Wixams (Bedfordshire) station should be built with 4 platforms

[richieb1971]

Moderator note: Split from

New station: Wixams, Bedfordshire. Planning approved

As per BBC: Wixams: Residents pleased with railway station approval https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-64723212 Residents on a housing development say they "finally have some good news" after plans for a railway station were approved. Bedford Borough Council's planning...

www.railforums.co.uk

I've asked my MP to get Universal/Thameslink and EWR in the same room at the earliest convenience. I suspect all the wrong decisions will be made without such a meeting, to the extent it will be inadequate when it's built.

The station of Wixams is minimalistic in design from what I saw a year or so ago. I'm still not sure how they plan to put an island between the fast and slows, but I'm guessing they will shunt the slows to the east where a rail spur existed many eons ago just south of the road bridge next to the car auction place. It's the one place where the land is the same height as the track and just has overgrown with trees since last used. Illustrated by the contours near Kim Road at the bottom of the picture.


For illustration, the distance from the station to the park entrance (nearest landmark of the park itself) if avoiding housing.



By road is 1 mile between the 2 points. So a bit further than if it does not cut across the fields.


Also, a brand-new studio is being built 1 mile south of this.

Stewartby film studio plans approved at former quarry site

It is claimed the studio could create 1,400 jobs and bring millions into the local economy.

www.bbc.co.uk

Construction on a new film studio at a former quarry has been approved following a council planning meeting.

Plans for the studio in Houghton Conquest, near Stewartby, were approved by Central Bedfordshire Council.
Home of Production wants to build a new base at Quest Pit, and said it would create 1,400 jobs and bring millions of pounds into the local economy.
During the debate some councillors voiced concerns the studio could have a negative impact on local wildlife.
A decision on the plans had been previously deferred after an error where councillors decided not all the relevant information had been presented to them.
The development, off Ampthill Road, would include multiple sound stages, workshops and on-site accommodation for staff.
Home of Production said the studio would be a "sustainable development" and previously mentioned "a rewilded water body, a central boulevard and canal" to create "a healthy and sustainable working environment".
The site would cover 1,587,000 sq ft (14.7 hectares) in the Bedfordshire countryside and the film company hoped it would become operational by 2025

 

[MML]

Wixams needs to be a 4 platform station from the outset.

The MML operates as a 2 track railway during periods of regular maintenance, and delivering a station only on the slow lines will mean either frequent costly rail replacement or no service at weekends and overnight.

The Universal Studios development and future passenger growth has been omitted from the design of the station. The flawed planning decisions will mean a central platform is built in the wrong place between the up and down slow lines.

If this station was properly designed with future traffic flows in mind, it would have the central platform correctly located between the down slow and the up fast. A platform on the down fast could then be added and funded as part of any approval of the Universal Studios development.

 

[richieb1971]

My mind has the fasts on the west side but they are on the east side. Which is not ideal. I guess a huge embankment extension will suffice. Putting a fast platform will mean bending the rail a bit as the station will bulge out.

Wixams will get a Winslow type station unless universal put pen to paper first. For once in my life hopefully it will be done in the right order even if a delay occurs.

 

[MML]

The Midland mainline has the fasts on the west side and the Slows on the east side. The current flawed design has a single platform with station building on the up slow furthest east and a second island platform between the up and down slow lines. It is this island platform which as it currently stands will be built in the wrong place. If you are building an island platform with bridge, it needs to be located between the down slow and up fast like every other MML station.
This station has been designed as a local development without proper understanding of how the current let alone future railway operates.
It will either require costly rail replacement during periods of regular 2 track maintenance or be closed most weekends and overnight.
And the building of the island platform in the wrong location will blight any future development on the west side and platform provision on the fast lines if and when visitor numbers grow with the opening of the Universal studios development.

