Waterbeach (Cambs) station relocation.

[bramling]

How impracticable would it be to keep both?

I appreciate that having every train stop at both would mess up timings. But presumably you could fix that by having services “take turns” or some trains could stop at both and some neither

Is there any actual cost beyond the upkeep of a 2 platform unmanned station?

Guess the difficulty is there’s already two additional calls on the Ely/Kings Lynn trains, so it’s a trade-off between an extra 2 minutes or so for everyone else, versus more convenient for those people for whom the relocated station is less convenient than the current site.

It’s rough for those users, however I can’t see a case stacking up for keeping both, unless usage between the two would be genuinely split.

Seems like a case of locals being screwed over in favour of the relentless building of new housing, sadly.

 

[Magdalia]

How impracticable would it be to keep both?

There would probably be a need to rewrite the timetable because of the knock-on impact through Ely and on the single line sections north of Ely.

Is there any actual cost beyond the upkeep of a 2 platform unmanned station?

Equipment for the level crossings will be simplified if the existing station is closed, in particular it will be possible to dispense with the need to differentiate between stopping and non-stopping trains.

Network Rail will also be keen to bank a reduction in level crossing risk if the existing station is closed.

Seems like a case of locals being screwed over in favour of the relentless building of new housing, sadly.

Only some locals will be screwed, others will benefit. Guess who makes the most noise?

The existing station is not well located, being on the extreme south east edge of the village. The new station will be on the north east edge. People in the southern end of the village will be further away, but people in the northern end will be nearer. People in the middle won't be affected, apart from having to remember to turn the other way when they leave the house.

 

[bspahh]

There would probably be a need to rewrite the timetable because of the knock-on impact through Ely and on the single line sections north of Ely.


Equipment for the level crossings will be simplified if the existing station is closed, in particular it will be possible to dispense with the need to differentiate between stopping and non-stopping trains.

Network Rail will also be keen to bank a reduction in level crossing risk if the existing station is closed.


Only some locals will be screwed, others will benefit. Guess who makes the most noise?

The existing station is not well located, being on the extreme south east edge of the village. The new station will be on the north east edge. People in the southern end of the village will be further away, but people in the northern end will be nearer. People in the middle won't be affected, apart from having to remember to turn the other way when they leave the house.

The new station is to the North of Waterbeach at the moment, but I'd say its closer to the centre of the new settlement.
The new station will have better bus connections, a bigger car park and I assume better cycle paths and footpaths.

Keeping both stations increases the running costs, and is worse for passengers when the services are disrupted.

 

[andy33gmail]

so it’s a trade-off between an extra 2 minutes or so for everyone else, versus more convenient for those people for whom the relocated station is less convenient than the current site.

Not withstanding all the other quite valid points…

Why would it cost an extra 2 mins, if (on average) each train only stopped at one?

 

[35B]

Not withstanding all the other quite valid points…

Why would it cost an extra 2 mins, if (on average) each train only stopped at one?

It wouldn't. But you'd then be imposing the railway with the costs of two stations. Looking at that map, I'd have said that the change of site is a swap of one mediocre site for another without building, and significantly more suitable with the development.

 

[weeklycommuter]

AIUI the Department for Transport has to hold an enquiry or consultation in order for the existing Waterbeach Station to be closed but as this station will only close when and because a new station with much better facilities will open at the same time just over 2km away I am not sure on what possible grounds they would decide to keep the existing station open.

Even if for whatever reason a decision is taken to keep the existing station open when the new station is opened there is no guarantee that the existing station would have a usable train service. I cannot see the passenger train operators, which by the time the new station opens will all be part of Great British Railways, being interested in continuing to provide any sort of service to the existing station, they will want all their trains to call at the new station. I therefore expect the existing station would end up with a parliamentary service like Shippea Hill.

 

[William3000]

The existing Waterbeach station is the second busiest in South Cambs and busier than places like March and Thetford. The distance between the existing and new stations is greater than that between Foxton and Shepreth to the south of Cambridge. I think it’s reasonable to assume at least half would continue using the existing station were the other to open.

A solution could be a turn back at Waterbeach new town - which shouldn’t cost much more than enabling some Cambridge terminators to continue northwards - the slow Cambridge to London King’s Crosd currently wait in platforms 2 or 3 for nearly half an hour so continue the slow trains to Waterbeach giving it a half hourly service and stopping longer distance and fast trains at the new Waterbeach station could be a solution. It does seem short sighted to be closing a well used station in one of the fastest growing areas in the country

 

[Magdalia]

The existing Waterbeach station is the second busiest in South Cambs

In South Cambridgeshire Waterbeach was third in 2023/24, behind Cambridge North and Whittlesford Parkway.

