Wisbech to March line consultation.

[stuu]

Why specifically Wisbech though? If there were a notional £200m available to provide better access to Cambridge, is a branch line to Wisbech the best solution? Why not to Haverhill? Or redoubling the Kings Lynn line and increasing frequencies? Or double the size of March instead? Wisbech is a fair distance from Cambridge after all

 

[Dr Day]

Purely an observation, and I appreciate Cambridge may be a special case, but why doesn't our planning system encourage the building of places where people can live alongside the building of places where they work (and conversely more jobs where people actually live), to reduce the need to travel in the first place?

I'm not an economist, but something seems a bit wrong if we need to invest in infrastructure and transport subsidies facilitate 90-minute+ door to door commutes in order to grow the national economy.

 

[Bald Rick]

Why specifically Wisbech though? If there were a notional £200m available to provide better access to Cambridge, is a branch line to Wisbech the best solution? Why not to Haverhill? Or redoubling the Kings Lynn line and increasing frequencies? Or double the size of March instead? Wisbech is a fair distance from Cambridge after all

Well, quite. Or Waterbeach, or Cambourne, ie what is happening !

Purely an observation, and I appreciate Cambridge may be a special case, but why doesn't our planning system encourage the building of places where people can live alongside the building of places where they work (and conversely more jobs where people actually live), to reduce the need to travel in the first place?

It kind of does, or at least it doesnt discourage it. Plenty of homes being built in the centre of our big cities.

The issue is, people tend to prefer living somewhere with a garden, and not next to an industrial estate.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Why specifically Wisbech though? If there were a notional £200m available to provide better access to Cambridge, is a branch line to Wisbech the best solution? Why not to Haverhill? Or redoubling the Kings Lynn line and increasing frequencies? Or double the size of March instead? Wisbech is a fair distance from Cambridge after all

Wisbech is significantly bigger than Haverhill.
It doesn't necessarily need a rail reconnection, but a busway on most of the old formation would help connections to Cambridge as well as relieve congestion on the busy A47 to Peterborough (there are regular tailbacks at the A47/A141 Guyhirn roundabout between Wisbech and March/Peterborough, so much so that the highways authorities are rebuilding the roundabout).

 

[Magdalia]

Purely an observation, and I appreciate Cambridge may be a special case, but why doesn't our planning system encourage the building of places where people can live alongside the building of places where they work (and conversely more jobs where people actually live), to reduce the need to travel in the first place?

I'm not an economist, but something seems a bit wrong if we need to invest in infrastructure and transport subsidies facilitate 90-minute+ door to door commutes in order to grow the national economy.

I am an economist, amongst other things, and your point deserves an economist's answer!

As is often the case with economics, it is about demand and supply. There is a huge demand from businesses to be located in or near Cambridge because it has one of the top ten universities in the world. The only other place in the UK that offers the same is Oxford. Furthermore, those businesses are just the sort of high productivity businesses that will generate lots of economic growth and the tax income that follows from that.

But in Cambridge supply of three key resources are constrained, these being land, people and water.

With regard to land Cambridge itself is almost full. In prime locations business requirements are now starting to take priority over other uses. This can be seen, for example, in the proposals for business uses on the sites between the railway and Newmarket Road (near to Coldham Lane Jn) and the proposal to move the sewage works near to Cambridge North station.

People can only work in Cambridge if they have somewhere to live and transport infrastructure to get them to and from work. Cambridge has one of the most overheated property markets in the UK because demand exceeds supply. Lots of people who work in Cambridge can't afford to live there. Cambridge is also a city with a very constricted road network that suffers badly from congestion, another example of demand exceeding supply. Buses are not the answer because of the congestion and the overheated labour market, which restricts the supply of drivers.

Well, quite. Or Waterbeach, or Cambourne, ie what is happening !

No, that's what was happening. It isn't happening any more. And the reason for that is water, Cambridge does not have enough of it.

Water was a minority interest until recently, but the 2022 summer changed that, when Cambridge recorded a new maximum temperature of 39.9C and went through nearly all of July and August without any rain. Furthermore, the Cambridge area drainage and river network is very fragile and globally rare: tributaries of the River Cam are about 10% of all of the chalk streams in the world. Demand for water is also affected by the Cambridge area being the UK's most important for agriculture, which takes 10% of water supply, far higher than anywhere else in the UK.

