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

[Ianno87]

I'm fully aware of why they will be stopping at Cambourne!

You say "move-outer-ers", what about the people who have already been forced out (who are living in Great Gransden, Potton, Gamlingay, Biggleswade) ?

They can access EWR at Tempsford or Cambourne.

As you correctly say "If you add stops to EWR itself it becomes less effective at serving the longer flows". But by not serving the shorter flows EWR is/going to stoke up a lot of NIMBYsm, because those NIMBY's won't get any benefit from EWR!!

But they do get reduced road congestion.

As I see it, EWR will only be a benefit to people living in Cambourne or who haven't moved into the area yet. It does very little for the people who already live in the surrounding village's (and btw, have you ever tried cycling from Cambridge to Madingley?). Yes some villagers can be able to cycle in, but contrary to what some people think, Cambridge and the surrounding area is not 100% flat !

Yes, transport planning for future schemes is not about current users - it is about the future users who don't exist yet.

 

[mwmbwls]

Sadly you are completely missing the point. Why is EWR being built because it is an integral element of this.
Oxford-Cambridge Arc - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk). The locals protesting about the impact on their quiet semi rural lifestyle show liitle or no awareness of the scale of development about to hit them. The centres of Oxford and Cambridge will both become less car friendly - not that they really are already. The cancellation of the parallel road link by the MOT near Oxford is a clear indication that modal shift will occur whether the locals like it or not, Please read, mark and inwardly digest the problems in the existing and arc and the scale of development required. Mass pacification of commuting by car through congestion and ultra low emissions charging will contribute the modal shift.
P.S. And this is all before decarbonisation of the Arc Economy.

 

[Steve Harris]

They can access EWR at Tempsford or Cambourne.

But people from Great Gransden to Cambridge wont be driving to Tempsford to use the train, as your driving West to catch a train East and double back on yourself.

Yes, transport planning for future schemes is not about current users - it is about the future users who don't exist yet.

Exactly !!!

Hence why this should of been planned for years ago !!

Sadly you are completely missing the point. Why is EWR being built because it is an integral element of this.
Oxford-Cambridge Arc - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk). The locals protesting about the impact on their quiet semi rural lifestyle show liitle or no awareness of the scale of development about to hit them. The centres of Oxford and Cambridge will both become less car friendly - not that they really are already. The cancellation of the parallel road link by the MOT near Oxford is a clear indication that modal shift will occur whether the locals like it or not, Please read, mark and inwardly digest the problems in the existing and arc and the scale of development required. Mass pacification of commuting by car through congestion and ultra low emissions charging will contribute the modal shift.
P.S. And this is all before decarbonisation of the Arc Economy.

I can asure you I'm not completely missing the point. Just because I look at things in a objective manner doesn't mean I "don't get it"!!

I have lived in Cambridge 40+ years and I know how many bad planning decisions have been made in the past (and still being made). If good decisions had been made EWR would of already happened well over a decade ago (or two) (and EWR would probably of come out of Cambridge on the original alignment through Trumpington before taking a new alignment).

Whatever way you look at it, the issues I have raised is due to insufficient/good planning in the past which will raise local opposition to EWR and you seem to think "locals" won't have a say in the matter, going on past experience I think they will have a big say.

 

[D365]

Amazing how Greens are always arguing against rail projects on the basis that something else is supposedly greener.

Couldn't say it any better myself.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 May 2021 ==

I have lived in Cambridge 40+ years and I know how many bad planning decisions have been made in the past (and still being made). If good decisions had been made EWR would of already happened well over a decade ago (or two) (and EWR would probably of come out of Cambridge on the original alignment through Trumpington before taking a new alignment).

I agree with this, but sadly history didn't turn out this way and mistakes are still being made.

Not much we can do about Trumpington short of ripping up the busway and P+R.

 

[ashkeba]

It does very little for the people who already live in the surrounding village's (and btw, have you ever tried cycling from Cambridge to Madingley?). Yes some villagers can be able to cycle in, but contrary to what some people think, Cambridge and the surrounding area is not 100% flat !

Yes I have cycled from Madingley to Cambridge. It is nicer but longer by Huntingdon Road now, but Madingley Road is not awful.

Many villagers will not cycle to Cambridge unless we give them e bikes, but probably would to a EWR or busway station if sufficient suitable parking exists. Cambridgeshire rail demand has long been suppressed by limiting parking which seems more and more silly.