I think it’s reasonable to assume at least half would continue using the existing station were the other to open.

I don't agree with that assumption, it would be less than half, mainly because the new station will have better road access, including buses. If the existing station retained 50% of existing traffic then usage would fall to below Meldreth, Shelford, and the new station. If usage fell to 40% it would also be lower than Ashwell and Morden.

It does seem short sighted to be closing a well used station in one of the fastest growing areas in the country

But the area around the existing station isn't going to be growing very much, most of the undeveloped land near the existing station is flood plain.

A solution could be a turn back at Waterbeach new town - which shouldn’t cost much more

Changing track and signalling is a lot more expensive than just building a new station. Beaulieu Park, for example, cost £175m.

The distance between the existing and new stations is greater than that between Foxton and Shepreth to the south of Cambridge.

I think there is a case for development at Foxton and Shepreth including replacing the existing stations with a new station somewhere in between, and away from the level crossings. Foxton and Shepreth should be like what is being proposed for Waterbeach, not the other way around.

 

[weeklycommuter]

The existing Waterbeach station is the second busiest in South Cambs and busier than places like March and Thetford. The distance between the existing and new stations is greater than that between Foxton and Shepreth to the south of Cambridge. I think it’s reasonable to assume at least half would continue using the existing station were the other to open.

A solution could be a turn back at Waterbeach new town - which shouldn’t cost much more than enabling some Cambridge terminators to continue northwards - the slow Cambridge to London King’s Crosd currently wait in platforms 2 or 3 for nearly half an hour so continue the slow trains to Waterbeach giving it a half hourly service and stopping longer distance and fast trains at the new Waterbeach station could be a solution. It does seem short sighted to be closing a well used station in one of the fastest growing areas in the country

The real question is how many users of the existing Waterbeach Station would stop travelling by train instead of switching to the new station if and when the existing station closes. Relocating the station just over 2km to the North would not be as convenient for passengers who live very close to the existing station but they can still get to the new station. I have a 2km walk to my own local station.

The issue would be persuading the train operators to continue to provide a usable train service at the existing Waterbeach Station.

Clearly some people want the existing station to remain open after the new station opens but it would not be enough to get a decision to keep the existing station open. They would also have to persuade the train operators to continue to provide a usable train service at the existing station and to create a workable timetable for a usable train service at the existing station when, in addition to the new Waterbeach Station, the timetable will have also have to support stops at Cambridge North, Cambridge and Cambridge South.

The other issue is what would rail passengers based at stations on the Fen Line Ely to Kings Lynn think of keeping the existing Waterbeach station open. It would be of no benefit to them and could slow down their train services. Would they be happy to accept keeping the existing Waterbeach Station open? This is always the problem of adding another station on a route, it benefits the users of that station but unless the number of users is high it is hard to justify slowing down the train service for everyone else.

 

[William3000]

In South Cambridgeshire Waterbeach was third in 2023/24, behind Cambridge North and Whittlesford Parkway.


I don't agree with that assumption, it would be less than half, mainly because the new station will have better road access, including buses. If the existing station retained 50% of existing traffic then usage would fall to below Meldreth, Shelford, and the new station. If usage fell to 40% it would also be lower than Ashwell and Morden.


But the area around the existing station isn't going to be growing very much, most of the undeveloped land near the existing station is flood plain.


Changing track and signalling is a lot more expensive than just building a new station. Beaulieu Park, for example, cost £175m.


I think there is a case for development at Foxton and Shepreth including replacing the existing stations with a new station somewhere in between, and away from the level crossings. Foxton and Shepreth should be like what is being proposed for Waterbeach, not the other way around.

I know Cambridge North is technically in South Cambs but I was essentially considering a city station

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2025 ==

In South Cambridgeshire Waterbeach was third in 2023/24, behind Cambridge North and Whittlesford Parkway.


I don't agree with that assumption, it would be less than half, mainly because the new station will have better road access, including buses. If the existing station retained 50% of existing traffic then usage would fall to below Meldreth, Shelford, and the new station. If usage fell to 40% it would also be lower than Ashwell and Morden.


But the area around the existing station isn't going to be growing very much, most of the undeveloped land near the existing station is flood plain.


Changing track and signalling is a lot more expensive than just building a new station. Beaulieu Park, for example, cost £175m.


I think there is a case for development at Foxton and Shepreth including replacing the existing stations with a new station somewhere in between, and away from the level crossings. Foxton and Shepreth should be like what is being proposed for Waterbeach, not the other way around.

