New station: Wixams, Bedfordshire. Planning approved

[61653 HTAFC]

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

 

[richieb1971]

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

Best thing about this is that its the easiest thing to reverse. You can easily add more services.
A lot of night passengers are heading for Luton airport or Gatwick airport and are largely empty. It will mean any Wixams passenger will need to get to Bedford station.

I have to assume the forecasted footfall for Wixams is extremely low. Even Cheddington on the WCML gets an hourly service and there is less in Cheddington than there is at Wixams.

 

[stephen rp]

Has anyone got a binding commitment from the TOC that they will stop any trains at the new station?

(See "Warrington West")

 

[Edvid]

13 months since the two-platform proposal was granted planning permission, here's how things are going:

* Approval in Principle (general design) and Network Change have both been signed off.
* BBC approve of NR's cost plan and provision for funding will be noted in their next Medium Term Financial Strategy.
* The two applications for minor amendments (to accommodate a second footbridge) were approved in yesterday's Planning Committee meeting.
* BBC signed a Development Services Agreement instructing NR to undertake detailed design of the station, with site surveys in week beginning 30 March.
* The first draft of an Implementation Agreement should be available from NR by 12 April. Entering this agreement will trigger the first tranche of S106 money, with the other two likely to follow 6 and 12 months into the project.

Sources: ESCOSC meeting, 21 March 2024 / PC meeting, 25 March 2024

 

[richieb1971]

I hope it suits all the needs of the paying customer. Warehouses are going up all around it so if it doesn't suffice in 5 years we have another broken project.

If universal turn wixams into some kind of 60k a day station I will be looking at the people who made these decisions. You could put the station next to the car auction and have future proofing built in.

Does anyone else believe that if universal goes ahead wixams will suffice?

 

[DarloRich]

Does anyone else believe that if universal goes ahead wixams will suffice?

yes - more than adequality. Users will, obviously, come by train but many ( perhaps most) will come by road. The site is very close to good road links and motorways and train ticket costs mean driving will be more realistic for many people.

If universal turn wixams into some kind of 60k a day station

Where do you get this kind of figure from?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Mar 2024 ==

You could put the station next to the car auction and have future proofing built in.

work needs to start pdq or the S106 money will be lost. if that is lost there is no station. IRC that is something like £13m!

 

[richieb1971]

Alton towers captures 2.3 million per year without train connectivity and mainly caters for UK folk only.

Universal studios is a much larger enterprise and has a catchment area of the whole of Europe of which many will fly and catch a forwarding train.

Alton towers has 2500 employees. If you match that figure for universal and all arrive by car that's up to 2500 cars before a ticket is sold. It's much more likely many of these will commute in by train since the stations are very local to the park.

Any which way you look at it, the stations adjacent to the park will be used quite heavily. In both scenarios the summer season will be booming.

I heard a few years ago Rushden lakes banned employees to arrive by car because the car park was half full once they arrived. I don't know how big the car park will be for universal but it's going to have to be gigantic.

I just think it's premature on the decision making.

Especially as my mayor told me another warehouse is being built next to the station blocking it in. Or at least making expansion afterwards much more difficult.

 

[flitwickbeds]

I agree that if Wixams goes ahead in its current form (two platforms only, limited hours only) it will not be sufficient for Universal, should that go ahead. The location also would require shuttle buses to get to the park entrance.

How about instead letting Wixams go ahead as planned and use Kempston Hardwick as a gateway to Universal? This also may help EWR plans.

- A new piece of track between Stewartby and Kempston Hardwick village connecting EWR to the MML.
- Expand a renamed Kempston Hardwick station onto the piece of land in the corner of the proposed park which looks like abandoned concrete right now, with through and terminating platforms
- One train an hour between London St Pancras and the new Universal Studios station, using one of the Bedford paths (so Bedford to Gatwick reduces from 4tph to 3tph) - calling at St Pancras, St Albans, Luton/Parkway, and Universal.
- Marston Vale keep Universal Studios as a stop on their new network as a through route

Also gives an extra diversion/freight route onto the MML southbound.

 

[richieb1971]

It absolutely needs Wixams because of train lengths. EWR is supporting 4 car trains only. Which means Universal cannot be on the Vale services it would require shuttle trains from Bedford exclusively for the purpose of universal traffic.