 

[Starmill]

The Midland mainline has the fasts on the west side and the Slows on the east side. The current flawed design has a single platform with station building on the up slow furthest east and a second island platform between the up and down slow lines. It is this island platform which as it currently stands will be built in the wrong place. If you are building an island platform with bridge, it needs to be located between the down slow and up fast like every other MML station.
This station has been designed as a local development without proper understanding of how the current let alone future railway operates.
It will either require costly rail replacement during periods of regular 2 track maintenance or be closed most weekends and overnight.
And the building of the island platform in the wrong location will blight any future development on the west side and platform provision on the fast lines if and when visitor numbers grow with the opening of the Universal studios development.

Are you proposing that up trains would cross over to the down slow line to stop then? That would completely and utterly ruin the timetable...

 

[MML]

Are you proposing that up trains would cross over to the down slow line to stop then? That would completely and utterly ruin the timetable...

No I'm proposing that Wixams should be built with 4 platforms. There is a good reason why Leagrave, Harlington and Flitwick all operate with 4 platforms. The majority of services only use the platforms on the slow lines, but operational flexibility and resilience requires platforms on the fast lines to cope when it is not possible to run a train service on the Slows.

 

[Starmill]

No I'm proposing that Wixams should be built with 4 platforms. There is a good reason why Leagrave, Harlington and Flitwick all operate with 4 platforms. The majority of services only use the platforms on the slow lines, but operational flexibility and resilience requires platforms on the fast lines to cope when it is not possible to run a train service on the Slows.

Fair enough. You must appreciate this would add 50% - 80% of cost though for very, very small benefit? A handful of services per week extra at most.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Fair enough. You must appreciate this would add 50% - 80% of cost though for very, very small benefit? A handful of services per week extra at most.

That’s true, and I was surprised that it’s what happened at Brent Cross West, along with full 12 coach platforms being built when the current plan is only for 8 coach trains to use the station.

I’m sure those in the north would be mildly surprised that two 12 coach platforms were built which are not expected to get any regular use.

 

[PGAT]

If you don’t build it now then there WILL be proposals to add them in and it WILL cost at least double the price than if you did it at the start

 

[MML]

Fair enough. You must appreciate this would add 50% - 80% of cost though for very, very small benefit? A handful of services per week extra at most.

The existing plans have a platform on the up slow with the main station building and car park on the east side. A second platform between the up slow and down slow, with a bridge and presumably lifts connecting both.
If the second platform was instead correctly positioned between the down slow and up fast, then it would be substantially the same structure with just the over bridge needing extension.
If there are claims that building a 4 platform station would increase costs by 50% to 80%, someone should be seriously questioning the costs of building a station and why they are so inflated particularly when the platform infrastructure is likely to consist of a couple of benches and a bus shelter.
This isn't Brent Cross West with escalators, posh waiting rooms or public crossing over bridge.

 

[jamieh27]

The existing plans have a platform on the up slow with the main station building and car park on the east side. A second platform between the up slow and down slow, with a bridge and presumably lifts connecting both.
If the second platform was instead correctly positioned between the down slow and up fast, then it would be substantially the same structure with just the over bridge needing extension.
If there are claims that building a 4 platform station would increase costs by 50% to 80%, someone should be seriously questioning the costs of building a station and why they are so inflated particularly when the platform infrastructure is likely to consist of a couple of benches and a bus shelter.
This isn't Brent Cross West with escalators, posh waiting rooms or public crossing over bridge.

From what I understand on Todays Railways late last year was that Wixman's was only going to have 2 platforms, only on the relif line. No platforms will be built on the fast line and the line will be closed at 22:00 which measn TL won't call at that station after that time. The station would kind of look a bit like Acton Main Line and West Ealing (pre-construction of Platform 5.

 

[Starmill]

The existing plans have a platform on the up slow with the main station building and car park on the east side. A second platform between the up slow and down slow, with a bridge and presumably lifts connecting both.
If the second platform was instead correctly positioned between the down slow and up fast, then it would be substantially the same structure with just the over bridge needing extension.
If there are claims that building a 4 platform station would increase costs by 50% to 80%, someone should be seriously questioning the costs of building a station and why they are so inflated particularly when the platform infrastructure is likely to consist of a couple of benches and a bus shelter.
This isn't Brent Cross West with escalators, posh waiting rooms or public crossing over bridge.

