East-West Rail (EWR): is it worth it?

[Magdalia]

Cambridgeshire isn’t the Home Counties by any stretch.

Cambridge is odd in that sense, it may physically be in East Anglia but a combination of how costly it is to live there and its connections to the South East make it act like it's much closer to London than it actually is. Same with Oxford.

When I grew up in Cambridge it was East Anglian. After electrification in the 1980s it was briefly influenced by the London economy.

But now Cambridge is an economic and geographic entity in its own right. Cambridge doesn't identify with other places, other places now identify with Cambridge.

 

[Bletchleyite]

When I grew up in Cambridge it was East Anglian. After electrification in the 1980s it was briefly influenced by the London economy.

But now Cambridge is an economic and geographic entity in its own right. Cambridge doesn't identify with other places, other places now identify with Cambridge.

You could say the same of MK, but in reality the proximity to and ease of reaching London is a key part of its economic success - and Cambridge and Oxford are no different.

 

[Magdalia]

You could say the same of MK, but in reality the proximity to and ease of reaching London is a key part of its economic success - and Cambridge and Oxford are no different.

Cambridge and Oxford are different. Their economic success is increasingly independent of London. What matters is their Universities with global reputations.

And Milton Keynes, once EWR opens, will be emphasising its proximity to Oxford and Cambridge, not just its proximity to London.

 

[Cantab26]

The amount of traffic south of Bedford dwarfs the traffic north of Bedford. I still don't see why 15-20 workings currently north of Bedford create so much congestion when there are 200 workings south of Bedford with the same amount of tracks. When Thameslink started up we didn't need to build 4 more tracks for them, we just used the pre existing ones and ran alongside the inter city services and that goes on for 50 miles, not 1.5.

This is dealt with at pages 90 to 93 of the Route Update Report here

In summary, it is not really about the absolute number of train services, but pathing constraints.

 

[al green]

Except it isn't dealt with there; it says "The four-track section of the MML that runs through Bedford has been identified by as one of currently five congested infrastructure sections of the network."

The report deliberately (?) confuses congestion within and to south of Bedford station with the lightly used slow tracks north of Bedford station.

Slow tracks north of Bedford station only handle Up EMR Corby 2 tph and 2-3tph each way frieght.

If a platform is built on Up fast - as NR proposed last year - then Up EMR Corbys can stay on Up fast. That just leaves 2-3tph each way freight to share with 4tph each way EMR on Slows for about 1km.

hat's only using about 50% of available capacity. And even more pathing flexibility is provided by both Slow tracks being bi-directional.

I really don't know why EWR Ltd is persisting with its 6 track proposal that includes unnecessary house demolition. It just seems to be making enemies for the sake of it.

 

[Cantab26]

Except it isn't dealt with there. It says "The four-track section of the MML that runs through Bedford has been identified by as one of currently five congested infrastructure sections of the network." The report deliberately? confuses congestion within and to south of Bedford station with the lightly used slow tracks north of Bedford station. Slow tracks north of Bedford station only handle Up EMR Corby 2 tph and 2-3tph each way frieght. If a platform is built on Up fast - as NR proposed last year - then Up EMR Corbys can stay on Up fast. That just leaves 2-3tph each way freight to share with 4tph each way EMR on Slows for about 1km. That's only using about 50% of available capacity. And even more pathing flexibility is provided by both Slow tracks being bi-directional. I really don't know why EWR Ltd is persisting with its 6 track proposal that includes unnecessary house demolition . It just seems to be making enemies for the sake of it.

As the document makes clear and I have pointed out above, the capacity issue north of Bedford is caused by the pathing constraints imposed by the south of Bedford timetable, including on the slow lines.

And this applies even if a new up fast platform is constructed and even if bidirectional running is factored in.

Do you really think that EWR Co would be proceeding with this if it could reasonably avoid the aggravation? Does that not indicate that the additional tracks (and associated demolition) are in fact necessary in order to deliver this project without an unacceptable impact on existing rail operations and capacity?

