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

[Bletchleyite]

he benefit of calling more long distance services at Luton would be minimal; there really isn’t much of a flow to the East Midlands and north, andnever has been.

I can see a significant case for calling *all* EMT services at Bedford but removing all calls south thereof.

 

[richieb1971]

I'd like everyone to know there is NO "H" in Wixams.

 

[A0]

I can see a significant case for calling *all* EMT services at Bedford but removing all calls south thereof.

I can see a case for removing Bedford from *all* EMT stops and having the sole stop south of Kettering as Luton Airport Parkway - which makes far more sense.

The only reason for retaining Kettering is to provide the northbound connectivity towards Leicester because of the split of the lines to Corby.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can see a case for removing Bedford from *all* EMT stops and having the sole stop south of Kettering as Luton Airport Parkway - which makes far more sense.

There are two reasons Bedford makes sense:
1. It's at the outer end of the local stopping service (Thameslink) for connections. Though Luton Airport Parkway would sort of meet that if doubling-back was always allowed.
2. East West Rail (unless of course that runs to Luton instead as some propose).

 

[A0]

There are two reasons Bedford makes sense:
1. It's at the outer end of the local stopping service (Thameslink) for connections. Though Luton Airport Parkway would sort of meet that if doubling-back was always allowed.
2. East West Rail (unless of course that runs to Luton instead as some propose).

And going forward there will be 2 tph to Corby - which in effect moves the 'outer suburban' limit.

EWR is irrelevant to where EMT stops. If you're on Cambridge or the ECML you already have links to Leicester and Nottingham from Peterborough and Sheffield via Leeds or Doncaster. From WCML or beyond there are options via Tamworth or Nuneaton already.

EMT need to be offering sensible journey times from the major centres in the East Mids - that means not stopping at every lesser stop along the way. The ECML between London & Peterborough has 2 "inter city" stops - Stevenage and Peterborough, the WCML has 1 with alot of stops, MKC, and 2 lesser Watford Junc and Rugby. For that reason the MML should probably have 2 and the only two which make any sense are Luton Airport Parkway - because the airport IS a destination in its own right - and Kettering because it's where the line splits and therefore people wanting to travel from Bedford, Wellingborough, Kettering or Corby need the connectivity onto Leicester and beyond.

EWR is not about people trying to travel from Sandy to Nottingham or Bletchley to Derby, or Oxford to Sheffield - those can already be done - and that's not a justification for trying to stop more and more EMT services at Bedford. Bedford's role will be similar to that of Nuneaton or Tamworth on the WCML - and to that end the Corby's nearest equivalent is the LNW Crewe services.

 

[mr_jrt]

But the what would be the point of the airport station then?

Very much where I was leading things.

 

[richieb1971]

There are Bedfordians lobbying for EMT stops in the peak hours and they have no consideration for EWR at all. Its all about comfort and having what they were used to. If EWR uses BDM and EMT uses it too in the future, every consideration should be made for the bottlenecks it could cause.

What we have here is a classic case of not having enough bandwidth. Funny thing is I've seen much busier stations cope. Basingstoke is one such example where trains are coming and going all the time and there isn't much of a problem keeping things to time. But oh wait, there isn't 2 or 3 THL trains parked in the platforms all day long haha.

 

[Maltazer]

There are Bedfordians lobbying for EMT stops in the peak hours and they have no consideration for EWR at all. Its all about comfort and having what they were used to.

I think there's a case for changing the fare structure so that travel on regional or inter-city services requires payment of a supplement on the basic ticket price, otherwise people will always choose the nicest, fastest train. It might go some way to solving the problem of long distance trains being rammed between certain pairs stops due to use by commuters.

If that didn't work, you could then simply not have season tickets available for regional trains from certain stations (so in Bedford's case, season tickets to London would only be valid on Thameslink).

 

[mwmbwls]

I attended the Bedford consultation event in a small very crowded church hall. The EWR team were gratified by the number of people attending although the information presented amounted to little more to blown up versions of the route option maps - of which hard copies were available. I suspect that the supply of these would have run out before the end of the session. EWR team may need to beef up their team both in terms of numbers and technical experience for future events.

There is a technical detail document supporting the consultation that is available on line but this was not available in hard copy form at the meeting.

https://eastwestrail-production.s3....sultation/db652106d4/EWR-Technical-Report.pdf

Hardcopies are available from EWR. You can also request paper copies of all the consultation materials and a response form by emailing contact@eastwestrail.co.uk, or writing to Freepost EAST WEST RAIL.

 

[richieb1971]

Was anything verbal stated about Bedford Midland Station being on the route, and if chosen how it will be cope with capacity into the future? The fact that it states clearly Stewartby to Bedford clearly illustrates that BDM is not on the route. The fact that Stewartby is chosen as the last station on the Marston Vale states the line will deviate away from Bedford after Stewartby.