You want a footbridge twice as long, a third lift tower and staircase, two extra 240m platforms, a longer closure of lines to get that all in, a longer construction phase, and possibly a bit of extra land? And, now, extra money to redesign it all? All for the sake of a handful of services per week which will be very quiet? And you don't think that could add even 50% to the cost?

 

[Class 170101]

The problem with having Wixams as a slow line station only is that if people cannot get home after 22:00 on weekdays and cannot rely on it at weekends for leisure trips then it is unlikely it will be used by those people and thus diminish its potential.

This feels like a station built to cost rather than a spec and being managed in future by NR Engineers expecting a two track railway post 22:00 and on Sundays rathyer than a station meeting customer expectations.

I also question why is a side platform being supplied on the Up Slow when it seems (from posts here) there will be an island platform between the slows. Surely it would be better to provide an island platform between the Up and down slow and similarly an island platform between the Up and Down Fast Lines?

 

[richieb1971]

You want a footbridge twice as long, a third lift tower and staircase, two extra 240m platforms, a longer closure of lines to get that all in, a longer construction phase, and possibly a bit of extra land? And, now, extra money to redesign it all? All for the sake of a handful of services per week which will be very quiet? And you don't think that could add even 50% to the cost?

And if Universal Studios opens it will be the busiest station for 50 miles.

As I said someone in the railway needs to be speak to Universal to see what the expected demand is. Its obvious they picked the location for its lakes and access options, of which the railway (or 2 railways) could play a big part. The nearest airport to Bedford is Luton Airport which flies in from Europe so 4 stops down the line is Wixams (will be called Universal Studios by then). Between Wixams and Kempston Hardwick you could have as many as 10,000 passengers per day just from flights from Gatwick, Heathrow and Luton. Once you add EWR to Cambridge you have Stansted as well. The other parks have 11 million guests per year. If you have half that and divide by 300 days of worthy visiting days you get 18,333 per day. Albeit a lot will come by car, but not those from the continent of which there is no Universal Studios in Europe so Bedford's offering will be in the catchment area of Europe.

 

[Bald Rick]

No I'm proposing that Wixams should be built with 4 platforms. There is a good reason why Leagrave, Harlington and Flitwick all operate with 4 platforms. The majority of services only use the platforms on the slow lines, but operational flexibility and resilience requires platforms on the fast lines to cope when it is not possible to run a train service on the Slows.

The problem with having Wixams as a slow line station only is that if people cannot get home after 22:00 on weekdays and cannot rely on it at weekends for leisure trips then it is unlikely it will be used by those people and thus diminish its potential.

What many people seem to be missing is that whilst there is indeed a two track railway on sections of the MML some mid week nights and some Sundays, it is a much rarer occurence on the slows between Flitwick and Bedford because of the presence of Cauldwell Walk, Jowett and the Bedford sidings, and to a lesser extent Elstow aggregate terminal.

And if Universal Studios opens it will be the busiest station for 50 miles.

There is no chance that it would be the busiest station for even 30 miles on the MML, let alone 50 miles in any direction.

The park will be about half the size of Universal Orlando, which caters for 11m visitors a year. It‘s about a quarter of the size of the Disneyland Paris complex which caters for around 10m visitors a year. Even if, somehow, the much smaller Universal UK somehow managed to squeeze in similar numbers, it’s inconceivable that more than 30% would arrive by train, seeing as it is less than 10 minutes from the M1 and 15 mins from the A1.

 

[richieb1971]

As I tell everyone you can't put a car on an airplane. Those will come by train.

Let's say 5000 people day come by train that's too much for EWR and too much for a Winslow build station

 

[Bald Rick]

As I tell everyone you can't put a car on an airplane. Those will come by train.

But you can hire a car at all major UK airports, not least because a trip to Universal London (as it will surely be known) will be just one part of a trip to the UK for many tourists.