 

[The Planner]

As the document makes clear and I have pointed out above, the capacity issue north of Bedford is caused by the pathing constraints imposed by the south of Bedford timetable, including on the slow lines.

This, its all very well saying a piece of line between B and C has loads of capacity if you cannot use it as A to B is full.

 

[David Goddard]

Is E-W worth it? Yes
Is the route selected appropriate? Probably not, the deviation just to serve Cambourne is not needed.
Is Cambridge an important centre? Of course it is, for business, science, learning and leisure economies

 

[Cantab26]

Is the route selected appropriate? Probably not, the deviation just to serve Cambourne is not needed.

What would you propose instead?

Without increasing the overall environmental impact or cost.

 

[Magdalia]

the deviation just to serve Cambourne is not needed.

Please justify that assertion, setting out your proposed alternative transport infrastructure for Cambourne, with particular reference to linking it to the Cambridge Biomedical Campus.

 

[swt_passenger]

Please justify that assertion, setting out your proposed alternative transport infrastructure for Cambourne, with particular reference to linking it to the Cambridge Biomedical Campus.

Perhaps this thread will generate different alternatives to the other thread started a few days ago:

East-West Rail (EWR): Alternative options

Moderator note: split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/east-west-rail-ewr-consultation-updates-not-speculation.99892/ East West Rail can only do good for cross country connectivity; the first bit from Oxford to Bletchley does that very well. Its potential for freight and passenger...

www.railforums.co.uk

But I cant help feeling it’s all been done many times before…

 

[Steve Harris]

setting out your proposed alternative transport infrastructure for Cambourne, with particular reference to linking it to the Cambridge Biomedical Campus.

Guided Bus ?? (anyone). Or isn't that now progressing to Cambourne ? As last time I looked the council was planning to drive it through an ancient orchard !! And yet, it's supposed to be 'green', lol.

 

[Magdalia]

Guided Bus ?? (anyone). Or isn't that now progressing to Cambourne ? As last time I looked the council was planning to drive it through an ancient orchard !! And yet, it's supposed to be 'green', lol.

There is a proposal for a Cambourne to Cambridge busway, but it is not guided, and only reaches the West Cambridge site near Junction 13 of the M11. It doesn't get anywhere near the Biomedical Campus. And yes, it is planned to go through an ancient orchard in Coton.

 

[Cantab26]

Guided Bus ?? (anyone). Or isn't that now progressing to Cambourne ? As last time I looked the council was planning to drive it through an ancient orchard !! And yet, it's supposed to be 'green', lol.

There is a proposal for a Cambourne to Cambridge busway, but it is not guided, and only reaches the West Cambridge site near Junction 13 of the M11. It doesn't get anywhere near the Biomedical Campus. And yes, it is planned to go through an ancient orchard in Coton.

And this was also looked at by EWR Co to see if it would satisfy the identified strategic transport need between Bedford and Cambridge.

It was ruled out primarily because of the combination of longer journey times and insufficient overall capacity.

 

[daodao]

The “poor business case” referred to is actually the ‘benefit to cost ratio’ or BCR.

This is one element of the ‘economic case’ for the project, which is in turn one of the five ‘cases’ which make up a DfT ‘Green Book’ business case.

The BCR only factors in certain economic benefits and does not include an allowance (in money terms) for the wider-scale economic or social benefits which are expected to flow from a given project.

These are either dealt with in narrative fashion as part of the economic case or through the ‘strategic case’. The agglomeration benefits of overlapping the economic hinterlands of Oxford, Milton Keynes and Cambridge would fall into this category.

In the case of EWR, the direct BCR is fairly poor, but this is only one (very minor) part of the picture. All other elements of the EWR business case (including the non-monetised elements of the economic case and the overall strategic case in particular) are very strong.

In summary: the fixation on the BCR (and the slapdash use of the term ‘business case’ to describe it) merely demonstrates that these people are either (1) ignorant or (2) disingenuous or (3) both.

My money is on (3).

Thanks for your helpful reply. I have put my response in a more appropriate thread.

