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

[zn1]

Bletchley can served by the ewr trains etc - by renaming fenny "bletchley parkway", and working with arriva etc to increase bus services in to bletchley as part of the ticket ...or doing a reverse move at BY..the infrastructure is there at MKC for the service..USE IT

the line was always used in emergencies, pendos can be dragged in to western region until line is strung up etc...

until mothballing which was only due mainly to the stoke gifford - wolverton stone train finishing..

it was always mad that railtrack mothballed it...very very shortsighted and regretted now i think

 

[edwin_m]

To be fair to VT, they have in the past organised Voyagers in twos (threes even?) between Birmingham and Marylebone during WCML diversions, and currently between Carlisle and Glasgow.

For planned blockades that happen at quieter times there may still be scope to do something similar, as happened over Christmas, or to strengthen the services of the operator of the diversionary route using stock that might otherwise be idle. All this of course is much more difficult for an unplanned route closure.

EWR should bring some benefit in this respect, particularly for passengers between London and Milton Keynes to Rugby or Bedford to Market Harborough. These people would have a rail alternative via EWR which isn't sensibly possible on existing infrastructure.

 

[HowardGWR]

The discussion is an interesting "diversion" (excuses) but I don't agree with SWT_pass that we are going round in circles. It seems to me that, seen strategically, Bletchley is simply a better exchange point than MK. If the buses and taxis were connecting well between Bletchley and the rest of the conurbation, then an EW passenger would be quite content to get out at Bletchley, unless his end destination was a few yards from MK 'Central' (note inverted commas). Network Rail staff perhaps?

As our colleague AOwen has pointed out, for local journeys, the spread out nature of the conurbation lends itself to road transport from places like Northampton and Bedford., unfortunately.

What is exciting about EWR is not just the possibility to reduce travel via London, but to be preferable to that option. Disregarding a fare pricing policy to encourage that, the EWR must be very fast (only stops at interchanges), frequent and well integrated with connections, especially at Bletchley and Bedford, but later also at Cambridge .

This is the infrastructure forum and I always think in terms of reinstating, protecting, then enhancing the infrastructure, and then think about all the possibilities it offers. It seems the wrong way around, I know, but it isn't, because we are trying to undo the damage done in the 60s and 70s. That is a strategic goal, which franchising bids (and thus a passive NR) works against.

 

[A0]

, pendos can be dragged in to western region until line is strung up etc...

To go where though and in what paths?

As has already been pointed out - the GW diversions at Christmas could only be accommodated by cancelling some Chiltern services (on the Marylebone route) or SWT into Waterloo.

Paddington doesn't have a load of free paths - and to get to Paddington you'd have to go via the New North line (which is limited capacity and linespeed) or via Oxford & Reading - massive journey time extension.

Marylebone is pretty full with Chiltern services - don't forget both routes into MYB (Amersham and Wycombe) are twin track and therefore have contentions with existing stopping services.

Frankly the lack of thought before posting on some of these threads is genuinely scary.

 

[swt_passenger]

The discussion is an interesting "diversion" (excuses) but I don't agree with SWT_pass that we are going round in circles.

I wasn't referring to the whole thread, just that particular reply, pointing out what I had already posted a page or so previously...

But even then there is little point dwelling on the detail of how to reverse through trains from Oxford to Bedford via Milton Keynes, if they have already decided not to do that.

That has been established from published service proposals a couple of times earlier in this thread, that has now been running for getting on for two years.

 

[Class 170101]

Although MKC isn't going to be served by true east west services the provision of the line from Aylesbury to Winslow will mean that the Aylesbury services are due to be extended to MKC. In doing so there will be direct services from Winslow and Bletchley (high level) to MKC. Therefore although it wouldn't be a direct service passengers from west of Winslow should be able with a change be able to get there.

I would have thought changing at Bletchley would be better as there are more trains between there and Milton Keynes to choose from.