Foxton being right on the crossing is one of the bonuses.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2025 ==

The real question is how many users of the existing Waterbeach Station would stop travelling by train instead of switching to the new station if and when the existing station closes. Relocating the station just over 2km to the North would not be as convenient for passengers who live very close to the existing station but they can still get to the new station. I have a 2km walk to my own local station.

The issue would be persuading the train operators to continue to provide a usable train service at the existing Waterbeach Station.

Clearly some people want the existing station to remain open after the new station opens but it would not be enough to get a decision to keep the existing station open. They would also have to persuade the train operators to continue to provide a usable train service at the existing station and to create a workable timetable for a usable train service at the existing station when, in addition to the new Waterbeach Station, the timetable will have also have to support stops at Cambridge North, Cambridge and Cambridge South.

The other issue is what would rail passengers based at stations on the Fen Line Ely to Kings Lynn think of keeping the existing Waterbeach station open. It would be of no benefit to them and could slow down their train services. Would they be happy to accept keeping the existing Waterbeach Station open? This is always the problem of adding another station on a route, it benefits the users of that station but unless the number of users is high it is hard to justify slowing down the train service for everyone else.

At the very least I would suggest giving it a Parliamentary service and avoiding closure. If Shippea Hill and Lakenheath can stay open there is far more justification for Waterbeach to do so

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2025 ==

The real question is how many users of the existing Waterbeach Station would stop travelling by train instead of switching to the new station if and when the existing station closes. Relocating the station just over 2km to the North would not be as convenient for passengers who live very close to the existing station but they can still get to the new station. I have a 2km walk to my own local station.

The issue would be persuading the train operators to continue to provide a usable train service at the existing Waterbeach Station.

Clearly some people want the existing station to remain open after the new station opens but it would not be enough to get a decision to keep the existing station open. They would also have to persuade the train operators to continue to provide a usable train service at the existing station and to create a workable timetable for a usable train service at the existing station when, in addition to the new Waterbeach Station, the timetable will have also have to support stops at Cambridge North, Cambridge and Cambridge South.

The other issue is what would rail passengers based at stations on the Fen Line Ely to Kings Lynn think of keeping the existing Waterbeach station open. It would be of no benefit to them and could slow down their train services. Would they be happy to accept keeping the existing Waterbeach Station open? This is always the problem of adding another station on a route, it benefits the users of that station but unless the number of users is high it is hard to justify slowing down the train service for everyone else.

No I don’t think Waterbeach should slow down existing through trains but should be part of a metro type service with trains terminating at Waterbeach New Town for onwards connections north.

 

[35B]

At the very least I would suggest giving it a Parliamentary service and avoiding closure. If Shippea Hill and Lakenheath can stay open there is far more justification for Waterbeach to do so

A “Parliamentary service” is a sign of failure, and should be avoided at all costs. Stations left in that state have too few services to be of any use to anyone, but retain the costs and hassles because operators can’t be bothered to go through the legal processes. If that’s the choice, let it die, rather than leaving it in a coma, unloved and unwanted.

 

[Magdalia]

I know Cambridge North is technically in South Cambs but I was essentially considering a city station

Cambridge North isn't just a city station. It the main railhead for some of the biggest South Cambridgeshire villages, including Milton, Impington and Histon. It is also the main station for Northstowe.

Foxton being right on the crossing is one of the bonuses.

I don't agree. Foxton is very busy for both road and rail traffic and it would be better for both if the station was moved.

 

[William3000]

Cambridge North isn't just a city station. It the main railhead for some of the biggest South Cambridgeshire villages, including Milton, Impington and Histon. It is also the main station for Northstowe.


I don't agree. Foxton is very busy for both road and rail traffic and it would be better for both if the station was moved.

I strongly disagree - it’s in the perfect location but needs to have a parkway/travel hub.

 

[Magdalia]

I strongly disagree - it’s in the perfect location but needs to have a parkway/travel hub.

A parkway and travel hub is of course what is happening at the new Waterbeach station, though they are called car park and transport interchange on the map.

At the existing Foxton station, road access to/from a car park and transport interchange would be a nightmare. The existing road junctions into Foxton village and towards Barrington are bad enough, without adding more new junctions close to the level crossing. But something similar to the new Waterbeach, between the existing Foxton and Shepreth stations, would work well, with a road off the A10 a decent distance away from the level crossing.

 

[Brubulus]

I strongly disagree - it’s in the perfect location but needs to have a parkway/travel hub.

You don't have to wait at that crossing multiple times a week, waiting for a train to do it's stop.
There is nothing really stopping a Foxton-Shepreth Barrington station which can operate as a proper parkway for the local area. It would also allow regularisation of stopping patterns so the semifasts don't have to stop at Ashwell+Morden.

Regarding Waterbeach, I think the new station is too far from the existing station, but it's not worth it to keep the old one open. If there was infinite money and track capacity there might be a reason to keep it open, but there isn't and any funds would be better spent on improvements at Ely.

 

[lachlan]

The two sites are not far from each other as the crow flies but the walking route is significantly further, from Station Road and Lode Avenue.

This could be resolved by knocking down a fence which separates Lode Avenue from Burgess Road and constructing a path from Burgess Road to Bannold road parallel to the railway.

Perhaps improvements to the local path network are already planned as part of the relocation? One can hope.

 

[Class 170101]

If people were really keen I guess one stopping at the current and the other would work if the running times between Cambridge North and Ely Dock were the same but there would be few trains serving both stations and each station would only get 1tph off peak. In addition how would one decide which station to serve when there is only an hourly service on this route (eg on Sundays).

 

[William3000]

A parkway and travel hub is of course what is happening at the new Waterbeach station, though they are called car park and transport interchange on the map.

At the existing Foxton station, road access to/from a car park and transport interchange would be a nightmare. The existing road junctions into Foxton village and towards Barrington are bad enough, without adding more new junctions close to the level crossing. But something similar to the new Waterbeach, between the existing Foxton and Shepreth stations, would work well, with a road off the A10 a decent distance away from the level crossing.

I disagree

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2025 ==

You don't have to wait at that crossing multiple times a week, waiting for a train to do it's stop.
There is nothing really stopping a Foxton-Shepreth Barrington station which can operate as a proper parkway for the local area. It would also allow regularisation of stopping patterns so the semifasts don't have to stop at Ashwell+Morden.

Regarding Waterbeach, I think the new station is too far from the existing station, but it's not worth it to keep the old one open. If there was infinite money and track capacity there might be a reason to keep it open, but there isn't and any funds would be better spent on improvements at Ely.

How do you mean? I’m literally a season ticket holder and travel from Foxton every day! I travel through the crossing several times a week.

 

[MikeWM]

I can't think of any modern equivalent to relocating a well-used station well over a mile away from where it currently is. The only recent example I can think of it Sankey-for-Penketh being 'replaced' by Warrington West, but in that case Sankey wasn't well-used (and indeed hasn't closed, though only now has peak-time services).

The current location is certainly off to one side of the village, but is *considerably* closer to the current centre (assuming you define that as the village green, the village sign, 2 of the 3 pubs, etc.) than the relocated station will be. It really does feel like the existing residents of Waterbeach are being sent a message that they are less important than the newcomers.

I say all that as someone who would be facing slower journeys if both stations were kept, so from a selfish perspective I have no issue with this change (!), but objectively it really doesn't seem at all fair on the current users of the station.

 

[Magdalia]

I can't think of any modern equivalent to relocating a well-used station well over a mile away from where it currently is.

Stevenage was relocated by 1 mile and Tiverton Parkway is well over a mile from the old station at Tiverton Junction.

The current location is certainly off to one side of the village, but is *considerably* closer to the current centre (assuming you define that as the village green, the village sign, 2 of the 3 pubs, etc.) than the relocated station will be.

For most people they are going to and from their homes, not the village green or the pubs, none of which are in the middle of the village geographically. Nearly all of the recent growth is on the north side of the village and the centre of gravity has shifted.

 

[MikeWM]

Stevenage was relocated by 1 mile and Tiverton Parkway is well over a mile from the old station at Tiverton Junction.

I'm not convinced Stevenage counts as 'modern', the move was before I was born and I'm not exactly a spring chicken anymore

As for Tiverton Junction, I can't imagine it was 'well-used' at the time of closure. I'm not terribly familiar with it, but Wikipedia says it had only two trains a day each way by the 1980s. Even then, that was 40 years ago and so I'm not convinced that is 'modern' either.

For most people they are going to and from their homes, not the village green or the pubs, none of which are in the middle of the village geographically. Nearly all of the recent growth is on the north side of the village and the centre of gravity has shifted.

But it is remarkably unfair for those who have lived in Waterbeach for a long time, and quite possibly deliberately chose to purchase a house near to the railway station, as railway stations aren't expected to move like this - or at least haven't for the last 50+ years. It's probably irritating enough that the character of their village is about to irrevocably change, without making those who have lived there a long time be so hugely inconvenienced on a daily level.

As I said above, as they are no doubt determined to open the new location, it is actually preferable *to me* that they also close the old, but that doesn't stop me thinking it is a very unreasonable thing to do.