In other words, conventional assessments (i.e. BCR) indicate a poor business case based on current demand/needs. The case for EWR rests on the projected demand and "wider" benefits postulated as a consequence of massive development of the Cambridge area and the hinterland between it and Bedford, which rests on many assumptions and is thus difficult to quantify precisely. Given that this region is already overheating economically and development here will destroy thousands of acres of grade 1 agricultural land, is this necessarily beneficial?

 

[zwk500]

Given that this region is already overheating economically and development here will allow thousands more homes to be built, this is massively beneficial.

Have fixed that for you.

The average first time house price in Cambridgeshire is £300,000 to £440,000 (in the city itself). Most mortgages are between 4 and 5 times your salary, so you would need even for the cheapest end, a £30,000 deposit and to be earning more than £40,000 a year - and that assumes you can get a decent interest rate so that you can actually afford the repayments. Building a very large amount of new houses would bring average prices back down, which is incredibly good for Cambridge to be recruiting young bright graduates for it's research and tech based industries.

 

[Cantab26]

In other words, conventional assessments (i.e. BCR) indicate a poor business case based on current demand/needs.

That is broadly correct.

The case for EWR rests on the projected demand and "wider" benefits postulated as a consequence of massive development of the Cambridge area and the hinterland between it and Bedford,

Not necessarily. There would be economic agglomeration benefits even if very little new development came forward - it just wouldn’t be of the same scale compared to (for example) the redevelopment of places like Stewartby brickworks or the former RAF Tempsford.

which rests on many assumptions and is thus difficult to quantify precisely.

Yes, although you could attempt to quantify them. Best practice is to leave such matters as non-monetised benefits though.

The same approach is taken for station closure proposals, incidentally.

development here will destroy thousands of acres of grade 1 agricultural land

This is untrue.

 

[Steve Harris]

Have fixed that for you.

The average first time house price in Cambridge is £300,000 to £440,000 (in the city itself). Most mortgages are between 4 and 5 times your salary, so you would need even for the cheapest end, a £30,000 deposit and to be earning more than £40,000 a year - and that assumes you can get a decent interest rate so that you can actually afford the repayments. Building a very large amount of new houses would bring average prices back down, which is incredibly good for Cambridge to be recruiting young bright graduates for it's research and tech based industries.

Sorry, but he does raise a valid point. Otherwise, we will all have a roof over our heads but will be starving. Recently we had shortages of certain food stuffs in the shops because of bad harvests in other parts of the world, while some of those food stuffs could be grown in the UK.

Fixed that for you
Cambridgeshire is not just Cambridge, there are 2 other cities in Cambridgeshire with house prices at least £100,000 cheaper in them (to what you have quoted).

Besides, if we just built social housing everyone would be able to afford to live anyway.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jun 2023 ==

This is untrue.

How?

It is agricultural land that EWR will be going through in some areas, it may not be grade 1 but it is agricultural. So I'm at a loss how you can use a broad brush statement (which is unhelpful,) without a little explanation.

 

[Cantab26]

How?

It is agricultural land that EWR will be going through in some areas, it may not be grade 1 but it is agricultural. So I'm at a loss how you can use a broad brush statement without a little explanation.

It is a simple matter of fact. The statement was not true. Almost no grade 1 agricultural land would be affected by EWR Co’s proposals.

I’m not sure what further ‘explanation’ you might be expecting.

As far as agricultural land more broadly is concerned, there would be an impact no matter where you built the railway because - funnily enough - the landward parts of Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire are used for agriculture.

As to new housing development, if you want to avoid the best agricultural land in this area (as your principal decision-making criterion) then you would put it at Tempsford.

 

[Steve Harris]

It is a simple matter of fact. The statement was not true. Almost no grade 1 agricultural land would be affected by EWR Co’s proposals.

I’m not sure what further ‘explanation’ you might be expecting.

As far as agricultural land more broadly is concerned, there would be an impact no matter where you built the railway because - funnily enough - the landward parts of Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire are used for agriculture.