 

[Steve Harris]

Not much we can do about Trumpington short of ripping up the busway and P+R.

Indeed.

That ship has well and truely sailed !!

 

[Tobbes]

Indeed.

That ship has well and truely sailed !!

Not least because no one is proposing using the old route through the Mullard Observatory....

 

[Steve Harris]

Not least because no one is proposing using the old route through the Mullard Observatory....

And if you read post #5253 I said "the original alignment through Trumpington before taking a new alignment" (ie coming away from Cambridge).

I never once suggested going through the mullard observetary !! (I have emboldened my text to make it even more clearer).

So I have no idea what point your trying to make. Either your agreeing with me (and have quoted the wrong post) or your disagreeing with me (and trying to quote something I didn't say) or simply need some new spectacles.

 

[camflyer]

Concerned citizens erect a tower in their back garden

East West Rail: Campaigners construct tower to show ‘Great Wall’ height

Campaigners have erected a tower to show the height of East West Rail’s proposed embankment at Harston.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

 

[ABB125]

Concerned citizens erect a tower in their back garden

East West Rail: Campaigners construct tower to show ‘Great Wall’ height

Campaigners have erected a tower to show the height of East West Rail’s proposed embankment at Harston.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

Is it just me, or does everyone in the picture look like a stereotypical NIMBY/"angry of xxx"?

 

[fishwomp]

Is it just me, or does everyone in the picture look like a stereotypical NIMBY/"angry of xxx"?

There is a website and twitter feed for this: Angry People in Local Newspapers

 

[59CosG95]

There is a website and twitter feed for this: Angry People in Local Newspapers

British Journalism Eddie, best in the world!

 

[Bald Rick]

Is it just me, or does everyone in the picture look like a stereotypical NIMBY/"angry of xxx"?

That lawn needs mowing.

 

[gallafent]

That lawn needs mowing.

— although “no mow May”[1] is good for wildflowers (and thus insects, and thus birds, etc.)

The importance of railway cuttings and embankments, free of people and with plenty of unchecked natural flora, as “wild spaces” and wildlife corridors, suggests to me that the presence of an embankment is a positive thing, at least from an ecological perspective, in fact.

[1] https://www.plantlife.org.uk/uk/discover-wild-plants-nature/no-mow-may

 

[ABB125]

There is a website and twitter feed for this: Angry People in Local Newspapers

That's possibly just made my day!

That lawn needs mowing.

But have they carried out an ecological survey to determine whether there are any great crested newts or bats living in the grass? And surely they'd need to build a tower first, showing how short the grass would be if it were to be cut?

 

[camflyer]

Sadly you are completely missing the point. Why is EWR being built because it is an integral element of this.
Oxford-Cambridge Arc - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk). The locals protesting about the impact on their quiet semi rural lifestyle show liitle or no awareness of the scale of development about to hit them. The centres of Oxford and Cambridge will both become less car friendly - not that they really are already. The cancellation of the parallel road link by the MOT near Oxford is a clear indication that modal shift will occur whether the locals like it or not, Please read, mark and inwardly digest the problems in the existing and arc and the scale of development required. Mass pacification of commuting by car through congestion and ultra low emissions charging will contribute the modal shift.
P.S. And this is all before decarbonisation of the Arc Economy.

One one hand you can understand the concerns of these people. The villages to the south and west of Cambridge are a lovely place to live - you are in the countryside but also within a few miles of Cambridge, with some of the best paid jobs in the country and also easy access to London. However, as you say, there is a huge amount of development planned in the area so infrastructure needed to support it.

The Cambridge Science Park has announced consultations on a big expansion on the other side of the A14 (https://www.cambridgesciencepark.co.uk/cambridge-science-park-north/) and the Biomedical Campus around Addenbrookes is only going to grow.

 

[michaelspencer]

We've had this leaflet put through our door in Cherry Hinton:

 

[ABB125]

We've had this leaflet put through our door in Cherry Hinton:

View attachment 96970View attachment 96971

Nice to see some factually correct statements in there...

 

[stuu]

Wonder whether they are equally bothered about the thousands and thousands of diesel powered HGVs on the A14/M11? Or are they sufficiently far from their homes?

And as a graphic designer, that is an appalling leaflet

 

[ABB125]

We've had this leaflet put through our door in Cherry Hinton:

View attachment 96970View attachment 96971

Also, it says that the "alternative northern approach" will pass under the A14. Based on the high quality (!) map provided, the railway would cross the A14 about here. Am I the only person to think that a bridge is a much more likely prospect? Complete with those abominable 12m high embankments?

