport route' ( https://www.greatercambridge.org.uk...o-cambridge/cambourne-to-cambridge-the-route/ ) you'll see that none of the proposed route uses any old railway alignments - there is nothing to 'reinstate' in that area. Get out your pre-grouping rail atlas if you don't believe me.

The EWR project between Bedford and Cambridge isn't about reinstating an old route, it's about creating a new railway route to suit modern needs.