As to new housing development, if you want to avoid the best agricultural land in this area (as your principal decision-making criterion) then you would put it at Tempsford.

You have given the explanation, the grade 1 part wasn't true.

 

[Cantab26]

Fixed that for you
Cambridgeshire is not just Cambridge, there are 2 other cities in Cambridgeshire with house prices at least £100,000 cheaper in them (to what you have quoted).

@zwk500 already specified that he was referring to the city so there was nothing to be fixed.

Besides, if we just built social housing everyone would be able to afford to live anyway.

And where will we build this social housing (whatever that term might mean)?

 

[zwk500]

Fixed that for you
Cambridgeshire is not just Cambridge, there are 2 other cities in Cambridgeshire with house prices at least £100,000 cheaper in them (to what you have quoted).

From Cambridge Live: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/cambridge-most-expensive-city-first-25623340

At £441,643, Cambridge's average price for first-time buyers was considerably higher than South Cambridgeshire on £385, 457 and East Cambridgeshire on considerably less at £303,857.

So no, you didn't fix it for me Of course there will be lower individual prices - that's how averages work.

 

[Magdalia]

development here will destroy thousands of acres of grade 1 agricultural land, is this necessarily beneficial?

It is agricultural land that EWR will be going through in some areas, it may not be grade 1 but it is agricultural. So I'm at a loss how you can use a broad brush statement (which is unhelpful,) without a little explanation.

As far as agricultural land more broadly is concerned, there would be an impact no matter where you built the railway because - funnily enough - the landward parts of Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire are used for agriculture.

The line itself will take small strips of agricultural land (as will the A428 by the way) but it is not "thousands of acres". The impact of East West Rail on availability of agricultural land in this area is tiny compared to solar panels, where some of the best agricultural land there is, in the Fens between Waterbeach and Ely, has already been lost to solar panels. There is a "thousands of acres" proposal for loss of agricultural land near Newmarket which is also for solar panels. If you are worried about loss of agricultural land then you need to be looking elsewhere.

The housing developments will be mostly brown field, for example Tempsford and Stewartby. The expansion of Cambourne onto the old Bourn aerodrome is also brown field.

Given that this region is already overheating economically

The average first time house price in Cambridgeshire is £300,000 to £440,000 (in the city itself). Most mortgages are between 4 and 5 times your salary, so you would need even for the cheapest end, a £30,000 deposit and to be earning more than £40,000 a year - and that assumes you can get a decent interest rate so that you can actually afford the repayments. Building a very large amount of new houses would bring average prices back down, which is incredibly good for Cambridge to be recruiting young bright graduates for it's research and tech based industries.

You are right that the Cambridge economy is "running hot" and the tightness of the housing and labour markets are good indications of that. I'd like to know where in Cambridge there are houses for £300k. I read a National magazine which has what I call a "property porn" page, recently it featured an unexceptional Victorian 3 bed semi in Cambridge at £925k.

But anyone who has followed UK political and economic debate recently will know that the UK economy has a "growth problem". The UK can't afford to constrain economic development with high productivity employment that will boost UK economic growth and hence tax income. The fact is that growth is around Cambridge and Oxford, because they are Universities with global reputations.

East West Rail is about reaping the rewards of that growth, without further overheating of the Cambridge economy, by providing essential housing at suitable places nearby and transport infrastructure between where the houses will be and where the jobs will be. Everyone, all over the country, will benefit from East West Rail, because the economic growth that will be facilitated will give the Government a lot more tax income to spend on public services, or reduce tax rates.

Yes there are significant environmental and sustainability issues associated with increased development, and they need to be addressed with sensitivity, but they don't have a veto. What has happened with Cambridge South is a good small scale example of how that works, with an iterative process to minimise impact with compensation for the impacts that are unavoidable.

 

[zwk500]

You are right that the Cambridge economy is "running hot" and the tightness of the housing and labour markets are good indications of that. I'd like to know where in Cambridge there are houses for £300k. I read a National magazine which has what I call a "property porn" page, recently it featured an unexceptional Victorian 3 bed semi in Cambridge at £925k.