 

[camflyer]

Also, it says that the "alternative northern approach" will pass under the A14. Based on the high quality (!) map provided, the railway would cross the A14 about here. Am I the only person to think that a bridge is a much more likely prospect? Complete with those abominable 12m high embankments?

The Great Wall of Cambridgeshire is only an terrifying abomination when it's south the Cambridge. Perfectly fine to the north.

Equally, freight trains in south Cambridge = bad. Freight trains through Soham, Waterbeach and Northstowe = perfectly sensible

 

[TheDavibob]

Also, it says that the "alternative northern approach" will pass under the A14. Based on the high quality (!) map provided, the railway would cross the A14 about here. Am I the only person to think that a bridge is a much more likely prospect? Complete with those abominable 12m high embankments?

EWR have highlighted the impracticality of a bridge (it would have to cross at least 10 lanes of road, so would be massive). They've therefore decided to make up an alternative option.

The required gradients would be savage, and the ground conditions awful. I'm not sure how being quite so close to sea level would go down, either.

 

[ABB125]

The Great Wall of Cambridgeshire is only an terrifying abomination when it's south the Cambridge. Perfectly fine to the north.

Have you only just realised that? Only an idiot can't see the sense in this logic!

Equally, freight trains in south Cambridge = bad. Freight trains through Soham, Waterbeach and Northstowe = perfectly sensible

Funny how the single-track sections on the route through Newmarket are a deal-breaker for freight, but the single-track through Soham isn't...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 May 2021 ==

EWR have highlighted the impracticality of a bridge (it would have to cross at least 10 lanes of road, so would be massive). They've therefore decided to make up an alternative option.

The required gradients would be savage, and the ground conditions awful. I'm not sure how being quite so close to sea level would go down, either.

I've just had a brilliant idea! It's called a "level crossing"

 

[camflyer]

EWR have highlighted the impracticality of a bridge (it would have to cross at least 10 lanes of road, so would be massive). They've therefore decided to make up an alternative option.

The required gradients would be savage, and the ground conditions awful. I'm not sure how being quite so close to sea level would go down, either.

Don't worry. A computer games player in Harston will come up with an ingenious solution that Network Rail and EWR engineers haven't been able to.

 

[ashkeba]

We've had this leaflet put through our door in Cherry Hinton:

View attachment 96970View attachment 96971

It looks like that chord from the Alt N Approach to Cambridge demolishes part of either Landbeach or Milton, doesn't it?

And they appear to have put Camborne on the other side of the A428 to where it is?

And the line there is labelled 7 which is "Existing freight route" - there is no railway there now, is there? I am not even sure there ever was.

An awful leaflet full of errors and hiding impractical demands affecting other parts of Cambridge area. It makes its backerss look like the sort of people who deal with a dead animal in their yard by throwing it into their neighbour's flowerbed.

 

[Bald Rick]

And the line there is labelled 7 which is "Existing freight route" - there is no railway there now, is there? I am not even sure there ever was.

The red 7 is very much a railway, it is the main cross country freight route from Felixstowe.

It’s about the one thing they have got right.

 

[zwk500]

The red 7 is very much a railway, it is the main cross country freight route from Felixstowe.

It’s about the one thing they have got right.

However the green 7 isn't on an existing railway. I suspect it's meant to be an 8, as there's nothing actually labelled 8 on that map, and it's where you'd attempt to build a 'hidden' railway.

EDIT: I'd love to know which trench technology is suitable for floodplains, other than as a drainage channel.

 

[Bald Rick]

However the green 7 isn't on an existing railway. I suspect it's meant to be an 8, as there's nothing actually labelled 8 on that map, and it's where you'd attempt to build a 'hidden' railway.

EDIT: I'd love to know which trench technology is suitable for floodplains, other than as a drainage channel.

I’d love to know what trench ‘technology’ is. Do they mean a ‘cutting’?

 

[zwk500]

I’d love to know what trench ‘technology’ is. Do they mean a ‘cutting’?

I took Trench Technology to mean a JCB

 

[ABB125]

I’d love to know what trench ‘technology’ is. Do they mean a ‘cutting’?

They've used "cutting" in an earlier point ("massive 40m wide cutting" etc); perhaps they think they get extra points for using alternative vocabulary? A bit like creative writing in school (which this document surely is)!