 

[mwmbwls]

I did speak to one of the EWR representatives who acknowledged that Bedford Midland options would result in a repositioning of the booking office to the east - closer to Ashburnham Road and the EWR tracks taking up an alignment with extra two extra platform faces. Because of the volume of people/pressure of time I was not able to put my second question - which would have been if, the Bedford Midland option is chosen, the implications for Wixams station? I assume that if southern routes are chosen then the combined Wixams' "Tamworth style/split level" station will be part of the overall EWR budget but if not the residents of South Bedford would have to hope for inclusion in the GRIP process and a suitable funding slot in a future Control Period. I do not think that redeveloping Bedford station would necessarily incentivise developers to contribute in the same way as could be expected at Wixams. Has anybody else put this question - or if anybody else is going to attend another consultation event - could they put this specific question?

 

[richieb1971]

I'm of the belief that questions will not be answered until a written or graphic illustration is shown beforehand. It's very rare an insight is gained from asking a question before concrete plans have been made.

 

[mwmbwls]

I understand your point but the issue is raised as a result of the publication of the five route option diagrams - two via Bedford Midland three via Wixams.

Para 5:16 in the Technical Report describes the location of a Bedford South station
"A new station to the south of Bedford could be located either slightly to the south of the A421 or alternatively near the new settlement of Wixams. The eventual location would be a matter for more detailed consideration of route alignments after selecting a preferred route option. If EWR services were to serve a new station to the south of Bedford, this could have implications for the planned service between Oxford and Bedford Midland that it is currently anticipated will follow the completion of the EWR western section. This will be considered further in advance of selecting a preferred route".

 

[jimm]

I did speak to one of the EWR representatives who acknowledged that Bedford Midland options would result in a repositioning of the booking office to the east - closer to Ashburnham Road and the EWR tracks taking up an alignment with extra two extra platform faces. Because of the volume of people/pressure of time I was not able to put my second question - which would have been if, the Bedford Midland option is chosen, the implications for Wixams station? I assume that if southern routes are chosen then the combined Wixams' "Tamworth style/split level" station will be part of the overall EWR budget but if not the residents of South Bedford would have to hope for inclusion in the GRIP process and a suitable funding slot in a future Control Period. I do not think that redeveloping Bedford station would necessarily incentivise developers to contribute in the same way as could be expected at Wixams. Has anybody else put this question - or if anybody else is going to attend another consultation event - could they put this specific question?

You don't seem to understand how Section 106 payments work - it's not about incentivising developers to contribute funds. If there are conditions attached to a planning permission requiring them to put money into infrastructure or anything else, it's not up to the developer to pick and choose what that money is spent on.

If a sum is allocated for 'transport improvements' in a section 106 it's up to the local authority to decide where it goes - e.g. where I live, section 106 money from housing developments on the edge of town has paid for alterations at nearby road junctions, but also to the road layout in the high street and new bus shelters there and at the station, plus bus stop signs on the developments and some revenue support for the extension of one of the local bus service to run there. Money allocated for 'education' has been spent both at the local primary school and at the nearest high school 8 miles away and at the town's library.

So if Bedford Midland was the chosen option for EWR development, money from Wixams could potentially be allocated there, or if work there was covered in the main EWR budget, then money allocated from section 106s at Wixams for transport could be put in a pot to help pay for a standalone Wixams station on the Midland Main Line. But it's not up to housing developers to decide that, or whether to contribute to infrastructure to support their highly profitable ventures in the first place.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Apologies if I've missed it, but does it have to be Wixams or Bedford Midland (can't it be some mixture of both?) and does it all have to be decided from the off? Can it not evolve, at least to some extent? Most especially because the central section can only come considerably later than the western section?

Can the route into Bedford Midland not be used initially (it's there, after all) and indeed remain in use even if the 'main' East-West trains ultimately only stops at some sort of Tamworth-like Wixams interchange? In fact, ultimately, could a triangular link into BDM be used to allow express EW service to overtake an EW semi-fast?

 

[mwmbwls]

You don't seem to understand how Section 106 payments work - it's not about incentivising developers to contribute funds. If there are conditions attached to a planning permission requiring them to put money into infrastructure or anything else, it's not up to the developer to pick and choose what that money is spent on.

Ah - you are missing my point. If Bedford Midland is chosen for development there will, I would suggest, be less potential for S106 payments from developers because there will be less immediate vacant development around the station. If Wixams is selected for its MML potential there will be greater development potential - which in turn would be greater still were Wixams, a joint EWR/MML station, to materialise. It is not only a question of the quantum of development value that frames the basis for s106 calculations but also the timing thereof. In essence, discounted cash flows techniques rewards those scheme reward those schemes that are not only the largest in potential development terms but deliver that value the soonest. The question is which option gives Bedford, and its Council, the biggest development bang and hence the biggest bucks.