And people from near europe can drive, just as very many people from the UK do when travelling to Disneyland Paris. (Including me, twice, despite getting free train travel).

It’s incredibly naïve to think that all non UK visitors will use the train. It is simoly not the case, not by a long way.

 

[richieb1971]

If everyone came by car it would be a travesty considering track circulates the whole park. So we need a car park for up to 10000 spaces and a prayer that any station is minimally provisioned for one of the greatest sites in the UK.

Sounds like a big gamble to me. The station at wixams is provisioned for residents which also have cars.

 

[Bald Rick]

If everyone came by car it would be a travesty considering track circulates the whole park. So we need a car park for up to 10000 spaces and a prayer that any station is minimally provisioned for one of the greatest sites in the UK.

Sounds like a big gamble to me. The station at wixams is provisioned for residents which also have cars.

No one is sugsting that everyone will come by car. Clearly many will come by train, and rightly so.

However given the park (if it even happens, which is far from certain) is located right next to the strategic road network it is plainly obvious that many - indeed most - will travel by road.

 

[pitdiver]

I don't think people should get excited about possible developments in the Stewartby area. You only have to look at NIRAH to see how plans can go wrong

 

[DarloRich]

And if Universal Studios opens it will be the busiest station for 50 miles.

No it wont! That will be Stewartby or Kempston Hardwick obviously

(They wont be the busiest stations for 50 miles even if this project happens - MK station was used by 4.5m people last year for instance)

Its obvious they picked the location for its lakes and access options, of which the railway (or 2 railways) could play a big part.

They have also picked the site because:

A) it is big and available for a decent price ( and has some water features on site)
B) it has rail conenction nearby that wont need much improving
C) it has good road links to both the A1 and M1
D) MK coachway is not far and could easily be a route into the park
E) there is a big ish airport nearby ( and a second smaller one for big shots at Cranfield)

Rail is an important way of getting people to the park but it isn't the only one. ALL local transport links will have to be upgraded to support this attraction including roads.

Surely it is better to build Wixhams now and seek a contribution to improvements from Universal IF their development ever happens? Otherwise this station might not be built for another 5 or 10 years

In any event surely you would put a VIP bus on from Bedford to the park? It has a better service than this station will

As I said someone in the railway needs to be speak to Universal to see what the expected demand is.

And ask how much Universal will put up to help make improvements and how they will link the stations to the attraction

As I tell everyone you can't put a car on an airplane. Those will come by train.

You can, however, hire a car at the airport - you seem to assume visitors to this park will come ONLY for the attraction - will they not want to explore the UK a bit while here? I hope so. We might need thier money at this rate!

If they do they are going to drive - just like all of us would in another country

it is a much rarer occurence on the slows between Flitwick and Bedford because of the presence of Cauldwell Walk, Jowett and the Bedford sidings, and to a lesser extent Elstow aggregate terminal.

I was going to mention that!

 

[richieb1971]

All I am saying is that the new station should be provisioned for the park if its built, rather than just the commuters it will serve currently, then hoping for the best later on.

If you guys think a very basic 2 platform station is enough to suffice all demand then so be it. But me, I am afraid the stations foundations are set in stone before taking into account the future.

The rhetoric I am hearing, "very few are coming by train, everyone is coming by car". Without actually getting analytical data to back that up. I've never gone to any theme park overseas by car (well once in FL USA). I went by train, coach or shuttle bus from the hotel.

Also, the area in which the park will be built is highly congested already from most directions. It is well connected via the A421 but that only works if the connection to any car park is from the A421. The B roads aren't that great even now with the junction where the MML crosses over the Marston vale line (I'm talking road junction here) is a complete mess that the Dft won't fix because it involves 2 railways.

As I stated before, the last time I went to Universal was last August in Osaka Japan. The train was absolutely rammed going there and coming back. I didn't even see a car park, not saying one didn't exist.

If the railway doesn't secure some of the business of the park, I see that ultimately as a failure of the railway itself in this instance. It seems to build a railway folk make lies to make it sound justified, but when something that really could benefit from the railway everyone says "They are going to use the car".