 

[work-traveller]

If Bedford Midland cannot be included on the EWR then MKC certainly cannot.

As I see it MKC is a bit big to ignore but I don't consider part of the EWR at all. The ideal is to get from Oxford to Bedford direct as possible in the 1st instance. Then to Cambridge in the 2nd instance.

'The idea' is indeed what the longer-term scheme is aiming to delivery, i.e. Oxford-Bedford-Cambridge connectivity. However, it's noteworthy that the DfT has recognised the reality of anticipated passenger movement by creating a train service specification that provides more services from Oxford/Aylesbury to MKC than from Oxford/Aylesbury to Bedford. What service pattern may be remitted by the DfT to Cambridge in years to come - I suspect nobody reading this is in a position to say (this excludes conjecture and speculation).

Thinking about it, it's like many railway services - most people don't make 'end to end' journeys, rather they make a journey along part of the route. People taking a train to Cambridge, aren't likely to be going anywhere else. People taking a train to MKC, will be going to MK, Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow...

 

[richieb1971]

'The idea' is indeed what the longer-term scheme is aiming to delivery, i.e. Oxford-Bedford-Cambridge connectivity. However, it's noteworthy that the DfT has recognised the reality of anticipated passenger movement by creating a train service specification that provides more services from Oxford/Aylesbury to MKC than from Oxford/Aylesbury to Bedford. What service pattern may be remitted by the DfT to Cambridge in years to come - I suspect nobody reading this is in a position to say (this excludes conjecture and speculation).

Thinking about it, it's like many railway services - most people don't make 'end to end' journeys, rather they make a journey along part of the route. People taking a train to Cambridge, aren't likely to be going anywhere else. People taking a train to MKC, will be going to MK, Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow...

I totally agree. And I believe Bletchley literally is MK. You could probably get away with calling Bletchley "Milton Keynes South". Since there is a "Central" for no purpose whatsoever.

Would it be so hard to make Bletchley the main station? I mean, its 5 min drive isn't it?

 

[70014IronDuke]

...
Thinking about it, it's like many railway services - most people don't make 'end to end' journeys, rather they make a journey along part of the route. People taking a train to Cambridge, aren't likely to be going anywhere else.
People taking a train to MKC, will be going to MK, Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow...

Well, it's only opinions about a hypothetical situation for now, but I think "People taking a train to Cambridge, aren't likely to be going anywhere else" is a very sweeping statement and not correct.

First, yes, I agree that a good proportion - quite possibly a majority - going to MKC will be changing for trains elsewhere. MKC is very well connected to - ultimately - a very high percentage of the UK population.

But, assuming that a future EW link to Cambridge is not a mere mirror of the former 1 train per two hour local service (which would, I agree, probably attract mostly commuters going only to Cambridge) then I am sure a good proportion, travelling from places like Bedford, MK, Ayelsbury and Oxford will be going on to a variety of destinations like Ely, Kings Lynn, Norwich, Yarmouth, Newmarket, Bury St Edmunds and even Stowmarket/Ipswich.

Yes, I fully realise that, eg Aylesbury-Ipswich will be considerably faster via London. These are just examples of the possible combinations. And yes, future trains into Cambridge will not be heaving with pax changing to a train to Ely. But I would argue the people going forward to all such destinations will be significant.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

...

Again - it depends. If they want to travel to the intermediate stations between MKC and London then diverting via Chiltern is no good.

Well, of course not, but I thought going into this (and other places above, now snipped) was stating the bleedin' obvious.

Similarly, the Chiltern route is generally busy (both in terms of number of people on the trains and capacity on the line). You try handling a couple of Pendo's worth of passengers onto a 3 car DMU from Aylesbury to Marylebone in addition to the people already planning to travel on that route and you've got a recipe for overcrowding and far more frustrated passengers than if you'd just put those from MK onto a coach.

I did write "enhanced" service - for planned engineering works. If an enhanced service at weekends can't be done, so be it, but Chiltern have done it before.