Your also pushing lots of the bandwidth onto Bedford Station which may cause havoc. In the briefings where universal have been mentioned it was said universal have approached the government themselves with particular rail requirements and one was train lengths.

I think both EWR and MML should share the load.

Forders sidings are already in prime location for charters to park and for any shuttle runs. Of course this area of track will require a loop. Forders sidings already has one long enough for passenger coming from the west. So one needs to go in the east with a bay platform.

At this stage the railway may make or break Universals plans. Because without the rail that area will be hard to get to as the current roads are busy as it is. The retail park down the road already has traffic jams at the traffic lights most of the day.

So it's a choice of making lots of road adjustments or rail adjustments or both. It may cost £80 a head to go there if your 2 hours late that's gonna hurt the park and your experience.

 

[flitwickbeds]

It absolutely needs Wixams because of train lengths. EWR is supporting 4 car trains only. Which means Universal cannot be on the Vale services it would require shuttle trains from Bedford exclusively for the purpose of universal traffic.

Your also pushing lots of the bandwidth onto Bedford Station which may cause havoc. In the briefings where universal have been mentioned it was said universal have approached the government themselves with particular rail requirements and one was train lengths.

I think both EWR and MML should share the load.

Forders sidings are already in prime location for charters to park and for any shuttle runs. Of course this area of track will require a loop. Forders sidings already has one long enough for passenger coming from the west. So one needs to go in the east with a bay platform.

At this stage the railway may make or break Universals plans. Because without the rail that area will be hard to get to as the current roads are busy as it is. The retail park down the road already has traffic jams at the traffic lights most of the day.

So it's a choice of making lots of road adjustments or rail adjustments or both. It may cost £80 a head to go there if your 2 hours late that's gonna hurt the park and your experience.

I am proposing that one (12 car) Thameslink train an hour goes to St Pancras, St Albans, Luton/Parkway, then Universal via a new connecting piece of track between Stewartby and Kempston Hardwick village - ie doesn't go to Bedford. Kempston Hardwick (renamed Universal Studios Park or whatever) would have two 4-car through platforms for EWR and one 12-car terminating platform for the new service.

If the new junction to the MML had both northbound and southbound curves then there could also be a Bedford <> Universal shuttle on the alternative half-hour if deemed necessary.

 

[richieb1971]

I don't mind that at all. Might even get the east north curve as well.

The nay sayers will be here waving cheque books today.

But I say EWR have put 4 roads in at Hs2 for limited use. This will be used every 30 minutes.

 

[mwmbwls]

https://www.bedford.gov.uk/media/7117/download?inline

I have just come across this review by SLC on behalf of Bedford Council. Has this been discussed before - (perhaps on another thread)?

 

[Edvid]

In addition to the usual oral hearings, a report for the upcoming Executive meeting on 19 June has been published.

When BBC became the project sponsor in October 2018 they budgeted £27.4 million (including S106 funds) for the station in their capital programme. The report authors (Cllr Graeme Coombes, Cllr James Weir & Jon Shortland) recommend the Executive make the following proposals at the next Full Council meeting:

* Enter into the Implementation Agreement (IA), with NR's Investment Panel planning to consider the same on 28 June.
* Approve a revised capital budget of £59m for the station.^ (The latest cost estimate from NR is £63.5m, for what that is worth)
* Reallocate £6.4m of CIL funds from Sharnbrook Primary and Bromham Road Cycle Bridge (increased borrowing will be required to fill the gap).

It is also confirmed the IA must be signed by 29 July to unlock agreed S106 funds (£13.4m from L&Q Estates, plus £5.3m from Miller Homes / O&H as part of Wixams lies in Central Bedfordshire). The draft IA makes provision for its termination should Universal & central government reach agreement on terms regarding the proposed theme park and associated infrastructure (including a four-platform station), but the authors reject foregoing or delaying a sign-off.

If the Full Council approves on 10 July then works start in September 2024 for a station opening in 2026.

Has anyone got a binding commitment from the TOC that they will stop any trains at the new station?

A letter of support from GTR was received last month.