 

[edwin_m]

Apologies if I've missed it, but does it have to be Wixams or Bedford Midland (can't it be some mixture of both?) and does it all have to be decided from the off? Can it not evolve, at least to some extent? Most especially because the central section can only come considerably later than the western section?

Can the route into Bedford Midland not be used initially (it's there, after all) and indeed remain in use even if the 'main' East-West trains ultimately only stops at some sort of Tamworth-like Wixams interchange? In fact, ultimately, could a triangular link into BDM be used to allow express EW service to overtake an EW semi-fast?

I would think that the existing link into Bedford Midland would be retained in the Bedford South options, with a new junction somewhere to the south so trains can either continue into Midland or turn eastwards. However lack of capacity or insufficient demand for two separate services may mean that after opening of the route to Cambridge the initial Oxford-Bedford train is diverted to Cambridge (or beyond at both ends) and calls at Bedford South instead. This would appear to leave Bedford Midland with only the Marston Vale service, which is unlikely to be attractive for through journeys because of the many stops it makes.

 

[mwmbwls]

Apologies if I've missed it, but does it have to be Wixams or Bedford Midland (can't it be some mixture of both?) and does it all have to be decided from the off? Can it not evolve, at least to some extent? Most especially because the central section can only come considerably later than the western section?

Can the route into Bedford Midland not be used initially (it's there, after all) and indeed remain in use even if the 'main' East-West trains ultimately only stops at some sort of Tamworth-like Wixams interchange? In fact, ultimately, could a triangular link into BDM be used to allow express EW service to overtake an EW semi-fast?

I do not think that the current plans preclude keeping the existing link into Bedford Midland and evolution would seem sensible. The CPRE have expressed concerns about the impact on Marston Vale local stations whose users have built their commuting patterns round a central Bedford destination.

 

[eastdyke]

So if Bedford Midland was the chosen option for EWR development, money from Wixams could potentially be allocated there, or if work there was covered in the main EWR budget, then money allocated from section 106s at Wixams for transport could be put in a pot to help pay for a standalone Wixams station on the Midland Main Line. But it's not up to housing developers to decide that, or whether to contribute to infrastructure to support their highly profitable ventures in the first place.

We have a thread on Wixams station and its funding:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/wixams-station-gets-funding-from-bedford-council.169935/
The original section 106 (including money for Wixams station) was signed in 2006.
A deed of variation was signed in 2018 which puts the developer Gallagher Estates on extended obligation to 2024 for an indexed link sum of £13.4million towards the station cost.
This is an extract [page 25] from a report presented to Bedford Borough Council in the time leading up to the deed of variation:
https://centralbeds.moderngov.co.uk...ELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE.pdf?T=10&txtonly=1

The Deed also makes provision to extend the date for the provision of financial contributions towards the cost of the railway station. Under the current Section 106 Agreement, the obligations on Gallagher Estates to provide a financial contribution towards the railway station would fall away in 2019. Due to uncertainties in relation to the delivery of East West Rail it has not yet been possible to deliver the railway station. The proposed Deed would extend the obligations until 2024 to allow time for the East West rail route to be finalised and discussions to continue in relation to the provision of the railway station.

Wixams and its 4,500 dwellings is likely to be only a small part of much larger land allocations for development south of Bedford.

 

[camflyer]

I've read through the full consultation twice now and I still can't decide which option I prefer.

 

[richieb1971]

Lets not forget why BDM needs extra platforms in the first place. Its because THL are parking in the main station for the reverse workings back south. As stated before 4 platforms is more than enough if they are vacant most of the time.

As for Wixams/Bedford south, there is only a bit of room available for a cross over track between the A421 and the cement factory. Otherwise you need to go much further south somewhere around Millbrook which isn't near anywhere to be honest. Personally the cement factory is near enough to the retail park in Kempston to be of great use to that and the Wixams estate and it perfectly aligns with the A421 going east. If you went further south there is a gigantic pit from the brick works to overcome from the Vale line.

As a connecting station Wixams/Bedford South has the potential to be a bigger station than BDM. In the future town centres may not be the favourite stations for commuters who drive to train stations. For those passengers, it definitely seems that having a parkway type station is an advantage because it means you won't be driving straight out into a congested town.

Its very frustrating not knowing if BDM or Bedford south is the preferred option because until that bit is decided its all up in the air.

 

[jimm]

Ah - you are missing my point. If Bedford Midland is chosen for development there will, I would suggest, be less potential for S106 payments from developers because there will be less immediate vacant development around the station. If Wixams is selected for its MML potential there will be greater development potential - which in turn would be greater still were Wixams, a joint EWR/MML station, to materialise. It is not only a question of the quantum of development value that frames the basis for s106 calculations but also the timing thereof. In essence, discounted cash flows techniques rewards those scheme reward those schemes that are not only the largest in potential development terms but deliver that value the soonest. The question is which option gives Bedford, and its Council, the biggest development bang and hence the biggest bucks.