Please note, I was talking about two separate situations - emergencies and resultant planned diversion of passengers (not trains) - along with planned enhanced services for engineering closures eg south of Bletchley.

If the former, yes, I can understand emptying a Pendelino into a three-car unit heading for Marylebone (or Reading) will not suffice. But it could at least relieve some of the pressure. It will certainly be better than what is currently available, which is wait for a substitute road service. (I assume almost nobody would normally divert via Bedford under the current service patterns.)

 

[DarloRich]

I totally agree. And I believe Bletchley literally is MK. You could probably get away with calling Bletchley "Milton Keynes South". Since there is a "Central" for no purpose whatsoever.

Would it be so hard to make Bletchley the main station? I mean, its 5 min drive isn't it?

what on earth are you talking about? Yes you could make Bletchley the main WCML station in the area ( would suit me!) but that does kind of miss the rather obvious point that all the main employers are in MK! :roll:

Why would you want to avoid serving the main employment and residential centre in the area?

BTW - MKC is the central station in a network of 5, including Bletchley so we could change the names of Wolverton, Blethcley, Bow Brickhill and Fenny Stratford.

 

[charley_17/7]

what on earth are you talking about? Yes you could make Bletchley the main WCML station in the area ( would suit me!) but that does kind of miss the rather obvious point that all the main employers are in MK! :roll:

Why would you want to avoid serving the main employment and residential centre in the area?

BTW - MKC is the central station in a network of 5, including Bletchley so we could change the names of Wolverton, Blethcley, Bow Brickhill and Fenny Stratford.

Spot on, bus connections at Bletchley are woeful for the Bletchley area, never mind CMK!

Wolverton becomes Milton Keynes North
Bletchley becomes Milton Keynes South
Fenny Stratford becomes Milton Keynes East (or Stadium:MK?)
Bow Brickhill becomes Open University/Caldecotte

 

[richieb1971]

I don't see any smart ideas connecting MKC to the rest of the network being proposed apart from reversing trains or have them terminate at MKC.

As I understand it buses are rubbish at the moment, but does it have to be that way? And how far is Bletchley from MKC?

 

[DarloRich]

I don't see any smart ideas connecting MKC to the rest of the network being proposed apart from reversing trains or have them terminate at MKC.

As I understand it buses are rubbish at the moment, but does it have to be that way? And how far is Bletchley from MKC?

you are missing the point, as always. MK is the main employment centre. Most of the people you want to attract to the trains will want to there, especially from the Oxford direction. Expecting them to get off at Beltchley and get the bus wont wash, regardless of the service provision.

As it stands the Marston Vale cant even compete on time with the X5 let alone cars to MK which really inhibits passenger numbers as does the change at Beltchely

 

[richieb1971]

Ok Darlorich, I'm willing to dance with you on this one.

IF money was no object, how would you go about connecting MKC with the EWR?

Don't talk politics.. I'm a trillionaire, I can make the world go round backwards if I wanted.. So you have this idea on how to connect the MKC station to the EWR, how would you go about it?

 

[DarloRich]

I would reverse at Beltchley. It is the cheapest and easiest way to achieve that end. It requires no investment. If money and practicalities were no object I would build a curve up to the flyover facing MK from somewhere near the start of the current depot at Bletchley and curving up and round through what is now the industrial estate.


We might also need:

1. a new bridge over the by pass next to tesco,
2. relocation and compensation for the businesses and homes impacted
3. new stabling sidings somewhere
4. potential removal of the depot buildings and track
5. track works around the junction with the exisiting flyover line
6. some land take (tesco area) to install double track to Fenny Stratford station,
7. a Second platform at Fenny Stratford
8. bridge for station users/access ramps ( land take again - assuming the existing bridge is usable - if not a new bridge)
9. the level crossing at Fenny will have to go which means a large land take along Simpson road for the replacement bridge
10. a new bridge over the A5 to take the double track as far as Bow Brickhill.