[^ The extra £31.6m incurred between October 2018 and today is as follows - £8.5m for past inflation, £5.9m for expected future inflation, £3m for line possessions, £3.9m for NR design work (including the second footbridge), and £10.3m for contingency]

 

[stephen rp]

In addition to the usual oral hearings, a report for the upcoming Executive meeting on 19 June has been published.

When BBC became the project sponsor in October 2018 they budgeted £27.4 million (including S106 funds) for the station in their capital programme. Jon Shortland (Chief Officer for Planning, Infrastructure and Economic Growth) recommends the Executive make the following proposals at the next Full Council meeting:

* Enter into the Implementation Agreement (IA), with NR's Investment Panel planning to consider the same on 28 June.
* Approve a revised capital budget of £59m for the station.^ (The latest cost estimate from NR is £63.5m, for what that is worth)
* Reallocate £6.4m of CIL funds from Sharnbrook Primary and Bromham Road Cycle Bridge (increased borrowing will be required to fill the gap).

It is also confirmed the IA must be signed by 29 July to unlock agreed S106 funds (£13.4m from L&Q Estates, plus £5.3m from Miller Homes / O&H as part of Wixams lies in Central Bedfordshire). The draft IA makes provision for its termination should Universal & central government reach agreement on terms regarding the proposed theme park and associated infrastructure (including a four-platform station), but Shortland rejects foregoing or delaying a sign-off.

If the Full Council approves on 10 July then works start in September 2024 for a station opening in 2026.


A letter of support from GTR was received last month.

[^ The extra £31.6m incurred between October 2018 and today is as follows - £8.5m for past inflation, £5.9m for expected future inflation, £3m for line possessions, £3.9m for NR design work (including the second footbridge), and £10.3m for contingency]

I queried whether the TOC had agreed to stop trains at the new station. Northern Rail's franchise bid had 3tph at Warrington West, not honoured. So "a letter of support" falls short of an agreement.

 

[Edvid]

During this evening's Executive meeting a question was asked about BBC expenditure on the 2-platform station in the event of the theme park (and consequently, a 4-platform station funded by Universal / central government) going ahead. Shortland responded that the S106 / CIL money would be spent first.

 

[richieb1971]

I'm sure its been done before but I cannot fathom how. How do you make a 2 platform station in the MML line configuration into a 4 platform configuration later taking into consideration the first 2 platforms will be built with 4 in mind later on?

Will they spend the money on 4 platform configuration and just run the pot dry quicker?

 

[mr_jrt]

IIRC, you slew out the slow lines, build a central island platform between the fast and slow lines, then build a side platform for the slow. The fast lines stay exactly as they are. When you want 4 platforms, you build the missing fast side platform. Essentially, you build a three platform station.

Conceivably you could omit building the fast side third-ish of the island platform if you were desperate to shave some costs (just leave the required space to build it later, as appears to have happened at Dore), i.e (it's not the clearest, but note the gap to the other lines and the position of the lift shaft)

 

[BeijingDave]

Platform maintenance surely can't be so expensive that it makes sense to build a 2-platform with two extra platforms later. Why not just bung 4 in now?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

IIRC, you slew out the slow lines, build a central island platform between the fast and slow lines, then build a side platform for the slow. The fast lines stay exactly as they are. When you want 4 platforms, you build the missing fast side platform. Essentially, you build a three platform station.

Conceivably you could omit building the fast side third-ish of the island platform if you were desperate to shave some costs (just leave the required space to build it later, as appears to have happened at Dore), i.e (it's not the clearest, but note the gap to the other lines and the position of the lift shaft)
View attachment 160479

Looking at the image, I am reminded when the new station at Low Moor in West Yorkshire was being planned on a different location to that of the closed station, the matter of curved platforms seemed to cause much concern.

Can someone inform me as to the current ruling on new stations proposed with curved platforms.

 

[Bald Rick]

Platform maintenance surely can't be so expensive that it makes sense to build a 2-platform with two extra platforms later. Why not just bung 4 in now?

Who pays for the extra platfroms now?

 

[richieb1971]

Putting in 2 platforms does in fact make up for the bulk of the cost because the slow rails will need realigning considerably along with electrification. Will the island platform make it 3 platforms for the price of 2? It will be interesting how they will tackle this as the footbridge will in 2 halves as well.