Cambourne and Waterbeach will be the last such developments for a long time. All major proposals for new houses in the Cambridge area are now being blocked by the Environment Agency. That includes a proposal for 3k new houses at Cambourne on the Bourn Aerodrome site. There are more details here:

Water supply fears prompt first housing objections

The Environment Agency objects to thousands of new homes because of "significant risk" of harm.

www.bbc.co.uk

Fears supplying water to thousands of new homes "will pose a significant risk" have led to the first planning objections from the Environment Agency.
It is the first time it has objected to new housing over water concerns.
The planned homes are all in the south of Cambridgeshire, which could see more than 50,000 new homes by 2041. Some may now be built more slowly.
Cambridge Water said it has "resilient, long-term" plans to increase supplies and is trying to reduce demand.
The Environment Agency has raised concerns about five planning applications, including at least 4,425 dwellings.

Plans to build 3,000 homes on Bourn Airfield and another 1,000 on Darwin Green on the outskirts of Cambridge are among them.
The Environment Agency said water is a "precious resource that is under pressure across the country" and that taking more from natural stores is "posing a real risk to chalk streams, river, and wetland habitats".
It added: "We have objected to some proposed development applications in the Greater Cambridge area on the basis that the water supply for these developments will pose a significant risk to our local water environment."

That's why other options need to be looked at.

Why specifically Wisbech though? If there were a notional £200m available to provide better access to Cambridge, is a branch line to Wisbech the best solution? Why not to Haverhill? Or redoubling the Kings Lynn line and increasing frequencies? Or double the size of March instead? Wisbech is a fair distance from Cambridge after all

And this is why, eventually, the options will need to be looked at together. The Cambridge 2040 Delivery Group, set up by Michael Gove and headed by Peter Freeman, will have something to say on that. There's more details on that here:

Cambridge house building to be 'supercharged' - Gove

The city could see huge housing and business growth by 2040 with a new delivery group set up.

www.bbc.co.uk

Cabinet minister Michael Gove said Cambridge's growth was being limited by "a lack of new space for lab capacity and research activity" and that "constraints on new housing… have priced new graduates out of the market" and "made attracting and retaining talent harder".

A Cambridge 2040 Delivery Group was being set up to lead the development of the city, backed by £5m and led by the chairman of Homes England, Peter Freeman.
Mr Freeman would work on the "detailed vision for Cambridge's future" including what it meant for housing, businesses - including in the technology and life sciences sectors - transport, healthy living and green spaces.
The delivery group would develop a master plan, "enforce high-quality design standards", buy land, approve planning and work with developers, Mr Gove said.
The Environment Agency recently confirmed it had formally objected to five large housing developments in the south of Cambridgeshire because of fears they did not have sustainable water supplies.

Michael Gove was in Cambridge recently, where water was the main issue, see here:

Michael Gove promises to sort Cambridge 2040 water issues

The housing secretary says the government wants to give "Cambridge a chance to grow".

www.bbc.co.uk

Addressing the water supply issue in Cambridge, Mr Gove said: "We know this is one of the most water-scarce parts of the county.
"The issue with water will absolutely be solved. We need to make sure we built reservoirs. And make sure the buildings we built in future are beautiful but also environmentally of the highest standard.
"We want to work in cooperation with landowners, local councils and local people to deliver our plans."
An EA spokesperson said it had a "statutory duty to support sustainable development".
"We will always work closely with local planning authorities and housing developers to build sustainable homes for the future, but those homes must have a reliable supply of clean and plentiful water which does not cause deterioration of the environment."

There is a lot of uncertainty at present, including the following:

• what will be the result of the East West Rail consultation in 2024?
• will the Ely upgrade actually happen?
• what will Peter Freeman's "detailed vision for Cambridge's future" say about housing, transport and water?
• what will happen at the forthcoming General Election?
• who will be Cambridgeshire Mayor in 2025?
• will we get back to inflation below 2%?

A bit of masterly inactivity right now is a good thing. But by 2025 or 2026 many of those uncertainties will have been clarified. I think that looking at the options for March-Wisbech is the right way forward, so that there can be informed decisions in 2025. In an ideal world there would be a similar options study for the Haverhill line, especially now that the existing busway proposal is on hold because of increased costs.

 

[bspahh]

No, that's what was happening. It isn't happening any more. And the reason for that is water, Cambridge does not have enough of it.

Water was a minority interest until recently, but the 2022 summer changed that, when Cambridge recorded a new maximum temperature of 39.9C and went through nearly all of July and August without any rain. Furthermore, the Cambridge area drainage and river network is very fragile and globally rare: tributaries of the River Cam are about 10% of all of the chalk streams in the world. Demand for water is also affected by the Cambridge area being the UK's most important for agriculture, which takes 10% of water supply, far higher than anywhere else in the UK.