We best check the canal bridge is up to standard and you can fit a second line on the embankment from there to the A5 bridge. We may as well shut the Bow Brickhill crossing at the same time so more land needed. Oh and electrification, signalling and new trains!

Sadly money is an object.

 

[richieb1971]

Yes, certainly better than a bus service.

 

[HowardGWR]

Why would you want to avoid serving the main employment and residential centre in the area?.

Perhaps for the reasons set out in recent posts. How many EWR pax will be wanting to commute to an employer within walking distance (say 500 metres) of MK 'Central'? The EMR is not being reinstated for MK commuters, but for long distance connectivity AIUI. Bletchley is a logical place for interchange and if buses were organised in the whole area to terminate or pass Bletchley Station, then it's the best choice, ISTM.

If I was attending the new stadium, I know where I would get out, as a visitor. I wonder how many go to MK and then have to retrace their steps?

It always comes down to origin /destination studies. Withouth such data and prognosis, it would be a brave person who would say one station is better than another.

 

[richieb1971]

Perhaps for the reasons set out in recent posts. How many EWR pax will be wanting to commute to an employer within walking distance (say 500 metres) of MK 'Central'? The EMR is not being reinstated for MK commuters, but for long distance connectivity AIUI. Bletchley is a logical place for interchange and if buses were organised in the whole area to terminate or pass Bletchley Station, then it's the best choice, ISTM.

If I was attending the new stadium, I know where I would get out, as a visitor. I wonder how many go to MK and then have to retrace their steps?

It always comes down to origin /destination studies. Withouth such data and prognosis, it would be a brave person who would say one station is better than another.

Nuneaton is about as important as Bletchley and its done alright as a railway interchange.

 

[edwin_m]

So you have this idea on how to connect the MKC station to the EWR, how would you go about it?

Demolish central MK and relocate it to Bletchley. As should have been done when MK was first designed, if the planners at the time had cared about anything other than roads.

 

[Andyjs247]

I totally agree. And I believe Bletchley literally is MK. You could probably get away with calling Bletchley "Milton Keynes South". Since there is a "Central" for no purpose whatsoever.

Would it be so hard to make Bletchley the main station? I mean, its 5 min drive isn't it?

Spot on, bus connections at Bletchley are woeful for the Bletchley area, never mind CMK!

Wolverton becomes Milton Keynes North
Bletchley becomes Milton Keynes South
Fenny Stratford becomes Milton Keynes East (or Stadium:MK?)
Bow Brickhill becomes Open University/Caldecotte

I totally agree. And I believe Bletchley literally is MK. You could probably get away with calling Bletchley "Milton Keynes South". Since there is a "Central" for no purpose whatsoever.

Would it be so hard to make Bletchley the main station? I mean, its 5 min drive isn't it?

Well Bletchley is part of MK. But that's about as far as it goes; Bletchley doesn't have the pull of MKC, for employment, shopping or otherwise. That said, while Centre:MK, Xscape and the theatre district is great - it's still at least a 20 minute walk from MKC station. Probably 30 mins walk if you're going to the far end of the centre by Middleton Hall / John Lewis. If walking distance is important MKC is not much better than Cambridge or Oxford!

Therein is an illustration of the problem. Everything in MK is quite dispersed - it is a big place. There's multiple retail parks and employment areas. A few years ago I was talking to a fellow University alumnus who happened to be a town planner in Milton Keynes. He was saying MK has a relatively low population density taken as a whole which makes providing public transport difficult. Consequently many people drive because it's more convenient and because bus stops are far away from where people live. With a grid network of through routes surrounding each neighbourhood, car is king. Unlike most places there's many choices to get from A to B. Congestion is rarely a problem unless everyone is trying to get to say Stadium:MK at the same time.