With 2 platforms, Elstow quarry temporarily puts one of them out of commission. Looking at the diagrams most are northern paths. I'm assuming the Elstow working reverses onto the mains with the engine already facing the north?

 

[59CosG95]

Putting in 2 platforms does in fact make up for the bulk of the cost because the slow rails will need realigning considerably along with electrification. Will the island platform make it 3 platforms for the price of 2? It will be interesting how they will tackle this as the footbridge will in 2 halves as well.

With 2 platforms, Elstow quarry temporarily puts one of them out of commission. Looking at the diagrams most are northern paths. I'm assuming the Elstow working reverses onto the mains with the engine already facing the north?

The planning documentation seems to show both platforms sandwiching the Up Slow. The Down Slow platform is shown as having a fence on the Up Slow. Presumably this is to minimise the amount of slewing work.

 

[mr_jrt]

Hmm. Would not have expected that. That's going to make fast line platforms very difficult to provide for seemingly very little benefit. I guess maybe the thinking is that all slow lines services will have served Bedford, so the speed reduction of the slew will be minimal for non-stopping services, but non-stopping services heading north would likely be at line speed, so you ideally want them on the optimal curvature. For stopping services curvature makes little difference.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

For stopping services curvature makes little difference.

That point was not borne out when the new station at Low Moor, which handles stopping services, was in its early project discussion stages.

 

[HSTEd]

Hmm. Would not have expected that. That's going to make fast line platforms very difficult to provide for seemingly very little benefit. I guess maybe the thinking is that all slow lines services will have served Bedford, so the speed reduction of the slew will be minimal for non-stopping services, but non-stopping services heading north would likely be at line speed, so you ideally want them on the optimal curvature. For stopping services curvature makes little difference.

Are they realistically going to need fast line platforms any time soon?

How likely is it that fast trains are going to be stopping at Wixams, even if it has some major tourist attraction near it?

 

[Magdalia]

There is an update on the BBC News website here:

Universal resort could mean bigger Wixams railway station

Plans have been in place for more than 20 years to build a railway station in the new town of Wixams.

www.bbc.co.uk

A yet-to-be-built railway station could be expanded if Universal builds a theme park close by, a council says.

An outline planning application was originally approved more than 20 years ago to build the station at Wixams, a new town, close to Bedford.

Bedford Borough Council said the original costs of about £27m had increased by an additional £30m, and it could open in 2026.

Having watched the Cambridge South project, opening in 2026 sounds unlikely.

 

[mr_jrt]

Are they realistically going to need fast line platforms any time soon?

How likely is it that fast trains are going to be stopping at Wixams, even if it has some major tourist attraction near it?

It has been pointed out elsewhere, during maintenance periods when the MML is a two track railway, you would lose rail access if you don't have platforms on all lines. For a major theme park, I would imagine people travelling on evenings and weekends would be a higher number than most conventional stations. Might be less of an issue given the Marston Vale rail access, though.

 

[Energy]

Are they realistically going to need fast line platforms any time soon?

How likely is it that fast trains are going to be stopping at Wixams, even if it has some major tourist attraction near it?

EMR intended to stop their Corby services there if Universal's Park was built.

Hmm. Would not have expected that. That's going to make fast line platforms very difficult to provide for seemingly very little benefit. I guess maybe the thinking is that all slow lines services will have served Bedford, so the speed reduction of the slew will be minimal for non-stopping services, but non-stopping services heading north would likely be at line speed, so you ideally want them on the optimal curvature. For stopping services curvature makes little difference.

Seems more likely that its to reduce the track slewing work.

Universal are making their decision on the park soon (June 30th IIRC). I'd hope that if they decide to go ahead, the station design would be changed so both tracks are moved and its a centre island.

It's not impossible later on, you'd probably slew the outer fast track and serve both tracks with an island. Though it would be a very odd station layout.

 

[DarloRich]

Who pays for the extra platfroms now?

and who fills in the S106 gap if the funding is timed out?

 

[richieb1971]

Universal resort could mean bigger Wixams railway station

Plans have been in place for more than 20 years to build a railway station in the new town of Wixams.

www.bbc.co.uk

If Universal builds the attraction on a 480-acre plot of land south of Bedford, "we will require a much bigger station to be constructed – happily at central government expense," Conservative councillor Graeme Coombes said.