Sorry, it was obviously badly worded - the average first-time house price in parts of Cambridgeshire is £300k, with the average first-time price in Cambridge itself is £440k. Obviously 'house' includes flat and so on, and first time buyers will probably less be looking at Victorian 3 bed semis but seeking out the cheapest deals.

 

[Steve Harris]

From Cambridge Live: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/cambridge-most-expensive-city-first-25623340

So no, you didn't fix it for me Of course there will be lower individual prices - that's how averages work.

Ermm.... yes I did. As that news article is misleading, as it quotes Cambrdge City, South Cambs and East Cambs Council area's (but forgets that just those area's don't make up the whole county.)

Well !
I have news for you... Cambridgeshire is made up of Cambridge City, South Cambs, East Cambs, Fenland, Huntingdonshire and Peterborough City Councils.
And if you do a little research online, the averages in those other 3 council areas will drop the overall 'average' for the whole county.
So, yes I did fix it for you

 

[zwk500]

Ermm.... yes I did. As that news article is misleading, as it quotes Cambrdge City, South Cambs and East Cambs Council area's (but forgets that just those area's don't make up the whole county.)

Well !
I have news for you... Cambridgeshire is made up of Cambridge City, South Cambs, East Cambs, Fenland, Huntingdonshire and Peterborough City Councils.
So, yes I did fix it for you

None of those 3 areas are served by EWR, so the point I'm making about housing being f***ing expensive in the area to be served by EWR still stands. You're obviously picking a chip about the relation of Cambridge to Cambridgeshire that isn't really part of this discussion.

 

[Steve Harris]

None of those 3 areas are served by EWR, so the point I'm making about housing being f***ing expensive in the area to be served by EWR still stands. You're obviously picking a chip about the relation of Cambridge to Cambridgeshire that isn't really part of this discussion.

I don't have a 'chip' as you put it, But I do dislike badly worded/misleading statements. EWR doesn't serve, but does go through 1 of those areas (Hunts), and no doubt will have an impact on house prices. So is still relevant to a certain degree.

 

[dk1]

More than worth it in my book. Ridiculous that there is no total cross-country route between the North London Line & Peterborough to Leicester/Nuneaton. Especially through such a populated areas in between.

 

[JSBark]

Cambridge and Oxford are different. Their economic success is increasingly independent of London. What matters is their Universities with global reputations.

And Milton Keynes, once EWR opens, will be emphasising its proximity to Oxford and Cambridge, not just its proximity to London.

In my view EWR will provide something very valuable to the global competiveness of both Oxford and Cambridge, namely the creation of a joint travel to work area that is not London.

Take a young high flyer who is considering relocating from overseas to a job in Oxford. Her partner is also a high flyer but in a different field that happens to be stronger in Cambridge. Moving to the Oxford area won’t work for them, and they couldn’t maintain their accustomed standard of living if they moved to London. Thanks to EWR, the couple could find a (relatively) good value place to live in say MK and have access to London, Oxford and Cambridge (as well as West Midlands or more local) employment.

I reckon not many places globally offer that level of access to opportunity. It might just tip the scales in favour of them moving to the UK - or put another way, encourage a similar UK based couple not to emigrate.

In other words, EWR can help our globally competitive industries continue to attract ‘the brightest and best’ - not something conventional cost-benefit analysis takes into account.

 

[Alpine Rider]

I understand the direct rail route from Oxford to Cambridge closed for passenger traffic way back in 1968. This was basically as a result of dwindling passenger numbers and increasing nubers of motorcars and cheaper and faster bus services.

I accept there has been some infill construction since but what really has changed?

Most of that new build almost automatically features ample parking for yet more cars, so once we get past the initial fanfare period it seems unclear whether there is any the long term passenger demand to justfy operating much more than a skeleton passenger service.

Conversely this route has proved already valuable to freight operators.

So perhaps it is time for Great British Railways to just leave it to freight services and stop wasting any more time, effort and taxpayers money trying to provide passenger services on the route.