Perhaps for the reasons set out in recent posts. How many EWR pax will be wanting to commute to an employer within walking distance (say 500 metres) of MK 'Central'? The EMR is not being reinstated for MK commuters, but for long distance connectivity AIUI. Bletchley is a logical place for interchange and if buses were organised in the whole area to terminate or pass Bletchley Station, then it's the best choice, ISTM.

If I was attending the new stadium, I know where I would get out, as a visitor. I wonder how many go to MK and then have to retrace their steps?

It always comes down to origin /destination studies. Withouth such data and prognosis, it would be a brave person who would say one station is better than another.

Although it doesn't fit the usual out of town model, I think Bletchley could work as a Parkway with a large multi storey car park and P&R for CMK. But you'd struggle to organise a network of buses to terminate in Bletchley from the whole of MK for the reasons above. It's still quite a trek to Stadium:MK.

 

[HowardGWR]

That's very interesting. Without being privy to O/D data, one could set up to observe entrances at MKC and see how many get out of a taxi, how many.......etc. One could interview people (every tenth entrant say) and get origin info. I say 'entrances' because folk don't want to answer questions when exiting and in rush hours they won't all have time.

One should be able to get a reasonable picture though. Changing pax don't matter as they could have done this at Bletchley for the purposes of this discussion.

Perhaps any of you local people could lobby for this to be done.

I agree with edwin_m that MK seems a planning disaster zone where sustainable local transport is concerned.

 

[aylesbury]

Having driven around ,MK as it was being built it is obviously based on the US model .Buses have never been popular and as every neighbourhoodhas shopping facilities people don't travel far unless its for work.MK Central has high commuting numbers many use Virgin but most LM .The central shopping centre is a magnet for people from out of the city I do not know how many travel by train.An interesting fact is many travel to Birmingham on LM and of course the NEC wether Bletchley will ever figure in the overall MK future is to wonrered,as the centre is run down and its a commuter town for London.So what ever happens MK will have to be a destination for East West not Bletchley .

 

[richieb1971]

All you need is a transport link from Bletchley to MKC. Whether it be bus, some sort of shuttle service or one of those airport rail systems.

Then you get some trains to stop at Bletchley and some at MKC and the shuttle, bus or airport rail system takes care of the rest.

 

[DarloRich]

You are showing your lack of local knowledge i am afraid.

Perhaps for the reasons set out in recent posts. How many EWR pax will be wanting to commute to an employer within walking distance (say 500 metres) of MK 'Central'? The EMR is not being reinstated for MK commuters, but for long distance connectivity AIUI. Bletchley is a logical place for interchange and if buses were organised in the whole area to terminate or pass Bletchley Station, then it's the best choice, ISTM.

Quite a few. Within an easy walk of MK central are several national employers/HQ:

Network Rail
Santandar ( they even have offices ABOVE the station!)
Home Retail Group (aka Argos)
Shoosmiths
BP
Deloitte
Grant Thonton
Price Waterhouse Coopers

There are also offices for all the major banks, lawyers and accountants along with several large IT/technology firms

These are exactly the sort of people you should seek to attract to the new trains. Affluent, mobile, young (ish). They often live in the Oxford/Aylesbury direction and should be tempted onto the train with direct services to MK.

Do you, honestly, think these people will use the train with a change at Bletchley?

If I was attending the new stadium, I know where I would get out, as a visitor. I wonder how many go to MK and then have to retrace their steps?

Oh I don't know - perhaps those who want to use the bus service from MK to the ground or those who fancy a pint and a bite to eat. Blethcley is a desert and few bother with the trip to Fenny.

It always comes down to origin /destination studies. Withouth such data and prognosis, it would be a brave person who would say one station is better than another.

I would say quite happily that to suggest that Bletchley should be used as rail head for MK is, frankly, bonkers.

That's very interesting. Without being privy to O/D data, one could set up to observe entrances at MKC and see how many get out of a taxi, how many.......etc. One could interview people (every tenth entrant say) and get origin info. I say 'entrances' because folk don't want to answer questions when exiting and in rush hours they won't all have time.