Cambourne and Waterbeach will be the last such developments for a long time. All major proposals for new houses in the Cambridge area are now being blocked by the Environment Agency. That includes a proposal for 3k new houses at Cambourne on the Bourn Aerodrome site. There are more details here:

Water is in short supply for the Cambridge area at the moment.

In the timescale for a rail link to Wisbech, the water supply for the Cambridge area should have improved.

Anglia Water have plans for a new reservoir near Chatteris and a pipeline to transfer water from Lincolnshire. They have a recent document on their plans for the next 25 years.

Water Resources Management Plan
We produce a WRMP every five years. It is a statutory document that sets out how a sustainable and secure supply of clean drinking water will be maintained for our customers. Crucially it takes a long-term view over 25 years, allowing us to plan an affordable, sustainable pathway that provides benefit to our customers, society and the environment

BTW, the new environment secretary and the "Head of Major Infrastructure DCO Planning & Stakeholder Engagement at Anglian Water Services" are Steve and Karen Barclay respectively.

Alarm raised over water firm job of new environment secretary’s wife
Steve Barclay married to executive at Anglian Water, which is under investigation for potential illegal dumping of raw sewage

 

[Magdalia]

Anglia Water have plans for a new reservoir near Chatteris and a pipeline to transfer water from Lincolnshire. They have a recent document on their plans for the next 25 years.

BTW, the new environment secretary and the "Head of Major Infrastructure DCO Planning & Stakeholder Engagement at Anglian Water Services" are Steve and Karen Barclay respectively.

Thanks for these. But in Cambridge Anglian Water is only responsible for sewage. Water supply is Cambridge Water, now a subsidiary of South Staffordshire Water. It is a small company with limited water resources, mainly in the chalk aquifers under the hills to the south of the City. Those aquifers also feed the chalk stream tributaries of the River Cam.

 

[Bald Rick]

I am an economist, amongst other things, and your point deserves an economist's answer!

As is often the case with economics, it is about demand and supply. There is a huge demand from businesses to be located in or near Cambridge because it has one of the top ten universities in the world. The only other place in the UK that offers the same is Oxford. Furthermore, those businesses are just the sort of high productivity businesses that will generate lots of economic growth and the tax income that follows from that.

But in Cambridge supply of three key resources are constrained, these being land, people and water.

With regard to land Cambridge itself is almost full. In prime locations business requirements are now starting to take priority over other uses. This can be seen, for example, in the proposals for business uses on the sites between the railway and Newmarket Road (near to Coldham Lane Jn) and the proposal to move the sewage works near to Cambridge North station.

People can only work in Cambridge if they have somewhere to live and transport infrastructure to get them to and from work. Cambridge has one of the most overheated property markets in the UK because demand exceeds supply. Lots of people who work in Cambridge can't afford to live there. Cambridge is also a city with a very constricted road network that suffers badly from congestion, another example of demand exceeding supply. Buses are not the answer because of the congestion and the overheated labour market, which restricts the supply of drivers.


No, that's what was happening. It isn't happening any more. And the reason for that is water, Cambridge does not have enough of it.

Water was a minority interest until recently, but the 2022 summer changed that, when Cambridge recorded a new maximum temperature of 39.9C and went through nearly all of July and August without any rain. Furthermore, the Cambridge area drainage and river network is very fragile and globally rare: tributaries of the River Cam are about 10% of all of the chalk streams in the world. Demand for water is also affected by the Cambridge area being the UK's most important for agriculture, which takes 10% of water supply, far higher than anywhere else in the UK.

Cambourne and Waterbeach will be the last such developments for a long time. All major proposals for new houses in the Cambridge area are now being blocked by the Environment Agency. That includes a proposal for 3k new houses at Cambourne on the Bourn Aerodrome site. There are more details here:

Water supply fears prompt first housing objections

The Environment Agency objects to thousands of new homes because of "significant risk" of harm.

www.bbc.co.uk

That's why other options need to be looked at.


And this is why, eventually, the options will need to be looked at together. The Cambridge 2040 Delivery Group, set up by Michael Gove and headed by Peter Freeman, will have something to say on that. There's more details on that here:

Cambridge house building to be 'supercharged' - Gove

The city could see huge housing and business growth by 2040 with a new delivery group set up.

www.bbc.co.uk

Michael Gove was in Cambridge recently, where water was the main issue, see here:

Michael Gove promises to sort Cambridge 2040 water issues

The housing secretary says the government wants to give "Cambridge a chance to grow".

www.bbc.co.uk

There is a lot of uncertainty at present, including the following:

• what will be the result of the East West Rail consultation in 2024?
• will the Ely upgrade actually happen?
• what will Peter Freeman's "detailed vision for Cambridge's future" say about housing, transport and water?
• what will happen at the forthcoming General Election?
• who will be Cambridgeshire Mayor in 2025?
• will we get back to inflation below 2%?

