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

[Magdalia]

The consultation feedback analysis will normally be dealt with thematically (e.g. ‘trees’, ‘flooding’ and so on) and not by question or group of questions.

Thanks, I see what you mean now!

 

[jfowkes]

The consultation feedback analysis will normally be dealt with thematically (e.g. ‘trees’, ‘flooding’ and so on) and not by question or group of questions.

Would there not be any sorting by geography then?
Considering that the primary points of contention would seem to be Bicester level crossing, demolition in the Poets area of Bedford and (trying to be diplomatic) "protecting rural Cambridgeshire", it would seem natural that a lot of responses would fit into those categories.

 

[BrianW]

Would there not be any sorting by geography then?
Considering that the primary points of contention would seem to be Bicester level crossing, demolition in the Poets area of Bedford and (trying to be diplomatic) "protecting rural Cambridgeshire", it would seem natural that a lot of responses would fit into those categories.

I imagine many submissions will attempt to 'cover all bases' that might support their opposition.

 

[Cantab26]

Would there not be any sorting by geography then?
Considering that the primary points of contention would seem to be Bicester level crossing, demolition in the Poets area of Bedford and (trying to be diplomatic) "protecting rural Cambridgeshire", it would seem natural that a lot of responses would fit into those categories.

To some extent, yes, but almost all of the feedback will be high level and generic regardless of which geographical area it might putatively relate to.

For example, a comment about being concerned about the impact of the nasty, nasty railway on the lovely, lovely countryside in [insert location] is fundamentally the same across the whole route and treated in the same way across the whole route. It adds nothing substantive and there is nothing specific about that kind of feedback which actually differentiates between one locality and another.

The same applies to objections to level crossing closures - whether in Bicester or elsewhere - and any other topic you can think of really.

It’s rather trying to have to drudge through all the dross, but every now and again you find a little nugget which can prove decisive. That is actually how the preferred route alignment between Bedford and Cambourne was identified and selected: one very brief comment mentioned in only a small handful of responses (about three or four if I recall correctly) carried far more weight in the decision than the thousands of generic NIMBY whinges.

 

[Magdalia]

To some extent, yes, but almost all of the feedback will be high level and generic regardless of which geographical area it might putatively relate to.

Thanks again. I find it very illuminating to be able to have a discussion about the mechanics of the consultation.

The same applies to objections to level crossing closures - whether in Bicester or elsewhere - and any other topic you can think of really.

Bicester level crossing is a good example. From EWR's perspective it is primarily a level crossing issue, whereas from consultation respondents' perspective it is primarily a Bicester issue. The consultation form needs to be set out in a way that works for the respondents, and that means some sort of data transformation to get the responses to fit with the EWR perspective.

every now and again you find a little nugget which can prove decisive. That is actually how the preferred route alignment between Bedford and Cambourne was identified and selected: one very brief comment mentioned in only a small handful of responses

I was very reassured to read this bit. I see the consultations as an iterative process to get to a better design and a less damaging construction. The consultation process for Cambridge South station was a good example of that. I already try to concentrate my consultation responses on issues where I think there are other options that at least might merit some investigation, having studied the technical report which is a very good guide to what has already been considered.

Hopefully there will be more little nuggets in this round of consultation.

 

[edwin_m]

issues where I think there are other options that at least might merit some investigation

Or perhaps where one option has been preferred over another one, but the reasoning for that decision hasn't properly taken everything into account.

 

[absolutelymilk]

Is there a separate thread for construction/upgrades of Bletchley to Bedford? If not, has work started already on this section?

Or will it be upgraded together with the line to Cambridge, i.e. will Bletchley to Cambridge be one big package?

 

[zwk500]

Is there a separate thread for construction/upgrades of Bletchley to Bedford?

I don't think there is, probably because there's no real updates at the moment.

If not, has work started already on this section?

Not to my knowledge, I don't think they've even decided which option to go with yet.

Or will it be upgraded together with the line to Cambridge, i.e. will Bletchley to Cambridge be one big package?

I expect Bletchley to Bedford will start sooner than Bedford to Cambridge, largely due to how difficult it will be to get everything approved for the Bedford-Cambridge section.

 

[td97]

MVL is CS2, then whole route to Cambridge is CS3.

East West Rail | Project overview

East West Rail is a major infrastructure project which will connect communities between Oxford and Cambridge. Delivery is now underway.

eastwestrail.co.uk

• Connection Stage 1
  
  East West Rail services will run from Oxford to Bletchley/Milton Keynes.
• Connection Stage 2
  
  Building on the work completed in Connection Stage 1, East West Rail services will then extend from Oxford to Bedford.
• Connection Stage 3
  
  This stage completes the full East West Rail connection, and will see services run from Oxford to Cambridge via Bedford and Bletchley.

 

[12LDA28C]

Is there a separate thread for construction/upgrades of Bletchley to Bedford? If not, has work started already on this section?

Or will it be upgraded together with the line to Cambridge, i.e. will Bletchley to Cambridge be one big package?

Bletchley to Bedford is currently scheduled to be completed by 2030 before Bedford - Cambridge gets started.

 

[DavidGrain]

This is the official East West Rail website which should be kept up to date as this project moves forward.

East West Rail | Your area - Marston Vale

East West Rail would help connect people in and around the Marston Vale area with jobs, education and days out.

eastwestrail.co.uk

My understanding is that we are still in the consultation stage about possible station closures/amalgamations.
On the Forum the only thread I can find for construction is this one.

 

[swt_passenger]

This is the official East West Rail website which should be kept up to date as this project moves forward.

East West Rail | Your area - Marston Vale

East West Rail would help connect people in and around the Marston Vale area with jobs, education and days out.

eastwestrail.co.uk

My understanding is that we are still in the consultation stage about possible station closures/amalgamations.
On the Forum the only thread I can find for construction is this one.

This is the construction thread, it is currently closed since January pending construction restarting:

East-West Rail (EWR): Oxford-Bletchley construction progress

I think they're very good at knowing what rules they can get away with breaking, and seem to know where all the speed cameras are. I'd hope that they would know they can't get away with jumping the lights at a level crossing, particularly if they put up a camera there to catch people doing it...

www.railforums.co.uk

The problem with the Bletchley to Bedford section is that a number of changes WERE authorised by the extant TWA Order for the route, but they were never started because the later decision to head for Cambridge meant they would have to be changed. To the best of my knowledge the EWR website has never really published any detailed statement about the Marston Vale section.

 

[mwmbwls]

At what stage in the process will the rebuilding of Bedford Station take place. Will the new platform on the fast lines be built before EWR?

 

[swt_passenger]

At what stage in the process will the rebuilding of Bedford Station take place. Will the new platform on the fast lines be built before EWR?

From other threads about Bedford I don’t think they have decided anything about fast line platforms at all. @Magdalia posted, (in the thread linked below), that the published EWR technical report only describes the two new dedicated EWR platforms, so I think your question is premature.

What could a complete rebuild of Bedford look like?

Wonder what a Reading style rebuild for Bedford might look, to allow pretty much everything to call. Probably two fast line platforms each direction and then 2 each for Thameslink and EWR? Is there any realistic possibility of there being space for that? I guess the car park could be sacrificed...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[neill]

The report on the 2024 non-statuatory consultation was published on Friday: https://eastwestrail.co.uk/news/lat...2024-non-statutory-consultation-update-report

 

[BrianW]

The report on the 2024 non-statuatory consultation was published on Friday: https://eastwestrail.co.uk/news/lat...2024-non-statutory-consultation-update-report

It says little, if anything, not already known, now accompanied by photos!
A typical 'product' of the PR industry.
Move on, nothing to see here.

 

[Magdalia]

The report on the 2024 non-statuatory consultation was published on Friday: https://eastwestrail.co.uk/news/lat...2024-non-statutory-consultation-update-report

Thanks for this link. I have not seen anything in local media yet.

One interesting feature is table 3 of the appendix, which shows the attendance figures for the consultation events.

The 3 highest attendances were Comberton 539, Great Shelford 537 and Cambourne 469.

At the other extreme Steeple Claydon 114, Tempsford 147 and Cherry Hinton 189 were the lowest.

 

[WesternBiker]

Thanks for this link. I have not seen anything in local media yet.

One interesting feature is table 3 of the appendix, which shows the attendance figures for the consultation events.

The 3 highest attendances were Comberton 539, Great Shelford 537 and Cambourne 469.

At the other extreme Steeple Claydon 114, Tempsford 147 and Cherry Hinton 189 were the lowest.

Not surprised by the figure for Comberton and Great Shelford, as that'll presumably have included those from Harston, Hauxton and Haslingfield, some of whom are very vocally opposed to the EWR routing (there are some very prominent "No East - West Rail here" signs sprouting up). The Residents' association for the village links to the petition (asking for plans to be paused until an "independent review" is undertaken - link here) with just under 5,500 signatures. (NB Not saying I'm agreeing with their point of view!).

 

[neill]

Not surprised by the figure for Comberton and Great Shelford, as that'll presumably have included those from Harston, Hauxton and Haslingfield, some of whom are very vocally opposed to the EWR routing (there are some very prominent "No East - West Rail here" signs sprouting up). The Residents' association for the village links to the petition (asking for plans to be paused until an "independent review" is undertaken - link here) with just under 5,500 signatures. (NB Not saying I'm agreeing with their point of view!).

I expect the scheduling also comes into it - I originally planned to go to the one in Shelford as it was local and early but couldn’t make it so ended up going to the one in Cherry Hinton.

 

[jfowkes]

Not surprised by the figure for Comberton and Great Shelford, as that'll presumably have included those from Harston, Hauxton and Haslingfield, some of whom are very vocally opposed to the EWR routing (there are some very prominent "No East - West Rail here" signs sprouting up). The Residents' association for the village links to the petition (asking for plans to be paused until an "independent review" is undertaken - link here) with just under 5,500 signatures. (NB Not saying I'm agreeing with their point of view!).

I went to the Comberton one in the evening. The EWR people said I was one of the few positive voices they'd heard all day.

 

[neill]

I went to the Comberton one in the evening. The EWR people said I was one of the few positive voices they'd heard all day.

lots of people in Cherry Hinton wanting the turn back to be made into a local station.

 

[td97]

deleted

 

[InTheEastMids]

A new article in New Civil Engineer "East West Rail says 1.5km tunnel under A428 is ‘right solution’ despite site constraints"
(Link below, first article free then £)

East West Rail says 1.5km tunnel under A428 is ‘right solution’ despite site constraints | New Civil Engineer

NCE sister title Ground Engineering reported that the 1.5km long cut-and-cover tunnel would pass beneath the A428 and the proposed Bourn Airfield

www.newcivilengineer.com

The basic point made by EWR's Integration Director is that there isn't really an obvious route from Cambourne to Cambridge to route the line without doing something like this. Plus construction will be disruptive, requiring a temporary diversion of the A428 and other local roads during construction.

 

[Brubulus]

A new article in New Civil Engineer "East West Rail says 1.5km tunnel under A428 is ‘right solution’ despite site constraints"
(Link below, first article free then £)

East West Rail says 1.5km tunnel under A428 is ‘right solution’ despite site constraints | New Civil Engineer

NCE sister title Ground Engineering reported that the 1.5km long cut-and-cover tunnel would pass beneath the A428 and the proposed Bourn Airfield

www.newcivilengineer.com

The basic point made by EWR's Integration Director is that there isn't really an obvious route from Cambourne to Cambridge to route the line without doing something like this. Plus construction will be disruptive, requiring a temporary diversion of the A428 and other local roads during construction.

All good so long as they don't spend hundreds of millions on it and are pragmatic instead of caving to Nimbys, and viaducts are usually much cheaper. More concerning is the proposed Chapel Hill tunnel, which has no physical reason to exist and is only proposed due to bats and NIMBYs.

 

[Magdalia]

More concerning is the proposed Chapel Hill tunnel, which has no physical reason to exist and is only proposed due to bats and NIMBYs

Chapel Hill tunnel has a big reason to exist, and the clue is in the name. Chapel Hill is, for Cambridgeshire, a big hill. The triangulation point near the Barrington-Haslingfield road is 61m above sea level, and about 45m above the River Rhee valley below.

Railways often use tunnelling to get through hills and that's what Chapel Hill tunnel is, a tunnel to get through a hill. The tunnel is a far more sensible engineering solution than the previous proposal, which involved a deep cutting through Chapel Hill and a high embankment and viaduct over the River Rhee. A tunnel at Chapel Hill allows for a much lower, and therefore cheaper, embankment and viaduct in the River Rhee valley.

Having the railway at lower elevation will also mean gradients on the railway will not be as steep. This is particularly important for freight, especially with the proposed freight loops at nearby Hauxton Junction.

A good local comparison is the A505 Baldock bypass, which is very similar terrain and geology, and also has a tunnel.

The claim that Chapel Hill tunnel is only for bats and NIMBYs is media nonsense.

 

[sharpener]

A good local comparison is the A505 Baldock bypass, which is very similar terrain and geology, and also has a tunnel.

Don't disagree but the curious feature of the A505 tunnel is that it is not at the summit level, that is in a cutting!

 

[AM9]

Don't disagree but the curious feature of the A505 tunnel is that it is not at the summit level, that is in a cutting!

The line of the A505 bypass peaks at about 145m altitude, some 200m NE of where it crosses Hatch Lane. Lowering the road into a cutting mans that the road surface is about 140m altitude. At the junction where the bypass rejoins the eastbound A505 the altitude is about 75m, so to avoid an unnecessarily sharp gradient, the tunnel was aligned to provide as gentle a gradient from the top of the hill. The tunnel was actually constructed by 'cut and cover' methods with a gentle profile road level excavated, the tunnel structure built and the terrain backfilled to approximate the hill's natural profile. This meant that the tunnel is actually on a falling gradient from SW to NE, with moderate cutting depth along the whole length.

 

[sharpener]

The tunnel was actually constructed by 'cut and cover' methods with a gentle profile road level excavated, the tunnel structure built and the terrain backfilled to approximate the hill's natural profile. This meant that the tunnel is actually on a falling gradient from SW to NE, with moderate cutting depth along the whole length.

I have often wondered about the cost of the plant room, lighting, overhead lane signs and other paraphernalia required for such a short tunnel.

On the only occasion I have encountered a lane closure there was no advance warning and the maintenance truck blocking lane 1 was not very visible. The overhead signs had not been used i.e. the arrows were all green, so it would have been better and safer if they had never been fitted.

 

[td97]

This newspaper article suggests Universal Destinations & Experiences (UDX) discontent directed towards EWR not accounting for Universal in their recent non statutory consultation.

As far as timings are concerned, the NSC commenced in autumn 2024 whilst UDX wasn't approved until April 2025! Go figure!

Universal and East West Rail clash over perceived "significant technical flaws" - Bedford Independent

Universal Destinations & Experiences (UDX) said it raised objections to the latest East West Rail (EWR Co) proposals, warning...

www.bedfordindependent.co.uk

Universal Destinations & Experiences (UDX) said it raised objections to the latest East West Rail (EWR Co) proposals, warning there are a “number of significant technical flaws” with the submission material which must be addressed.

In planning documents submitted with its application, UDX said EWR Co.’s non-statutory consultation fails to account for the theme park masterplan, despite the proposals being publicly available since April....

 

[richieb1971]

EWR would have carried on without taking the park into consideration?

Are EWR totally unaware of the parks existence? You cannot tell me that procedure/protocol of a build of something states to ignore another plan unless they call it out first?