I'm really not sure how I, or anyone else, was supposed to divine much of that from your previous post.

I doubt the EWR company is too fussed what delivers the most bucks for Bedford. Its focus is on what is the best solution to achieve the long-term goals set by the Government and councils and LEPs along the route for East West Rail.

Wixams and its 4,500 dwellings is likely to be only a small part of much larger land allocations for development south of Bedford.

Exactly - there is likely to be lots more section 106 money coming from developments - whether in the vicinity of Bedford Midland station or anywhere else around the town - some of which is likely to end up being used on various transport projects, in various places, at various points in time, which could include East West Rail generally, Bedford Midland station, a Bedford South/Wixams EWR station or a Wixams MML-only station.

 

[camflyer]

Not sure if this has any impact on the EWR consultations but Highways England have just announced their preferred route of the section of the Oxford-Cambridge Expressway realigning the A428 between Black Cat and Caxton Gibbet.

https://highwaysengland.citizenspac.../results/a428blackcattocaxtongibbetwebpra.pdf

 

[mwmbwls]

With construction of this road section starting in 2020/21 and completion in 2025/26, it will interesting to see whether it is road or rail options on the entire route can be brought in - on time/to budget.

 

[richieb1971]

If the A1 is diving under the black cat, that would make a good place to run the railway slightly to the south of that junction if the under pass starts early enough. Although the area seems to be built around considerably on the east side. That would perfectly align any new railway with the Tempsford area. If heading South east, could get close enough to the proposed new station at Sandy, which would be located somewhere north of the Industrial estate and currently has just big fields around it. Currently the ones on the east side of the EMCL are full of solar panels.

 

[camflyer]

If the A1 is diving under the black cat, that would make a good place to run the railway slightly to the south of that junction if the under pass starts early enough. Although the area seems to be built around considerably on the east side. That would perfectly align any new railway with the Tempsford area. If heading South east, could get close enough to the proposed new station at Sandy, which would be located somewhere north of the Industrial estate and currently has just big fields around it. Currently the ones on the east side of the EMCL are full of solar panels.

I also thought the mid/long term plan was to re-route the A1 away from the Sandy/Wyboston area where the current road is a very poor dual carriage way going only a few feet away from people's front doors which makes it impossible to otherwise upgrade.

 

[Bald Rick]

I also thought the mid/long term plan was to re-route the A1 away from the Sandy/Wyboston area where the current road is a very poor dual carriage way going only a few feet away from people's front doors which makes it impossible to otherwise upgrade.

Well it was the plan 30 years ago... indeed I think the design was done back then. I certainly saw designs for the upgrade to motorway standards to the West of Grantham back in the early 90s, and I’m reasonably sure the whole A1 from Letchworth to Newcastle was expected to be upgraded to Motoway standards, some on line and some off line. About half has been done, as we know, mostly in the north.

 

[camflyer]

Well it was the plan 30 years ago... indeed I think the design was done back then. I certainly saw designs for the upgrade to motorway standards to the West of Grantham back in the early 90s, and I’m reasonably sure the whole A1 from Letchworth to Newcastle was expected to be upgraded to Motoway standards, some on line and some off line. About half has been done, as we know, mostly in the north.

The A1, especially though Yorkshire, has been massively improved in recent years even if not quite to motorway standard. Now if you head south from Newcastle, the Blackcat is the first roundabout (and first set of traffic lights) you hit. All of the other junctions have been made grade separated. It's the section between Baldock and Brampton which is a mess.

I suppose the decision with Blackcat is whether to build a junction which is needed now or plan it on the basis of what might happen to the A1 in 10-20 years time. From the designs it looks like they have gone for the former.

 

[swt_passenger]

The A1, especially though Yorkshire, has been massively improved in recent years even if not quite to motorway standard. Now if you head south from Newcastle, the Blackcat is the first roundabout (and first set of traffic lights) you hit. All of the other junctions have been made grade separated. It's the section between Baldock and Brampton which is a mess.

I suppose the decision with Blackcat is whether to build a junction which is needed now or plan it on the basis of what might happen to the A1 in 10-20 years time. From the designs it looks like they have gone for the former.

I guess there’s always the possibility that a future new A1 will cross the east/west route without a junction. I think that’s being hypothesised on the “Sabre” roads forum...

 

[stut]

Now if you head south from Newcastle, the Blackcat is the first roundabout (and first set of traffic lights) you hit. All of the other junctions have been made grade separated. It's the section between Baldock and Brampton which is a mess.

A pedant writes: first roundabout is Buckden, then Black Cat. Black Cat is planned to get grade separation as part of the A428 dualling.

The bit round Sandy and Biggleswade, though...