A bit of masterly inactivity right now is a good thing. But by 2025 or 2026 many of those uncertainties will have been clarified. I think that looking at the options for March-Wisbech is the right way forward, so that there can be informed decisions in 2025. In an ideal world there would be a similar options study for the Haverhill line, especially now that the existing busway proposal is on hold because of increased costs.

The point is, surely, what makes Wisbech the prime location for providing more (and expensive) transport links for non-car commuting to Cambridge, when there are loads of other places with links already in place that already have the infrastructure, and are closer / quicker to Cambridge? Hitchin, Royston, Baldock, Stevenage, Harlow, Broxbourne, Welwyn, even Peterboro’ are closer as the crow flies. Water is not a problem for these. The railway is already there.

 

[70014IronDuke]

I am an economist, amongst other things, and your point deserves an economist's answer!

As is often the case with economics, it is about demand and supply. There is a huge demand from businesses to be located in or near Cambridge because it has one of the top ten universities in the world. The only other place in the UK that offers the same is Oxford. Furthermore, those businesses are just the sort of high productivity businesses that will generate lots of economic growth and the tax income that follows from that.

But in Cambridge supply of three key resources are constrained, these being land, people and water.

Then surely the answer is obvious, isn't it?

Move Cambridge University, lock, stock and dons, to somewhere where there is space and water.

And rail connections.

How about Ravenglass?

This sort of thing has been done in the past, just google Attaturk and Josef Stalin.

(good post, btw @Magdalia)

 

[Magdalia]

The point is, surely, what makes Wisbech the prime location for providing more (and expensive) transport links for non-car commuting to Cambridge, when there are loads of other places with links already in place that already have the infrastructure, and are closer / quicker to Cambridge? Hitchin, Royston, Baldock, Stevenage, Harlow, Broxbourne, Welwyn, even Peterboro’ are closer as the crow flies. Water is not a problem for these. The railway is already there.

I agree that the best option is to make use of the railway that is already there. Most of these places have a different problem, which is that house prices are already high because they are suitable for London commuting. Bishops Stortford and Harlow have the additional issue of proximity to Stansted Airport, which pushes prices up because they are very popular places to live for people in the air travel industry.

Anecdotal evidence, from watching the crowds at Cambridge station, does suggest that more people are commuting into Cambridge from the southern side, especially the GN route (if, when I get to Cambridge station for a TL/GN London train, and the stock to form my train hasn't arrived yet, I do count the alighting passengers when it comes in). I think it will happen more once Cambridge South opens (though those counts won't be as useful for anecdotal evidence). And those trains can take a lot more commuters. This is one aspect where the trend to more working from home will help, because dampening down of the London commuting gives opportunity for these places to pivot more towards Cambridge. What's not known is how big that shift will be, how long it will take, and whether it will be enough. Good luck to anyone trying to build a model to predict that!

I have never suggested that Wisbech should be the prime location for non-car commuting to Cambridge. What I have suggested is that non-car commuting to Cambridge would contribute to making the difference between March-Wisbech being a non-viable project and a viable project. Also that, given the constraints and uncertainties in Cambridge, it is an option that should be looked at. The big advantage that Wisbech has, over almost anywhere else, is the lower property prices.

 

[Bald Rick]

The big advantage that Wisbech has, over almost anywhere else, is the lower property prices.

According to Rightmove, property prices in March are on average only 2.7% higher than Wisbech. Accepting that it is lower, it’s not that much lower, and in my view not enough to trigger anyone looking to work in Cambridge, but also looking to move towards the north west ‘travel by train’ area to consider Wisbech over March. You would surely choose March for the shorter journey time, more frequent services, and cheaper tickets, even if your mortgage was an extra £30 a month.

 

[Magdalia]

According to Rightmove, property prices in March are on average only 2.7% higher than Wisbech. Accepting that it is lower, it’s not that much lower, and in my view not enough to trigger anyone looking to work in Cambridge, but also looking to move towards the north west ‘travel by train’ area to consider Wisbech over March. You would surely choose March for the shorter journey time, more frequent services, and cheaper tickets, even if your mortgage was an extra £30 a month.

And I'd agree. Commuting to Cambridge from March is going to happen before commuting from Wisbech.

I think that we also agree that the first option is to make use of the railway that's already there.

