Insider

Plans published for East West route extension to Cambridge

East West Rail.

The East West Railway is a first for England in many respects, as it replicates the optimism about investing in new railways that has been evident in Scotland for many years. North of the Border, projects have largely been related to restoring illconceived closures - such as reinstatement of the line to Tweedbank ( Galashiels), where passenger demand has far exceeded expectations since the route was reopened in September 2015.

The restoration of services between Oxford and Cambridge, for which the East West Railway Company has been established by the Government to deliver, is a project of much greater magnitude. In particular, there is a need to identify a new alignment between Bedford and Cambridge, as much of the former track bed has been subject to development that prevents use of the original alignment.

Thanks to the Chiltern Railways Evergreen project, trains are already running from Oxford to Bicester and thence to London Marylebone. And the section beyond to Bletchley is intact, although much of the formation has been disused for some time. The route was once seen as an important freight artery, to allow cross-country services to avoid the London marshalling yards. This resulted in sorting sidings being established at Swanbourne which have long been abandoned as BR reduced the scope of its freight activity.

In the initial planning to restore the EastWest link, the proposal was that an electric spine would be created to enable freight trains to run from Southampton to access the West Coast and Midland Main Lines. This included the conversion of third rail current collection to overhead catenary on the route between the port and Basingstoke.

This was very much a theoretical concept, as the freight operators quickly pointed out that they had recently invested in modern diesel traction and had no suitable electric resources available. Passenger operators also observed that their third rail rolling stock was not equipped to use overhead current collection, and so would require expensive conversion.

Among the technical fraternity, third rail current collection is viewed unfavourably because it is estimated that a 15% energy loss occurs compared with overhead line systems. There was, however, never a business case for conversion, and once the cost of installing alternative power systems was exposed as a result of the Great Western electrification project the idea was quietly dropped.

Despite this outbreak of reality, the Government continued to support a 100mph line using diesel power, as it created a corridor for economic and housing development which is part of the effort to re-balance rail investment that has become concentrated in London and the South East.

The section of the route beyond Bletchley to Bedford remains in use, although there has been little modernisation to upgrade line speeds that will be necessary as part of the planning for a through route.

Beyond Bedford, no steps were deemed necessary to protect the track bed to Cambridge via Sandy for future use, after the line closed in 1967. Third party development has since been extensive, necessitating a new alignment.

The processes to restore the disused infrastructure have been largely resolved, with a Transport and Works Act application deposited with Parliament in 2018. Planning activity has now started to construct what will be a largely new railway to reach Cambridge.

As a first step, consultation has commenced with stakeholders. This is expected to be a lengthy task that will continue until 2023 before construction can begin. There is no timescale for the start of operations, other than an expectation that this will be in the mid-2020s.

The proposed route has been defined by five corridors starting with options about the layout at Bedford. There will be a connection for passengers with the Midland Main Line, but it has not been decided whether this will be at the existing station or by the provision of a new facility described as Bedford South.

From there are two principal options. The first broadly follows the previous line of route via Sandy, with diversions that recognise where development has taken place. If chosen, it will result in the likelihood of a new station at Bassingbourn ( on the outskirts of Royston), where a Ministry of Defence establishment is expected to become surplus to requirements - allowing redevelopment.

The line would reach Cambridge by joining the branch from Hitchin in the Foxton area (a common feature of all the corridor choices). The estimated construction cost using this alignment is £ 2 billion.

The alternative is to route the line via Tempsford (near St Neots) and Cambourne, to serve growing communities where significant housing developments are planned. A new station would be provided on the East Coast Main Line to provide connectivity with Great Northern train services on the route, but much of the infrastructure would be a new alignment - although the arrangements to access Cambridge are the same as the route via Sandy.

The cost is much greater (at up to £ 3.5bn), but there are likely to be much wider economic benefits - including the proposed new housing that could result in greater value being offered for the investment.

Government is expecting a significant input of private sector capital to fund the project, having adopted a similar template under the market-led investment initiative whereby ideas were required to be submitted by the end of July 2018. The aim was to generate an expansion of rail capacity that would not be possible from taxpayer and rail user funding.

In all, proposals for 30 projects were received, including the Southern Rail Link to Heathrow which would provide a new connection between the airport and the national network at Staines.

One rejected project is the Windsor Link Railway to close the half-mile gap between the two branch lines from Staines to Windsor and Eton Riverside, and that from Slough to Windsor and Eton Central.

There is surprise that proposals are deemed to lack credibility, and criticism of a lack of dialogue with promoters who have devoted time and effort to develop ideas. There is a suspicion that the Williams Review has led to a change of heart about sources of investment.

“Government is expecting a significant input of private sector capital to fund the project.”