One should be able to get a reasonable picture though. Changing pax don't matter as they could have done this at Bletchley for the purposes of this discussion.

Perhaps any of you local people could lobby for this to be done.

It isn't the people already using the station you need to ask but those NOT using the station. Get out into the local businesses and find out why people aren't using the train and whether, with a better service ,they WOULD use it.

I agree with edwin_m that MK seems a planning disaster zone where sustainable local transport is concerned.

I would suggest that you don't know anything of the sort.

As for public transport in MK: If it were so bad ( as you seem to think) how could I survive without a car? The bus network in MK is pretty decent and fairly sensible, much more so than Darlington where i lived previously. It is all centered on MK station and shopping centre with routes radiating out from there. Services are good if reduced due to recent funding cuts.

Clearly the town centre and new town is designed for the car, but congestion is increasing as the numbers working there increase. Better links for the new housing towards Bedford and from OXford and Aylesbury will help to alleviate that. The speed of the train from the latter will create a very attractive commuting option. There should, in my view, also be a fast train from Bedford

Demolish central MK and relocate it to Bletchley. As should have been done when MK was first designed, if the planners at the time had cared about anything other than roads.

what on earth are you talking about? Why would you want the main station disconnected from the town centre. What silliness.

All you need is a transport link from Bletchley to MKC. Whether it be bus, some sort of shuttle service or one of those airport rail systems.

Then you get some trains to stop at Bletchley and some at MKC and the shuttle, bus or airport rail system takes care of the rest.

that is one sure fire way to retard passenger numbers and reduce profitability. Build a new railway but make it so unattractive to the people you need to attract to ensure they carry on driving to work.

Well Bletchley is part of MK. But that's about as far as it goes; Bletchley doesn't have the pull of MKC, for employment, shopping or otherwise.

Indeed

That said, while Centre:MK, Xscape and the theatre district is great - it's still at least a 20 minute walk from MKC station. Probably 30 mins walk if you're going to the far end of the centre by Middleton Hall / John Lewis. If walking distance is important MKC is not much better than Cambridge or Oxford!

it is a decent walk up to town but no worse than many other places. A shuttle bus service would help with that.

Therein is an illustration of the problem. Everything in MK is quite dispersed - it is a big place. There's multiple retail parks and employment areas.

Agreed, although the council are very good at getting businesses to move the the central area near the station and there are still vacant plots.

A few years ago I was talking to a fellow University alumnus who happened to be a town planner in Milton Keynes. He was saying MK has a relatively low population density taken as a whole which makes providing public transport difficult. Consequently many people drive because it's more convenient and because bus stops are far away from where people live. With a grid network of through routes surrounding each neighbourhood, car is king. Unlike most places there's many choices to get from A to B. Congestion is rarely a problem unless everyone is trying to get to say Stadium:MK at the same time.

there is certianly a low population density in the town centre. Visit early on a Sunday and it is like something from 28 days later! In the surrounding areas it will be quite high due to the number of flats.

In the newer developments bus stops and routes are incorporated into the design. My old house had a bus stop to serve the development as so the ones my friends live on. Although because of the type of people in the MK area many have at least 1 car.

That means congestion at peak times is getting bad, at least for MK! There will be a problem as the numbers working in the centre and commuting into MK increase.

Although it doesn't fit the usual out of town model, I think Bletchley could work as a Parkway with a large multi storey car park and P&R for CMK. But you'd struggle to organise a network of buses to terminate in Bletchley from the whole of MK for the reasons above. It's still quite a trek to Stadium:MK.

I am not sure that would work because of the road connection to Bletchley station. MKC has much better road connections.

 

[edwin_m]

what on earth are you talking about? Why would you want the main station disconnected from the town centre. What silliness.

Bletchley would then become the main station for MK and the MK station would be closed or would never have opened or would be served only by the slower trains.

It was a suggestion for "squillionaires" rather than being serious - but it does make a point about how rail was largely ignored in the planning of MK and most other "new towns".