The way you guys talk its as if "People will only use the railways when every other option is exhausted".

 

[Brissle Girl]

The comparison should be with other theme parks in this country, not Japan. What proportion use rail to get to Alton Towers, Chessington, Thorpe Park or Legoland - fairly low I suspect.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The comparison should be with other theme parks in this country, not Japan. What proportion use rail to get to Alton Towers, Chessington, Thorpe Park or Legoland - fairly low I suspect.

Most of them don't have a station right next to them. This will (Kempston Hardwick!)

 

[richieb1971]

Most of them don't have a station right next to them. This will (Kempston Hardwick!)

And Wixams. I don't mind if EWR run with it though. At the end of the day I believe EWR will have 30 min services of 4 coach units. Again perhaps not enough, but between the 2 stations it could work.



2 circles represent the 2 stations, the square is the park.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What's the reasoning for this "no service after 22:00" policy? Seems a bit counter-productive if the station is intended to serve new housing developments, yet those residents won't be able to use their local station for a night out in the West End.

It's because a cheap and short-sighted policy is being pursued to only put platforms on the slow lines, and after 2200 it's a two track railway, like the WCML.

If you're going to build it it needs to have four platforms.

 

[lachlan]

Most of them don't have a station right next to them. This will (Kempston Hardwick!)

Indeed and how many of the visitors to those parks are tourists? If it's anything like their other parks Universal are aiming for a broader market and this will include tourists likely staying in London without a car.

FWIW there's a regular shuttle bus from Thorpe Park to a nearby station and last time I visited it was packed full.

 

[Magdalia]

Indeed and how many of the visitors to those parks are tourists? If it's anything like their other parks Universal are aiming for a broader market and this will include tourists likely staying in London without a car.

The impact on local transport of a major new attraction like this is not just about visitors, it is about employees too.

Theme Parks employ a lot of people, but most of them are at or not far above the minimum wage. They will all need somewhere to live and transport to get to and from work.

There is limited information on how big a new park might be, or on the numbers of employees at existing parks, but a quick search suggests that Alton Towers has about 2000 employees and Disneyland Paris more than 10000.

If the park is big, and employs many thousands of people, then home to work travel could be a significant issue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed and how many of the visitors to those parks are tourists? If it's anything like their other parks Universal are aiming for a broader market and this will include tourists likely staying in London without a car.

Potentially also in Milton Keynes, which has absolutely huge amounts of hotel capacity (including about 5 Premier Inns) and so can be very cheap as long as it's not Silverstone or a Bowl concert that weekend. MK might be the city of the car, but if staying in the centre you don't need a car at all.

 

[Edvid]

All I am saying is that the new station should be provisioned for the park if its built, rather than just the commuters it will serve currently, then hoping for the best later on.

At whose expense, though? That's what it basically comes down to, as ever.

If Universal believe the theme park will generate enough rail traffic to necessitate a 4-platform station at Wixams then they may well provide a S106 contribution to pay for it, whether or not a 2-platform station is already under construction (or open) there*; ditto for improvements to Kempston Hardwick depending on how that squares with EWR. As they've said themselves, though:

It will be many months before we are ready to make a decision on whether to proceed [with building the park]. If we do decide to proceed with this project, we will secure all relevant approvals and consult with local communities.

In the meantime, the S106 agreement with L&Q Estates for the 2-platform scheme is only binding until late July (28/29th, not sure which). If that £13.4 million contribution is lost then Wixams will probably lose a previously-approved station (imperfect as it is) for the second time; following that, if Universal choose not to greenlight their project then Bedford BC would have to ask HM Government to at least make up the difference.

Third time lucky? Even if Labour win the upcoming GE, I wouldn't bank on that for a 4-platform scheme.

[* Yes, it would be cheaper to build a 4-platform station from scratch than to build a 2-platform station and add 2 more later on. That said, if the difference is fully covered by L&Q Estates / Universal then the taxpayer won't care a jot.]