 

[W-on-Sea]

I suppose the replacement of Eltham Park and Eltham Well Hall by a new Eltham station between the two (but much nearer the site of the latter) might be a broadly similar precedent, albeit in a very different social environment. Part of the justification of the move was the associated transport interchange at the new station too.

 

[Magdalia]

But it is remarkably unfair for those who have lived in Waterbeach for a long time, and quite possibly deliberately chose to purchase a house near to the railway station, as railway stations aren't expected to move like this - or at least haven't for the last 50+ years. It's probably irritating enough that the character of their village is about to irrevocably change, without making those who have lived there a long time be so hugely inconvenienced on a daily level.

There are only a few people living close to the existing station that are hugely inconvenienced, for most Waterbeach residents it either doesn't make much difference, or the new station is more convenient.

The proposal to move the station has been in existence since 2016, or possibly before, see this:

https://southcambsweb.azurewebsites.net/media/3vzhfwk1/rlw-dio-appendices-9-11.pdf

NEW WATERBEACH STATION SITE OPTIONEERING STUDY FEASIBILITY REPORT GRIP 2 RLW Estates Project no: 70000773 Feasibility Report GRIP 2 Date: October 2016

Anyone moving into Waterbeach since 2016 should have known about the possible station relocation, and those already there in 2016 have had a decade to adapt.

 

[bramling]

Stevenage was relocated by 1 mile and Tiverton Parkway is well over a mile from the old station at Tiverton Junction.

One would argue that Stevenage may well have required relocation at some point at the old site was probably going to eventually prove too restrictive for modern needs. Adapting it for increasing train lengths would have proved interesting, and the facilities would likely have proven very cramped. Waterbeach doesn’t really have these issues, albeit as a station it is rather basic.

One would argue that Tiverton Parkway is a better site all round (apart from the odd road access), there isn’t much population to be served at the old site.

 

[paulmch]

The two sites are not far from each other as the crow flies but the walking route is significantly further, from Station Road and Lode Avenue.

This could be resolved by knocking down a fence which separates Lode Avenue from Burgess Road and constructing a path from Burgess Road to Bannold road parallel to the railway.

Perhaps improvements to the local path network are already planned as part of the relocation? One can hope.

I might be wrong here but I remember reading a long time ago that a footpath running alongside/near the railway between the current and planned stations was part of the design.

 

[weeklycommuter]

AIUI the planning permission for some of the new homes at the Waterbeach development is conditional on the new Waterbeach Railway Station being built and opened. The planning permission does not require the existing Waterbeach Railway Station to be officially closed so it could remain officially open.

The Department for Transport has to hold a public consultation in order to officially close the existing Waterbeach Railway Station. I assume there is no guarantee that the ORR will give the go ahead to close the existing station. Perhaps the Department for Transport will decide to leave the existing Waterbeach Railway Station officially open to avoid the cost in time and money of the public consultation.

There are many examples of railway stations which have a very limited train service because it has not been considered worth spending time and money on the procedure that has to be followed to officially close them.

 

[windjabbers]

How impracticable would it be to keep both?

I appreciate that having every train stop at both would mess up timings. But presumably you could fix that by having services “take turns” or some trains could stop at both and some neither

Is there any actual cost beyond the upkeep of a 2 platform unmanned station?

I asked about this at the public meeting thing they held about this. The answer I got was that there wasn't room in the timetable for both stations, as you have to add in the dwell time for both stations. Plus as they are so close togther the train can't get up to line speed between them so that has further time.

 

[london004]

Sounds like a really thoughtful design that will make commuting and local travel much easier for the growing Waterbeach community.

 

[paulmch]

Sounds like a really thoughtful design that will make commuting and local travel much easier for the growing Waterbeach community.

Not just for the new residents either, for the existing residents the current station is at the end of road that's wildly unsuitable for what it's used for. With a footpath only on one side and a carriageway that is effectively single-track because of the parked cars it's a veritable death trap that can barely cope with the traffic levels today, let alone in 20 years when the population of the village has quadrupled!

 

[weeklycommuter]

Not just for the new residents either, for the existing residents the current station is at the end of road that's wildly unsuitable for what it's used for. With a footpath only on one side and a carriageway that is effectively single-track because of the parked cars it's a veritable death trap that can barely cope with the traffic levels today, let alone in 20 years when the population of the village has quadrupled!

If I lived near the existing Waterbeach Station I would want it closed and not stay open with trains continuing to stop there when the new station opens. I would be happy to use the new station instead. I am not sure why some people who live near the existing station want it to stay open and continue to have a train service when the new station opens. While it may be a convenient short walk away for them it clearly causes problems that adversely affect residents.