 

[DarloRich]

Bletchley would then become the main station for MK and the MK station would be closed or would never have opened or would be served only by the slower trains.

It was a suggestion for "squillionaires" rather than being serious - but it does make a point about how rail was largely ignored in the planning of MK and most other "new towns".

the station was built as close to the centre of MK as possible taking into account geography and existing infrastructure. Although clearly car was king in planning considerations. It is certainly better sited than, say, the station at Newton Aycliffe!

The access/egress to and from Bletchley station wont ever allow it to handle the kind of traffic at MKC, rebuilt or otherwise. Much as not having to go to MKC for the faster trains would suit me I don't think it is practicable

 

[HowardGWR]

Good of you to take the trouble. I did point out that I was not referring to commuters into the MK area. It just seems to me that Bletchley is a better interchange point for EW and NS services. So apparently, does EW, unless I have misunderstood.

On commuters into the MK area, one would expect a 'new town' to be right on top of changing to sustainable transport systems, rather than, apparently, totally ignorant of the trends being implemented elsewhere. O/D studies are the starting point for analysis of needs and I gather they have not been done.

I suspect that Bucks will be the last area in GB to consider doing something about car travel - it could be an idealogical matter of course.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Although it doesn't fit the usual out of town model, I think Bletchley could work as a Parkway with a large multi storey car park

It already has a fairly large double decker car park which is never full or anywhere near it.

But you'd struggle to organise a network of buses to terminate in Bletchley from the whole of MK for the reasons above.

Many of them already do.

It's still quite a trek to Stadium:MK.

That it is, and the shopping facilities surrounding the stadium are becoming the new town centre.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The access/egress to and from Bletchley station wont ever allow it to handle the kind of traffic at MKC, rebuilt or otherwise.

Not as it is now, but with the Police and Fire Stations about to close, and nothing other than greenery bordering the railway land for the whole length of the car park, it would not be unduly difficult to change it so it could.

Or to make it worse, like they did with MKC.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

the station was built as close to the centre of MK as possible taking into account geography and existing infrastructure. Although clearly car was king in planning considerations. It is certainly better sited than, say, the station at Newton Aycliffe!

It is right next to the CBD. The thing that's a problem is the shopping centre being right at the other end, but shoppers are less time sensitive than workers, and as retail work is typically low-paid most of them won't be commuting from outside MK.

It also wasn't part of the masterplan, but was added later. Bletchley and Wolverton were originally considered sufficient, and those train and bus things were so old fashioned in 1960s thinking.

 

[DarloRich]

Not as it is now, but with the Police and Fire Stations about to close, and nothing other than greenery bordering the railway land for the whole length of the car park, it would not be unduly difficult to change it so it could.

Or to make it worse, like they did with MKC.

The size of the car park isn't, that can be easily changed, but the roads service the station wont cope with the extra traffic and they cant, easily be changed


BTW fire AND police stations closing?????? where are they going?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Wolverton becomes Milton Keynes North
Bletchley becomes Milton Keynes South
Fenny Stratford becomes Milton Keynes East (or Stadium:MK?)
Bow Brickhill becomes Open University/Caldecotte

That would pointlessly irritate the locals, and has FWIW been proposed before. I wouldn't mind some DB-style "small letters" prefixing, but that isn't on the cards generally.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

BTW fire AND police stations closing?????? where are they going?

It's all moving to a new "blue light hub" but not until 2018. Don't really know much more detail.

As for the roads there's a dual carriageway (which is never congested) to the other side of the main road bridge. It would take heavy rejigging (some of which is going on now) but it would be achievable, particularly if the station could be accessed from both sides (so parking via the present entrance, pick up/drop off/taxi from a new entrance on the side opposite the bus station).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

All you need is a transport link from Bletchley to MKC. Whether it be bus, some sort of shuttle service or one of those airport rail systems.

Why not, umm, a stopping train?