The bit I'm not sure about is whether the ripple effect of the economic growth in Cambridge has just not reached March yet, or whether features of the current service are what makes people taking up jobs in Cambridge look at other locations first. A few days ago I mentioned that March only has an hourly service, overcrowded trains, no stops at Cambridge North and high fares. In all 4 of these March compares very unfavourably with Downham Market for similar journey distance and time.

The ripple effect of the economic growth in Cambridge will reach March, though it probably won't be until after the Ely upgrade (if it happens).

Or maybe the leaning Christmas tree of March is just a cunning ploy to get publicity for the town as a place to live!

March's 'wonky' Christmas tree lights turned on

"A lot of people were critical, but we've certainly learned to love it," says a town councillor.

www.bbc.co.uk

A controversial "wonky" Christmas tree has had its lights switched on in front of thousands of people.
The 30ft tree (9m) high in March, in Cambridgeshire, has a pronounced lean has brought a lot of attention to the Fenland town.

 

[TheBigD]

The bit I'm not sure about is whether the ripple effect of the economic growth in Cambridge has just not reached March yet, or whether features of the current service are what makes people taking up jobs in Cambridge look at other locations first. A few days ago I mentioned that March only has an hourly service, overcrowded trains, no stops at Cambridge North and high fares. In all 4 of these March compares very unfavourably with Downham Market for similar journey distance and time.

The ripple effect of the economic growth in Cambridge will reach March, though it probably won't be until after the Ely upgrade (if it happens).

In terms of the rail service, pre covid, the main commuter service (0730 ex March) was just a 2 car 170 and was usually full from Peterborough, and got busier at Whittlesea, March and Manea. In the reverse the 1800 ex Cambridge was also a 2 car. Both these, and all other services are now booked 3 car units (single 2 cars appear occasionally) and still have spare capacity west of Ely.

There is very little overcrowding west of Ely, but the timetable structure doesn't help Cambridge to Ely with a 25 minute gap before the 3 car XC ex Cambridge at xx00 followed by an 8 car GN at xx05.

First direct arrival from March in to Cambridge is at 0810, compared to 0539 (and every 30 minutes through to 0939) from the Kings Lynn line.

In the evening, March has an hourly service up until 2100, compared to the Kings Lynn line having a half hourly peak service 1535 to 2035, and later services up to 0005.

March has the option of a change at Ely from the 2 hourly Ipswich service, and occasional Norwich service that stops at March.

If you plan to commute in to Cambridge by rail, the service from March is the worse option when compared to the Lynn, Newmarket, Norwich, Royston or Audley End lines.

 

[Magdalia]

First direct arrival from March in to Cambridge is at 0810, compared to 0539 (and every 30 minutes through to 0939) from the Kings Lynn line.

In the evening, March has an hourly service up until 2100, compared to the Kings Lynn line having a half hourly peak service 1535 to 2035, and later services up to 0005.

Thanks, I had forgotten this aspect. Another downside when comparing March with Downham Market.

 

[TheBigD]

Thanks, I had forgotten this aspect. Another downside when comparing March with Downham Market.

There was a proposal for am earlier service but covid killed that idea.

Plan was for the 0740 ex Cambridge to Stansted start from Peterborough, with the unit attached to the 0515 Cambrdge to Birmingham service and detached at Peterborough.

 

[Bald Rick]

The last few posts demonstrate what the Wisbech initial business case did: by far the best option is to improve the servcie from March to Cambridge.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Purely an observation, and I appreciate Cambridge may be a special case, but why doesn't our planning system encourage the building of places where people can live alongside the building of places where they work (and conversely more jobs where people actually live), to reduce the need to travel in the first place?

I haven’t been in Cambridge for 25 years, but in the (perhaps similar) case of Oxford, the answer is two words: Green Belt.

 

[bspahh]

I haven’t been in Cambridge for 25 years, but in the (perhaps similar) case of Oxford, the answer is two words: Green Belt.

They share the problem problem is that the Green Belt (or at least green land owned by the colleges) extends into the city centre, so there are cows grazing 600m from the Market Square in Cambridge, or 400m from Carfax in Oxford.

 

[Magdalia]

They share the problem problem is that the Green Belt (or at least green land owned by the colleges) extends into the city centre, so there are cows grazing 600m from the Market Square in Cambridge, or 400m from Carfax in Oxford.
View attachment 147374

In Cambridge the cows graze on Coe Fen, Midsummer Common, Stourbridge Common and Coldhams Common. All, except for parts of Coldhams Common, are flood plains unsuitable for building.