Update from EWR Co.

AC7XAK Freightliner freight train, pulling out of the North rail freight terminal, Port of Felixstowe, Suffolk, UK.. Image shot 04/2007. Exact date unknown.

We received an update from the East West Rail Company today which reports on the conversations held with parish councils along the line of the route from Bedford to Cambridge. We also reported on this in a previous post for the sessions held in with parishes close to Cambridge in the Option E area. You can download EWR Co.’s full document below:

It’s a long document but highlights include some new material on the location of Cambourne Station on page 8 ..

“As mentioned, the exact location of new stations has not yet been decided, and we will be working with local authorities and other stakeholders to make sure the locations work for local communities.

We would be open to exploring the possibility of a station in the north of Cambourne.”

and aligning the route with the A428 see page 6 ..

“Specifically, on the A428, we are working with their [Highways England] team to see whether there is a practical way to bring the projects together being mindful that it is not as straightforward as it might seem at first – railways do not like hills or bends and the station stops might not fit well with the needs of road users. However, as mentioned, we will keep talking to our counterparts at the A428 and the other projects across the area to create not just the best rail system, but the best transport system we can.

As previously reported it seems EWR Co. are looking at a route similar to the one we described in this post. It’s nice to see this in a document put out by EWR Co. although there are no commitments yet.

Meanwhile let’s keep up the pressure to avoid the damaging routes in the option E area in favour of ones that work better with the local development plans. See the supporters menu for some ideas of what you can do.

3 replies on “Update from EWR Co.”

Excellent stuff, whilst a long read, several interesting points to be noted. For the first time I feel encouraged about EWR’s improving understanding of this contentious section of the route.

Picking up on one point in particular: “In addition, the project COULD utilise the new Cambridge South Station currently proposed by Network Rail and we are liaising with their team to understand the possibilities.”

I previously questioned this linkage to entering Cambridge South station from the South. It seems now just possible that this is up for review, this after all is one of the main reasons the route options locally are complicated.

I know I have banged on about this, without much feedback except from a few comment writers, if the linkage was dropped and say, the old route into Cambridge central station was utilised, either fully or in part, then turning sharply north to follow the rest of the “Option 6” recently presented at Webinars, much of the difficult routing would be avoided. It might even be possible for Network Rail to locate Cambridge South slightly further to the North to serve both lines with a travelling walkway to Addenbrookes site. This would result in a shorter route, less 4 tracking, less land grab and compulsory purchases and so on.

Yes I understand about the guided busway, yes I appreciate the country park issue. A cut and cover tunnel seems still just possible here. I am sure there is a civil engineering solution. I am certain that the financial costs would be substantially reduced, the impacts on our lovely villages negated.

Or, is this sentence suggesting that the full Northern route is now back on the table?

This is encouraging that EWR are now seemingly more open to more sensible and beneficial northerly routes.
I look forward to the webinar tomorrow.

Dave, in your post above you say “ I know I have banged on about this, without much feedback except from a few comment writers”. Please don’t be despondent or give up – there are probably lots of others like me who read your comments and are really pleased that you, with all your experience, are coming up with these ideas and putting them forward on our behalf. We don’t want to fill the comments with lots of “I agree”.

We support you! What can we do to make that clear and help further (apart from writing to our MP and leader of SCDC as you said in the webinar yesterday)?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *