OFFICIAL
Ely area capacity enhancement programme
Round 2 Consultation Stakeholder Information Pack 24 May – 4 July 2021 OFFICIAL
Contents Figures ...... 4 Acronyms and Abbreviations ...... 5 1. Introduction ...... 6 2. Purpose of this pack ...... 6 3. Need and Benefits ...... 7 4 Funding position ...... 8 5. Consenting and Land Requirements ...... 10 6. Round 1 Consultation (September – November 2020) ...... 11 7. Round 2 Consultation...... 14 8. Soham Branch line proposals ...... 16 9. Ely station ...... 17 9.1 The alignment of the tracks along Platform 3 needs to be straightened to enable ...... 17 10 Stuntney road bridge ...... 18 11 Cutter Bridge proposals ...... 19 12 Common Muckhill Bridge proposals ...... 21 13 Bridge Style options ...... 23 14 Kiln Lane level crossing proposals ...... 23 15 Kiln Lane vehicle access options ...... 27 16 Construction ...... 28 17 Sustainability ...... 29 18 Environmental Considerations ...... 29 19 Next Steps ...... 31 20 EACE Frequently Asked Questions – Round 2- Ely South ...... 32
OFFICIAL
Figures Figure 1: Proposed service uplift ...... 7 Figure 2: Scope by area of EACE programme ...... 9 Figure 3: Round 1 summary – number of responses received via channels ...... 12 Figure 4: Illustration of existing Ely South area and scope of Round 2 consultation...... 14 Figure 5: Soham branch line and Ely Dock junction location plan ...... 16 Figure 6: Ariel photograph of Ely station and Cutter (river) bridge looking south ...... 17 Figure 7: Ely station proposals ...... 18 Figure 8: Stuntney Road bridge proposals ...... 18 Figure 9: Image of existing Stuntney Road Bridge ...... 19 Figure 10: Location of Cutter bridge ...... 19 Figure 11: Image of existing Cutter bridge...... 20 Figure 12: Cutter bridge Option 1 - single span with two tracks ...... 20 Figure 13: Cutter bridge Option 2 - two spans carrying three tracks ...... 21 Figure 14: Image of existing Common Muckhill bridge ...... 21 Figure 15: Common Muckhill bridge Option 1 - arch style with no central pier ...... 22 Figure 16: Common Muckhill bridge Option 2 - truss style with pier ...... 22 Figure 17: Illustrative bridge style options for Cutter and Common Muckhill bridges ...... 23 Figure 18: Image of existing Kiln Lane level crossing ...... 24 Figure 19: Kiln Lane footbridge Option 1 - standard design with ramps and stairs ...... 25 Figure 20: Kiln Lane footbridge Option 2 – spiral ramp design (no stairs) ...... 25 Figure 21: Kiln Lane footbridge Option 3: ramped serpentine design (no stairs) ...... 26 Figure 22: Kiln Lane footbridge Option 4 – ramped wave design (no stairs) ...... 26 Figure 23: Kiln Lane vehicle access option 1 - viaduct across railway ...... 27 Figure 24: Kiln Lane vehicle access Option 2 - access via river bridge ...... 28 Figure 25: Roswell Pits SSSI site next to Kiln Lane ...... 30
OFFICIAL
Acronyms and Abbreviations
CCC Cambridgeshire County Council DfT Department for Transport EACE Ely Area Capacity Enhancement ECDC East Cambridgeshire District Council EIA Environmental Impact Assessment FOC Freight Operating Company GA Greater Anglia (TOC) GTR Great Northern (TOC) LEP Local Enterprise Partnership NR Network Rail OBC Outline Business Case PRoW Public Right of Way RNEP Railway Network Enhancements Pipeline SCDC South Cambridgeshire District Council SOBC Strategic Outline Business Case SSSI Site of special scientific interest TOC Train Operating Company TWA Transport and Works Act TWAO Transport and Works Act Order WAML West Anglia Main Line OFFICIAL
1. Introduction
1.1 The railway around Ely is an important and busy part of the network where five railway lines converge, providing routes for trains operated by Greater Anglia, Great Northern, East Midland and Cross Country services. This alone makes Ely a significant artery for the region and proposition to support growth outside of Greater London.
1.2 It is also an important part of the strategic freight network. The cross country corridor (via Ely) supports a nationally important freight route between the Port of Felixstowe and other regions such as the Midlands, Yorkshire and Scotland alongside busy inter-regional passenger services.
1.3 Ely station is a key interchange for passengers when travelling to destinations including Cambridge to the south, Peterborough to the north-west, King’s Lynn to the north and Norwich to the north-east.
1.4 Owing to the existing layout of the tracks and junction, signals and existing speed restrictions across key bridges, the railway through Ely is operating at full capacity. This means that we cannot increase the number of services through the area.
2. Purpose of this pack
2.1 With this pack, we are informing and consulting with you about our proposals to comply with the statutory requirements relating to the future application for a Transport and Works Act Order (TWAO). The pack presents the proposals and options for the Ely South area of the EACE programme known at this stage of design, the emerging construction proposals and our work to assess the likely significant impacts of the proposals on people, the natural and built environment.
2.2 The pack will provide:
• Introduction to the EACE programme • The need to uplift capacity and the benefits that it could bring • EACE funding position • Consent and known land requirements • Summary of the results from Round 1 consultation • Details of Round 2 consultation (May 2021) • Proposals and options at intervention sites in Ely South • How we intend to manage the environmental impacts • Our approach to sustainability • Next Steps • Frequently asked questions – EACE Round 2 consultation – Ely South
OFFICIAL
3. Need and Benefits
3.1 The Ely area capacity enhancement (EACE) programme is a proposal to upgrade the railway to allow more passenger and freight trains to run through Ely.
3.2 The scope of the EACE include the railway systems between Cambridge and Ely, Ely and Peterborough and Ely and King’s Lynn which includes: • 127 level crossings, • Ely north junction • Ely Dock junction • Bridge structures • Ely station • Signalling systems • Track and Overhead line electrification systems
3.3 We are looking at options to improve connectivity and reliability for passenger services and meet the demand for more rail freight between the Port of Felixstowe, the West Midlands and the North to support sustainable, long-term economic growth.
3.4 The EACE programme’s aspiration is to provide additional capacity which can facilitate a combination of passenger and freight services through Ely from the current off peak 6.5 trains per hour (tph) in each direction to off peak 10 tph in each direction.
Figure 1: Proposed service uplift
*Services are subject to change: **Capacity for an additional service to be confirmed OFFICIAL
3.5 The concept development work from 2018 to 2020 has concluded that a minimum of 10tph (using 11 train paths) is affordable and achievable through the Ely area.
3.6 The EACE programme is part of a bigger picture of growth and prosperity across the region and nationally – this is due to its geographical location.
3.7 EACE as a standalone programme is an enabler for supporting further growth on the West Anglia Main Line (WAML) as well as the Freight and cross-country paths that converge into the location.
3.8 With rail freight demand growing, increasing the capacity of the rail network will support a shift from road to rail thereby providing a faster, greener, safer and more efficient way of transporting goods across the country; helping to remove lorries from the roads and further reduce pollution and congestion.
3.9 The location is heavily relied upon for cross-country passenger routes as well as national freight services to and from the Port of Felixstowe.
3.10 A continual increase in demand compounded by a restrictive infrastructure layout will mean that the area is already unfit for its current purpose. 4 Funding position
4.1 Network Rail was provided with £9.3m funding from the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority, New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) and the Strategic Freight Network in 2018 to understand the scale of the challenge to increase capacity through Ely and develop a Strategic Outline Business Case.
4.2 A Strategic Outline Business Case (SOBC) was submitted to the DfT in March 2020 to seek additional funding to progress to the next stage of design/development including consultation stages.
4.3 The Railway National Enhancement Pipeline (RNEP) process sets out the DfT’s and Network Rail’s approach for rail proposals that require government funding. This approach creates a rolling programme of investment, focused on outcomes that provide benefits for passengers, freight users and the economy and moved government investment in enhancements away from a rigid 5-year cycle.
4.4 Network Rail secured an additional £13.1m funding from the DfT in August 2020 to develop an Outline Business Case (OBC).
4.5 The OBC is expected to be submitted to the DfT in spring 2022 to consider the case for further funding to progress to preferred option selection, a final round of public consultation and submission of a TWAO to the Secretary of State for Transport.
OFFICIAL
4.6 Additional funding of almost £9m has been granted by the DfT to develop proposals to upgrade level crossings between Ely and Ipswich. While this is not formally part of the EACE programme at this stage, it supports the EACE’s business case by unlocking the ability to run more freight and passenger services between Ipswich and Ely. There is likely to be an opportunity in the future to integrate the Ely/Ipswich level crossing work under the umbrella of the EACE programme.
Figure 2: Scope by area of EACE programme OFFICIAL
5. Consenting and Land Requirements
5.1 In order to realise the benefits of increased capacity, Network Rail will, subject to further funding being secured, need to seek powers under the Transport and Works Act (TWA) to acquire land and rights over land compulsorily as well as powers to construct, operate and maintain the associated railway infrastructure.
5.2 These powers will include, but are not limited to:
• compulsory purchase of land and property which is required for the project; • the right to use land temporarily and any permanent rights for the on-going management and maintenance of the project; • provision for temporary alternative routes and permanent diversions; • powers for making byelaws and traffic regulation orders; • powers to stop up or alter roads and level crossings permanently and temporarily; • powers to divert any utilities; and • amendments to other legislation.
5.3 As the options include proposals that require work to take place outside of the railway boundary we will need to apply to the Secretary of State for Transport for a TWAO to authorise both the construction and the use of land outside of the railway boundary, either temporarily or permanently.
5.4 Where works are to be carried out within the existing railway boundary, these works are likely to be constructed under Network Rail’s existing permitted development rights.
5.5 If any objections to the TWAO application for the EACE programme are made it is likely that a public inquiry would be held by an Inspector to help inform the Secretary of State’s decision.
5.6 For this second round of consultation Network Rail is undertaking an exercise to identify those with an interest in the land within the footprint of the known proposed interventions in respect of which compulsory acquisition powers could be sought through the TWAO application if private treaty arrangements cannot be made with the affected landowners in advance of the TWAO application being submitted.
5.7 Network Rail will seek to use compulsory purchase powers only after all reasonable and practicable means to negotiate for the voluntary acquisition of land have been exhausted.
OFFICIAL
6. Round 1 Consultation (September – November 2020)
6.1 The Round 1 public consultation on the EACE programme began on 21 September and continued to 1 November 2020. Consultation with statutory consultees (Local Authorities, statutory undertakers and local landowners) continued to 15 November.
6.2 The ongoing coronavirus pandemic impacted how engagement and consultation could be undertaken as traditional consultation events and face to face engagement in communities was impossible owing to the restrictions. Therefore, more flexible means of consultation were developed that made use of digital platforms and channels of communications to inform the design process prior to the submission of any application for authorisation.
6.3 The Round 1 public consultation was designed to gauge the views and opinions of communities and rail users on the rail industry’s aspiration to increase capacity through Ely and the benefits that could be delivered.
6.4 Network Rail also consulted with statutory consultees as part of Round 1 including those whose land is impacted by potential options; as well as local and national statutory authorities as set out in The Transport and Works (Applications and Objections Procedure) (England and Wales) Rules 2006. As part of Round 1 the following statutory consultees were informed of the consultation with feedback sought:
• Environment Agency - Anglian Region; • Canal & River Trust Head Office; • Inland Waterways Association; • National Association of Boat Owners; • Anglian Water; • National Grid House; • Historic England; • Natural England (Peterborough); • Natural England (Cambridge); • Transport Focus; • Office of Rail and Road; and • Design Council.
OFFICIAL
6.5 The challenges of increasing capacity were presented including, what the aspirations are, how we will approach public consultation and the funding position.
6.6 We presented the factors we will use to inform and progress the design/development work including: • does the option deliver the required capacity and meet stakeholder aspirations? • is the option consistent with railway and wider social, environmental and economic policy? • the impact on communities and passengers • environmental and sustainability impacts • the amount of additional land that would be required to deliver the scheme • is it affordable? • can it be constructed? • operational access requirements • maintenance
Figure 3: Round 1 summary – number of responses received via channels 6.7 The project team reviewed the results of the public consultation which generated: • 260 formal responses • 111 online chat messages • 8553 webpage views (60% accessed via mobile device) • 47 emails with comments and questions OFFICIAL
6.8 After reviewing the responses and feedback received, the analysis revealed: • 207 responses received supported or strongly supported the proposals to increase capacity for passenger and freight services through the Ely area • 45 responses were undecided • 5 responses did not support the proposals • 3 responses strongly did not support
6.9 Of the factors presented to help inform the design/development work, • 76% supported the factors • 3% do not support the factors • 20% were undecided
6.10 The response indicates that this first round of consultation has successfully increased awareness of the EACE programme with overall feedback being positive about Network Rail’s approach, its openness and the comprehensive range of factors that will inform decision making.
6.11 These responses indicate the Round 1 consultation successfully increased awareness of the benefits that the EACE Programme will deliver and it has helped grow support and advocacy for the Project.
6.12 Much of the feedback we received asked for future consultations to provide more explanation of the benefits of the programme, more detail on what the capacity enhancement options will be and information on impacts and mitigations particularly around the environment.
6.13 This feedback has helped inform the next round of consultation which includes more information on the benefits of increasing capacity, details of the proposals and options in the Ely South area, and more information on the environment and mitigating impacts through the design work.
OFFICIAL
7. Round 2 Consultation
7.1 The Round 2 consultation will open on 24 May 2021 and will be open for six weeks until 4 July 2021.
7.2 For this second round of consultation, we are inviting the public to comment on the options being presented in the Ely south area as shown in the area plan below.
7.3 Ely South encompasses part of the Soham branch line and Ely Dock junction (where the Soham branch line meets the West Anglia main line), Ely station Stuntney Road bridge, Cutter bridge, Common Muckhill bridge and Kiln Lane level crossing.
Figure 4: Illustration of existing Ely South area and scope of Round 2 consultation.
7.4 We are asking for comments on the various proposals and options presented as part of Round 2 consultation including: • Part of Soham branch line • Ely Dock junction • Ely station • Stuntney Road bridge • Cutter river bridge • Common Muckhill river bridge • Kiln Lane level crossing
OFFICIAL
7.5 To promote the Round 2 consultation, a series of promotional activities will commence on 10 May including: • Press release announcement • EACE Programme webpage update (NR website) • Press advertisements in local and regional publications • Distribution of EACE leaflet to home and businesses in Ely area • In-station display stand at key station locations • In-station posters • Social media posts • Virtual briefings for stakeholders • This stakeholder information pack
7.6 Owing to the ongoing Coronavirus situation, we have decided not to host this second round of public consultation via our website: www.networkrail.co.uk/Ely
7.7 The public will be able to submit feedback from 24 May 2021 by completing an online survey accessed via the EACE programme webpage until 4 July 2021.
7.8 Consultation documents will be available to download from the webpage with hardcopies available upon request by calling Network Rail’s 24/7 helpline number 03457 11 41 41 or emailing [email protected]
7.9 There will be an opportunity for the public to put their questions to our project team via a live webchat facility or by our consultation hotline between 25 May and 5 June 2021 at the times listed below:
How to chat to us directly When Live webchat facility via Tuesday, Thursday and Friday 10:00 – www.networkrail.co.uk/ely 16:00 Wednesday 14:00 – 20:00 Tuesday, Thursday and Friday 14:00 – Speak to one of the team by calling 17:00 0800 160 1780 Wednesday 17:00 – 20:00 Saturday 10:00 – 13:00
OFFICIAL
8. Soham Branch line proposals
8.1 The Ely end of the Soham branch line is a single railway track that sits on an earth embankment. The single track restricts the number of trains that can operate on the line and is a limiting factor to increasing capacity.
Figure 5: Soham branch line and Ely Dock junction location plan 8.2 We are inviting comments on our proposals to install additional tracks, including a 400-metre-long passing loop with a widened embankment. The passing loop would allow faster train services to pass slower services, reducing possible delays and increasing capacity.
8.3 A works access walkway would be constructed on either side of the tracks to enable railway staff to carry out maintenance. Troughing would be installed along the railway to safely and securely house a cable management system. The additional tracks, walkways and cabling mean that the existing earth embankment, which the railway sits on, would need to be strengthened and in some sections widened.
8.4 Fencing would be installed along the toe of the embankment to stop unauthorised access. Widening the embankment will extend it onto adjoining agricultural land, which we will need to acquire. We are liaising with landowners about these proposals.
8.5 There are three crossings that provide access across this section of the branch line. These are Wells Engine, Newmarket Bridge and Hawks crossings.
8.6 Consents have been approved to close the Newmarket Bridge and Hawks crossings.
OFFICIAL
8.7 Network Rail is investigating options to close or upgrade Wells Engine and divert the footpath and will consult on these as part of the Round 3 public consultation.
8.8 Ely Dock Junction is where the Soham branch line joins the main Cambridge to Ely (Fen) line to the south of Ely station. Tracks need to be repositioned so that more trains can pass through the junction. Moving the tracks means that overhead lines will also be moved to align the track.
8.9 The structures that support the overhead lines will be relocated and replaced to accommodate the new tracks. Troughing will be installed along the tracks, which will house the cable management system, together with small cabinets housing signalling and control equipment.
9. Ely station
Figure 6: Ariel photograph of Ely station and Cutter (river) bridge looking south 9.1 The alignment of the tracks along Platform 3 needs to be straightened to enable trains to pull out of the station quicker. As a result, Platform 3 will need to be widened by approximately five metres at the northern end so that passengers are able to step safely between trains and the platform. Equipment, including signals and overhead line structures, will need to be relocated and reconfigured.
OFFICIAL
Figure 7: Ely station proposals
10 Stuntney road bridge
10.1 Immediately to the north of Ely station, the railway crosses over Stuntney bridge. The tracks on the bridge need to be replaced and repositioned so that more trains can pass across the bridge.
10.2 The new track layout means that either a wider single-deck or two-decks will need to be installed on the east side. Local widening of the bridge may be required. The ‘headroom’ between the road and the bridge will not be reduced.
Figure 8: Stuntney Road bridge proposals OFFICIAL
Figure 9: Image of existing Stuntney Road Bridge
11 Cutter Bridge proposals
11.1 Cutter bridge carries the railway over the River Great Ouse north of Ely Station.
Figure 10: Location of Cutter bridge OFFICIAL
Figure 11: Image of existing Cutter bridge 11.1 The bridge needs to be replaced to carry trains travelling at 50 miles per hour and more frequent train services. A safe walkway for railway staff carrying out routine maintenance is needed and the existing headroom above the river needs to be maintained so that navigation is not impacted.
11.2 Option 1 replaces the existing bridge with a longer deck bridge carrying two tracks. The bridge would be supported by new stronger abutments constructed behind the existing abutments on either side of the river. The existing embankments may also need to be widened.
Figure 12: Cutter bridge Option 1 - single span with two tracks
11.3 Option 2 replaces the existing bridge with two separate bridges over the river. One bridge deck would carry two tracks and the other bridge deck alongside OFFICIAL
would carry a single track. Three tracks would enable freight services to travel on and off the main London line more quickly, avoiding disruption between freight and passenger services. On the north bank of the river, the bridge would join a wall approximately 60 metres in length before joining the existing embankment.
Figure 13: Cutter bridge Option 2 - two spans carrying three tracks
12 Common Muckhill Bridge proposals
12.1 Common Muckhill bridge carries the railway across the River Great Ouse between Ely Marina and the Fisherman’s car park. (See figure 7).
Figure 14: Image of existing Common Muckhill bridge
OFFICIAL
12.2 The bridge needs to be replaced with a stronger bridge that can carry heavy freight trains and faster, more frequent train services. The new bridge would be designed to carry trains travelling at 50 miles per hour, and it needs to be high enough above the river to maintain the existing headroom for river navigation.
12.3 Option 1 is a new single deck truss or arch bridge supported by abutments constructed behind the existing bridge abutments on either bank of the river. A pier located in the middle of the river that supports the existing bridge would no longer be needed.
Figure 15: Common Muckhill bridge Option 1 - arch style with no central pier 12.4 Option 2 is a truss bridge that would be supported by a new central pier in the river. Bridge abutments would be constructed behind the existing bridge abutments on either bank of the river. The embankments either side of the abutments may also need to be strengthened and widened to accommodate the ballast that the tracks sit on.
Figure 16: Common Muckhill bridge Option 2 - truss style with pier OFFICIAL
13 Bridge Style options
13.1 To ensure that the new Cutter and Common Muckhill bridges are strong enough to carry heavy trains without reducing the headroom above the river, the bridges need to include load bearing structures above the height of the tracks.
13.2 Network Rail has carefully considered the potential visual and landscape impacts of the bridges and the load-bearing structures. Comments are invited on two options: a truss and an arch style bridge.
13.3 Given the proximity of the Cutter and Common Muckhill bridges, it is proposed that the same style of bridge (truss or arch) be adopted for both.
Figure 17: Illustrative bridge style options for Cutter and Common Muckhill bridges
14 Kiln Lane level crossing proposals
14.1 More frequent train services would result in the Kiln Lane level crossing being closed for much longer periods each hour. We are therefore proposing to permanently close the crossing.
OFFICIAL
Figure 18: Image of existing Kiln Lane level crossing
14.2 We’ll need to provide an alternative means of crossing the railway for pedestrians and an alternative means of vehicle access for commercial and leisure facilities.
14.3 Because the underlying ground is peat, piled foundations would be required for all the bridge design options.
14.4 Because of the high-water table, it is not viable to construct an underpass beneath the railway.
14.5 Comments are invited on the bridge design options, materials and whether it should be lit.
14.6 Option 1: Standard footbridge design
OFFICIAL
Figure 19: Kiln Lane footbridge Option 1 - standard design with ramps and stairs
14.7 Option 2: Spiral bridge design
Figure 20: Kiln Lane footbridge Option 2 – spiral ramp design (no stairs)
OFFICIAL
14.8 Option 3: Serpentine footbridge design
Figure 21: Kiln Lane footbridge Option 3: ramped serpentine design (no stairs)
14.9 Option 4: Wave footbridge design
Figure 22: Kiln Lane footbridge Option 4 – ramped wave design (no stairs) OFFICIAL
15 Kiln Lane vehicle access options
15.1 As well as the impact for pedestrians, the closure of Kiln Lane level crossing would also impact vehicular access for commercial and leisure properties on the east side of the crossing. To maintain vehicular access, we are proposing two options.
15.2 Option 1 includes a 300-metre-long viaduct constructed across part of the Ely Pits and Meadows site of special scientific interest and agricultural grazing land. The viaduct would be approximately 10 metres at its highest point. The route of the viaduct crosses the floodplain and therefore an earth embankment is not considered to be appropriate.
15.3 Option 2 would include the construction of a 60-metre vehicle bridge across the River Great Ouse with a new road access from Queen Adelaide Way. A public right of way along the bank of the river may need to be diverted. The site is in the floodplain and poor ground conditions mean that deep piling would be required to support the bridge.
15.4 To maintain headroom for navigation purposes between the river and bridge, there will need to be load bearing structures above the deck of the bridge. The overall height of the bridge could be reduced but a supporting pillar would need to be installed in the river.
Figure 23: Kiln Lane vehicle access option 1 - viaduct across railway
OFFICIAL
Figure 24: Kiln Lane vehicle access Option 2 - access via river bridge
16 Construction
16.1 Details on how we can potentially construct the options that are eventually chosen are at an early stage of development and, in some cases, not yet known.
16.2 Subject to a TWAO being granted and funding being received the potential construction could start as early as 2024
16.3 Our approach to construction will need to identify land next to the areas of works for temporary compounds and to access the sites.
16.4 These compounds will be a base for construction staff working in the area, providing essential welfare and administration facilities and to store equipment and materials.
16.5 The exact siting and size of compounds will take into account consultation with landowners, environmental features, topography and ownership of land for access.
16.6 Large cranes will also need to be sited next to the bridge replacement works. We will consult on these temporary land requirements with affected landowners and intend to present the proposals in spring/summer 2022.
16.7 We will need to manage the impacts of construction carefully with particular attention given to communities and sensitive environments. Construction Environmental Management Plans and Traffic Management Plans will need to be developed to minimise potential impacts.
OFFICIAL
16.8 The programme of works will be subject to constraints, among them the availability of resources, timing of railway blockades, possessions and interfaces with other local projects.
16.9 As there will be a need to take possession of operational railway whilst safety- critical works are undertaken, planning for this will be critical to communicate accurate, relevant and timely information to passengers in advance of any timetable changes. Various teams across the railway industry will liaise on plans to minimise disruption to passengers and communicate with lineside neighbours well in advance of the start of works.
17 Sustainability
17.1 Sustainability means making sure that everything we build, manage, service or develop leaves a lasting positive legacy for future generations, and that we keep potential impacts on the environment and society at the forefront of all decisions.
17.2 We are carrying out surveys and an environmental and social appraisal to better understand the environment where works are proposed and the potential impacts on communities. This will inform option selection and our designs.
18 Environmental Considerations
18.1 Applications for Transport and Works Act Orders are made in accordance with the Transport and Works (Applications and Objections Procedure) (England and Wales) Rules 2006 (the Applications Rules).
18.2 Rule 7 requires the submission of an Environmental Statement, for works that fall under Annex I or Annex II to the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (European Council Directive 2011/92/EU) (as amended). This Project will require an Environmental Statement under Annex II.
18.3 An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process of evaluating the likely significant environmental impacts as a result of the construction and operation of a proposed project or development on the natural and physical environment and the relationship of people with that environment.
18.4 A detailed Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) will carried be out on the preferred options, once selected, to identify and consider the ‘likely significant impacts’ of the construction and operation of the selected options on people and the natural and built environment.
OFFICIAL
18.5 A scoping exercise will be carried out to determine which environmental topics are relevant to the proposals. These are likely to include (but not limited to) consideration of:
• Air Quality • Water Quality • Noise Impacts • Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) • Communities • Impacts on Wildlife • Heritage • Landscape and visual impacts • Impacts to footpaths and rights of way • Impacts to road network
18.6 The EIA will assess what measures are required to mitigate significant adverse impacts of the construction and operation scheme.
18.7 The findings will be presented in an Environmental Statement and Non‑Technical Summary. This will be submitted with the consent application subject to securing funding for the next stage of the project.
18.8 The assessment will also ascertain cumulative effects generated by other known ‘committed’ developments coming forward at the same time as the Project.
18.9 Further engagement with relevant stakeholders will be undertaken as the EIA progresses.
Figure 25: Roswell Pits SSSI site next to Kiln Lane
OFFICIAL
19 Next Steps
19.1 Public feedback will help identify the preferred options for Ely South and shape the final proposals prior to submitting a Transport and Works Act Order in 2022 (subject to securing additional funding).
19.2 Following this consultation round focusing on Ely South, a further public consultation is planned later in 2021 which is likely to focus on:
• remodelling the track layout at Ely North Junction • Queen Adelaide level crossings options • upgrading or closing other level crossings between Ely and Peterborough; between Ely and Soham, between Ely and King’s Lynn and between Ely and Cambridge.
19.3 Level crossings between Ely and Ipswich may be included in a future round of consultation if the Ely Ipswich level crossing project is integrated into the EACE programme.
19.4 Subject to funding, the Round 3 consultation in 2022 will report on the feedback received during both consultations in Round 2 and how it informed our decisions on the preferred options.
19.5 Assuming social distancing restrictions are no longer in place, Network Rail would intend to supplement the digital consultation with a series of public exhibitions hosted at publicly accessible locations near to proposed development sites and potentially affected communities.
OFFICIAL
20 EACE Frequently Asked Questions – Round 2- Ely South
General questions
Q: What is the EACE programme? The Ely area capacity enhancement (EACE) programme is a proposal to upgrade the railway to allow more trains to run through Ely. We are currently developing options to improve connectivity and reliability for passenger services and meet the demand for more rail freight between the Port of Felixstowe, the West Midlands and the North to support sustainable, long-term economic growth
Q: Why is the railway around Ely Important? The railway around Ely is an important and busy part of the network where five railway lines converge, providing routes for trains operated by Greater Anglia, Great Northern, East Midland and Cross-Country services. It is also an important part of the strategic freight network connecting the Port of Felixstowe to the West Midlands and the North. Ely station is a key interchange for passengers when travelling to destinations including Cambridge to the south, Peterborough to the north-west, King’s Lynn to the north and Norwich to the north-east.
Q: Why does the railway need to be improved? Owing to the existing layout of the tracks and junction, signals and existing speed restrictions across key bridges, the railway through Ely is operating at full capacity. This means that we cannot increase the number of services through the area.
Q: How many trains are running currently? The current capacity of Ely allows approximately six and a half (off peak) to eight (peak) train services to run through Ely per hour in each direction. Based on a 2019 baseline, these off-peak services are as follows per hour in each direction:
• 1x London – King’s Lynn (passenger) • 1x Norwich – Liverpool (passenger) • 1x Birmingham – Stanstead (passenger) • 0.5x Ipswich – Peterborough (passenger) • 1x Norwich – Stanstead (passenger) • 1x Felixstowe – west midlands/north (freight) • 1x flexible service (freight)
Q: How many more trains do you want to run through Ely? The EACE programme is looking at what interventions could be needed to increase capacity through Ely to be used by up to 10 train services in each direction per hour (off peak).
NOTE FOR INFOMRATION: This equates to up to 11 train paths per hour (in each direction) with the existing Norwich-Liverpool services using two paths through Ely north junction, as it arrives and departs Ely over the same section of track.
OFFICIAL
Q: What are the benefits of improving capacity? In general terms, increasing capacity on the Ely railway is expected to bring benefits to the national, local and regional economies, with better connectivity and reliability for passengers. With rail freight demand growing, increasing the capacity of the rail network will support a shift from road to rail thereby providing a faster, greener, safer and more efficient way of transporting goods across the country; helping to remove lorries from the roads and further reduce pollution and congestion.
Q: How many more trains will run to (Peterborough/King’s Lynn/Norwich Cambridge)? The anticipated (off peak) passenger service uplift* could include:
• 2 x London - King’s Lynn (passenger) • 1 x Norwich – Liverpool (passenger) • 1 x Birmingham – Stanstead (passenger) • 1 x Ipswich – Peterborough (passenger) • 1 x Norwich – Stansted (off peak) or Cambridge (peak only) (passenger) • 1 x TBC service** (passenger) • 2x Felixstowe to the west midlands and the north (freight) • 1 x flexible service (freight)
*Services are subject to change ** Capacity for an additional passenger service to be confirmed
The proposals on train patterns will form part of the overall business case to ensure that we utilise the extra capacity for maximum benefit based on the demand at the time of entry into service. Even then, the train timetable will not be set for many years until the upgrades have been substantially completed to allow more trains to run safely on this part of the railway.
Q: How big is the scope of the programme? The programme is looking at all the railway systems between Cambridge and Ely, Ely and Peterborough and Ely and King’s Lynn. This includes: • 127 level crossings, • The Ely north junction track modifications • Bridge structures (Stuntley road bridge, Cutters river bridge and Common Muckhill river bridge) • Ely station and track modifications • Soham branch track modification • Signalling systems • Ely station changes
Q: When would you expect to deliver the programme to allow extra train services to run? It is too soon to say exactly when we could see more services running through Ely. We have several stages of work to complete including, consultation, design, funding decisions and authorisation which we hope we can achieve by 2024 subject to funding.
OFFICIAL
Q: Is the EACE programme part of Project Speed? Following the Government announcement for Project SPEED in February 2021, we are looking to reduce the overall cost and programme of delivery for the EACE programme (being subject to successfully navigating the next funding stage next year and the TWAO) by identifying efficiencies in the consent and construction programme. This may help to realise the benefits of increased capacity via Ely sooner rather than later.
Funding
Q: How is the programme funded? Network Rail has secured £13.1m funding from the Department for Transport and £9.3m funding from the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority, New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) and the Strategic Freight Network to understand the scale of the challenge to increase capacity through Ely.
NOTE: Additional funding of almost £9m has been granted by the DfT to develop proposals to upgrade level crossings between Ely and Ipswich. While this is not formally part of the EACE programme at this stage, it will support the EACE’s business case by unlocking capacity to run more freight and passenger services between Ipswich and Ely. This project may be integrated with the EACE programme at some point in the future.
Q: What will the current funding package enable you to do? This funding will enable Network Rail to develop the Outline Business Case (OBC) and submit this to the DfT in spring 2022 to consider the case for further funding to move towards submission of a TWAO.
Q: When do you need to seek more funding? We are currently funded to develop an outline business case (OBC) and submit this to the DfT by spring 2022.
Q: What will happen after you have submitted an Outline Business Case? The DfT and Network Rail, following their Rail Network Enhancement Pipeline (RNEP) will assess the Outline Business Case and decide whether there is sufficient justification to fund the next stage of the programme.
Q: What is the Rail Network Enhancement Pipeline process? The Rail network enhancements pipeline (RNEP), sets out the DfT’s and Network Rail’s approach for rail enhancements that require government funding. This approach creates a rolling programme of investment, focused on outcomes that provide benefits for passengers, freight users and the economy and moved government investment in enhancements away from a rigid 5-year cycle.
OFFICIAL
Consultation Round 1
Q: When was the Round 1 consultation? Round 1 consultation ran for six weeks from 20 September to 1 November 2020.
Q: What did you consult on in Round 1? The purpose of the Round 1 community consultation was to: • introduce the EACE programme to the community • set out the challenges of increasing capacity; • set out the aspirations and benefits of the programme • explained the current funding position.
We also sought feedback on Network Rail’s proposals for future public consultation.
Q: How successful was round 1? The project website received 8553 views and 260 feedback responses were submitted. We received 111 online chat messages, 47 of emails and we engaged in 27 minutes of conversations via the dedicated project telephone hotline.
Q: What were the results of round 1? A total of 207 (89%) responses received supported or strongly supported the proposals to increase capacity for passenger and freight services through the Ely area, 45 responses were undecided, five responses did not support the proposals and three responses strongly did not support.
Q: How has this feedback helped the EACE programme? The feedback we received during the first round of consultation has helped inform the option selection process and we are now able to provide more detail on the EAC programme and the potential options in the Ely South area as part of Round 2 consultation.
Q: What factors will you use to make your decisions on which options to take forward: As we progress the design/development work, we will consider, but not be limited to, the following factors in deciding on preferred options: • does the option deliver the required capacity and meet stakeholder aspirations? • is the option consistent with railway and wider social, environmental and economic policy? • the impact on communities and passengers • environmental and sustainability impacts • the amount of additional land that would be required to deliver the scheme • is it affordable? • can it be constructed? • operational access requirements • maintenance.
OFFICIAL
Consultation Round 2
Q: What are you consulting on for Round 2? We are now consulting on options for the works in the Ely South Area. This includes, the Soham branch line, Ely station, three bridge structures and Kiln Lane level crossing.
Q: Will there by more rounds of consultation? We will hold more public consultation rounds for other areas of the programme. A consultation round is being planned for autumn 2021 which will include options for Ely North junction, Queen Adelaide level crossings and level crossings in the wider Ely area. We may also seek to consult on level crossings between Ipswich and Ely to support the overall business case for the EACE programme.
Another round of consultation is being planned for mid spring/summer 2022 (subject to funding).
OFFICIAL
Projected Project Cost
Q: How much will all this work cost to increase rail capacity? The programme has secured funding from the DfT (£13m) in 2020 to progress the current stage of development. It is too soon to say what the programme will cost to deliver all the works necessary to increase capacity until we have made further progress on the options and submitted an Outline Business Case to the DfT in 2022.
Q: When will you know more about the anticipated cost? The Outline Business Case (OBC) which will be submitted to the Department for Transport in spring 2022 will make a case for funding the next stages of consultation, design and development based on work being done during the current consultation stages. We will have a much better idea of the likely costs at that time.
Q: Previous reports in the media have stated that the project could cost up to £500 million plus. Is this correct? The cost estimates reported in the media are projections only and are not confirmed at this stage of the consultation process before options have been chosen. We can confirm that we have secured funding (£13m) for the EACE programme and almost £9m for the Ipswich to Ely level crossing programme to continue the development work to understand in more detail what the options are and what the likely cost could be for each of those options. We will have a much better idea of the likely costs when we submit the Outline Business Case to the DfT in 2022.
OFFICIAL
Timeline
Q: What are the stages of consultation? The stages of public consultation are currently: • September 2020 Public Consultation Round 1 – entire scope and challenge COMPLETE • May 2021 Public Consultation – Ely South focus • Autumn 2021 (TBC) Public Consultation - all areas outside Ely South including Queen Adelaide and Ely North Junction • Spring 2022 Submission of Outline Business Case to seek further funding for next stage of development • *Autumn/Winter 2022 Public Consultation on preferred options – area to be confirmed • *Winter 2022/23 Transport and Works Act Order submission • *Late 2024 TWAO determination • *Delivery TBC
*Subject to funding being secured
Q: Why are some consultation stages subject to funding? We are following the DfT’s and Network Rail’s Rail Network Enhancements Pipeline (RNEP) process which is a rolling process of investment. We will need to submit an Outline Business Case in 2022 to the DfT to seek more funding to progress to the latter stages of consultation and authorisation to build the programme.
Q: When do you intend to submit the TWAO application? Subject to funding, we currently anticipate that a TWAO could be submitted to the Secretary of State winter 2022/23 with a decision by the end of 2024. We are working hard to reduce the timescale for submission of the TWAO so that we can deliver the benefits sooner as part of Project SPEED.
Q: When would the works start/finish? It is too soon to say exactly when and how the project could be delivered as we are still at an early stage of development and there is no secured funding beyond 2022 but we are looking at how we could streamline the design and development stages as part of Project SPEED.
Q: Can’t you speed up the process so the benefits can be delivered sooner? The Government has challenged the rail industry (Friday, February 26) to pioneer new ways of working, to halve the time and reduce the cost of delivering critical infrastructure projects. Project SPEED will focus on halving the time and slashing costs of delivering rail infrastructure projects. The EACE programme is part of Project SPEED and work is being done to seek ways to reduce the time to deliver the additional capacity sooner.
OFFICIAL
Land Acquisition
Q: Would you need to acquire land as part of this programme? A lot of the work could be undertaken on existing railway land using permitted development rights, though we may have to temporarily acquire land to carry out the works. Some land may need to be permanently acquired subject to the options that are put forward.
Q: When will anyone affected by land acquisition be consulted? We are talking to or planning to talk to those landowners at the right time based on the phases of consultation. We are in contact with those landowners that are likely to be affected by the proposals being put forward for Round 2 consultation. Similarly, we are planning to contact those landowners in advance at each subsequent stage of consultation as options are presented to the public.
Q: I have been asked to provide access to my land for surveys. Does this mean that my land will be at risk of compulsory purchase? No. We are undertaking various surveys including ecological surveys to gather important information to allow us to consider potential environmental impacts on wildlife and their habitats or to understand ground conditions to inform our design work. The survey areas are broad, covering wider surrounding habitats away from the immediate confines of the railway, to inform the potential options that will eventually be presented at future public consultation rounds.
Q: How will you acquire any land if needed? Landowners will be formally contacted by Network Rail’s land agents at the right time with proposals that may impact their land to hold formal discussions. Any preferred options eventually selected will be part of an application to seek authorisation to build (such as a Transport and Works Act Order). If any land is required, we will seek permission to acquire the land through the authorisation process unless prior agreement can be reached with the landowner.
OFFICIAL
Kiln Lane crossing
Q: Where is Kiln Lane? Kiln Lane is a private road off Prickwillow Road which leads to the area around the Roswell pits.
Q: Why is Kiln Lane important? Kiln Lane has a level crossing which provides access across the railway for vehicles and pedestrians. The level crossing provides access for businesses and compounds which are located on the east side of the crossings and there is also access to a public footpath.
Q: Would you need to close Kiln Lane? Our assessments show that running more trains over the crossing would result in a significant increase in barrier down time each hour to such an extent that it will no longer be viable or safe to remain in use. We are proposing to close the crossing and provide an alternative means of access for pedestrians and vehicles.
Q: How will you maintain pedestrian access across the railway for pedestrians? Four footbridge options are presented in Consultation Round 2. These are: • Standard NR style footbridge with ramps and stairs • Spiral ramped footbridge • Serpentine ramped footbridge • Wave footbridge
Q: Can you construct an underpass instead? No. The water table is too high in this location and any underpass would be liable to continuous flooding.
Q: What about vehicle access to the commercial premises? The closure of Kiln Lane crossing will require an alternative means of access for the commercial and leisure properties located on the east side of the crossing. We are presenting two options for comment in Round 2: • (Option 1) A 300-metre-long vehicle bridge over the railway • (Option 2) A 60 metre vehicle bridge over the River Great Ouse from Queen Adelaide Way
Q: The level crossing is close to Roswell Pits; a site of special scientific interest (SSSI). Would your work impact on Roswell Pits? Yes, all options will have an impact on the local environment to varying degrees, but we will need to manage the impacts of construction carefully with particular attention given to communities and sensitive environments. Construction Environmental Management Plans and Traffic Management Plans will need to be developed to minimise potential impacts.
OFFICIAL
Roswell Pits
Q: Where are Roswell Pits Roswell Pits is an eight-hectare nature reserve on the eastern outskirts of Ely. It is managed by the Environment Agency which has an office based nearby. It is part of the wider Ely pits and is a designated site of special scientific interest for both biological and geological interest.
Q: What are Roswell Pits? Roswell pits were sites of former works for clay extraction. These former clay pits have lakes and reedbeds. Birds include common terns, kingfishers and reed warblers, there are flowers such as bee orchids and emperor dragonflies. The site has yielded fossils of dinosaurs, crocodiles and turtles.
They are also used by Ely Sailing Club since the club was founded in 1946.
Q: Would the railway works at Kiln Lane impact on Roswell pits? (See section on Kiln Lane)
Q: How will Network Rail protect Roswell pits and the environment? A detailed Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) will carried be out on the preferred options to identify and consider the ‘likely significant impacts’ of the construction and operation of the selected options on people and the natural and built environment.
The EIA will assess what measures are required to mitigate significant adverse impacts of the construction and operation.
Cutters Bridge (1569) and Common Muckhill Bridge (1572)
Q: What bridge structures are you looking at? There are two significant railway bridges that cross the River Great Ouse, which currently have speed restrictions imposed on them. These are Cutters Bridge and Common Muckhill Bridge. Round 2 consultation is presenting several options for these two structures.
Q: Where are these bridges located? These two rail bridges are located just to the north of Ely station and span the curve of the River Great Ouse.
Q: What is wrong with these bridges? Owing to the age and structure of these bridges, they have speed restrictions on them which limit the speed at which freight and passengers’ services can travel across the bridge. This is one of the limiting factors to running more trains through Ely.
OFFICIAL
Q: Why do these bridges have speed restrictions? Cutter bridge and Common Muckhill bridges are predominantly made of wrought iron and constructed around 1896. While structurally sound, the bridges are not able to withstand faster train speeds owing to their age and design.
Q: Why train speed is a factor? A train travelling at speed exerts a greater downward force than a train travelling at slower speeds. If we were to allow heavy freight trains to run faster than 20mph and passenger trains to run faster than 30mph, the forces exerted onto the structure could exceed the current tolerances and may damage the structure.
Q: What are the options for Common Muckhill bridge? We need to replace the bridge with a stronger design that can support faster and more frequent services. The new bridge would be designed to carry two tracks with trains travelling at 50 miles per hour. • Option 1 – single span (truss or arch) carrying two tracks supported by bridge abutments on either bank of the river (no central pier). • Option 2 – two spans (supported by a central pier) truss bridge supported by bridge abutments on either bank of the river
Q: What are the options for Cutter Bridge The bridge needs to be replaced to carry trains travelling at 50 miles per hour and more frequent train services. A safe walkway for railway staff carrying out routine maintenance is needed. We are offering two options for this bridge: • Option 1: A single span carrying two tracks supported by new abutments constructed behind the existing abutments either side of the river. • Option 2: Two separate single spans; one carrying two tracks and the other carrying a single track.
Q: Why does option 2 need separate single spans? Three tracks would enable freight services to travel on and off the main London line more quickly, avoiding disruption between freight and passenger services.
Q: Would a wider single bridge to carry three tracks be a better option? A wider bridge capable of carrying three tracks is too heavy to be able to lift in, in one piece. We would have to close the railway for a longer period and build a wider bridge in sections meaning longer period of disruption to the railway. Prefabricating the two spans off site and then lifting them separately would minimise disruption of the railway.
Q: What kind of bridge style are you offering for Common Muckhill and Cutter bridge? What is the visual impact? The bridges need to be strong enough to carry faster and more frequent train services without reducing the headroom above the river. The bridges will need a load bearing structure above the deck. Network Rail, having considered the potential visual and landscape impacts, are presenting two options: • Arch style bridge • Truss style bridge
OFFICIAL
Given the proximity of the Cutter and Common Muckhill bridges to each other, it is proposed that the same style of bridge (truss or arch) will be adopted for both.
Q: Will boat access to the marina be impacted? There will have to be some temporary restrictions in place during the construction phase which may impact river access to the marina.
Q: Will the headroom for boats be impacted? We have considered the issue of maintaining river navigation and all options being presented for Common Muckhill and Cutter bridges maintain the existing headroom for river navigation by including a load bearing structure above the bridge deck.
Stuntney Road bridge
Q: What are you proposing for Stuntney Road bridge? We are proposing to replace the bridge with a stronger deck and reposition the tracks so that they can support an increase in train speed and frequency. The options are: • A single span carrying two tracks • Two separate spans – one carrying two tracks and the other carrying a single track
Q: Will the new road bridge provide higher clearance for road vehicles? The new bridge options are not being designed to increase the height restriction for road vehicles. The Ely southern bypass will continue to be the primary route into Ely for large vehicles.
Ely Station
Q: What do you need to do at Ely station? The alignment of the tracks along Platform 3 needs to be straightened to enable trains to pull out of the station quicker. As a result, Platform 3 will need to be widened by approximately five metres at the northern end so that passengers are able to step safely between trains and the platform.
Q: Will you need to reconfigure railway equipment such as signals and overhead line structures? Yes. Railway equipment, including signals and overhead line structures and associated telecoms equipment will need to be relocated and reconfigured to accommodate the changes.
Q: Are your proposals a part of the local authority’s Ely Masterplan 2010 proposals? No. These proposals are about increasing capacity on the railway. The modifications being proposed for the station are to facilitate and accommodate a more frequent train service. They do not include proposals to change the station entrance/ticket office.
Q: Are you presenting options for the changes to the station? We are not formally presenting options for the changes to Ely station, however, the public are welcome to submit their views on the proposed changes.
OFFICIAL
Ely Dock Junction
Q: What and where is Ely Dock junction? Ely Dock Junction is where the Soham branch line joins the main Cambridge to Ely (Fen) line to the south of Ely station.
Q: What are your proposals for Ely Dock Junction? We will need to reposition tracks so that more trains can pass through the junction. The structures that support the overhead lines will be relocated and replaced to accommodate the new tracks. Troughing will be installed along the tracks, which will house the cable management system, together with small cabinets housing signalling and control equipment.
Q: Are you presenting options for the changes to Ely Dock junction We are not formally presenting options for the changes to Ely Dock junction, however, the public are welcome to submit their views on the proposals
Soham Branch line
Q: What are you planning for the Soham branch line? We’re proposing to construct a passing loop at the far northern end of the Soham branch line where it meets the West Anglia main line south of Ely. This will need a wider embankment to support the track.
Q: Why do you need to build a passing loop? The single track Soham branch line between Ely and Soham restricts the number of trains that can operate on the line and is a limiting factor to increasing capacity. The branch line is used by freight trains and a two hourly passenger service (Greater Anglia Ipswich – Peterborough service). A passing loop will improve the operational flexibility of the line for more freight and more passenger services by allowing faster passenger services to move past the slower moving freight services.
Q: Will you be doubling the line to the new Soham station? The EACE programme is not proposing to double the Soham branch line however, separate discussions are ongoing with the wider rail industry in respect to doubling the branch line to support freight and passenger services.
Q: How long is the freight loop? The proposed freight loop is 400 metres long
Q: Will you need to undertake works to the embankment? Yes, the embankment will need to be increased in size to accommodate a second track to act as the passing loop.
Q: What is happening to the three level crossings? OFFICIAL
The public footpath at Newmarket Bridge level crossing is being diverted to the adjacent underbridge (along the cycletrack) as part of the Cambridgeshire Level Crossing Reduction Order 2020.
Network Rail is investigating options to close or upgrade Wells Engine level crossing for the use of landowners. We are also looking into options to divert the public footpath and will consult on these as part of the Round 3 public consultation.
Hawkes level crossing, which does not carry any public rights and is located just to the south of the Ely Southern Bypass, is being legally closed by agreement.
Q: Are you presenting options for the changes to the Soham branch line? We are not formally presenting options for the infrastructure changes to the Soham branch line and the proposed freight loop however, the public are welcome to submit their views on the proposals presented.
OFFICIAL
Future Consultation Rounds
Q: When will we be able to see proposals for Ely North junction and Queen Adelaide level crossings? We are planning another consultation round later in 2021 which will include options on: • Remodelling of the track at Ely North Junction • Options for the level crossings at Queen Adelaide • Changes to other level crossings between Ely and Peterborough, between Ely and Cambridge, Ely and King’s Lynn and between Ely and Ipswich.
Q: Where is Ely north junction? Ely north junction is located approximately 1.5 miles to the north east of Ely station.
Q: What do you need to do at Ely north junction? The current track layout of the junction may need to be remodelled to provide a more efficient way to allow more passenger and freight services to move through the junction.
Q: Wasn’t there a scheme to upgrade Ely north junction a few years ago? The Ely North junction scheme was a proposal to improve the track layout of the main rail junction to the north of Ely station, however, this work was put on hold following the Hendy review in 2016. This has given us the opportunity to review the wider capacity constraints around Ely which also need to be considered to deliver the benefits of increased capacity.
Q: When will Network Rail have more information on options affecting Queen Adelaide? We are planning future consultation round later in 2021 where road and rail options for Queen Adelaide will be presented to the community.
Level Crossings (general questions)
Q: How many level crossings could be affected by these proposals? Within the scope of the current programme, there are 127 level crossings which could be affected by these proposals.
There are an additional 48 level crossings between Ipswich and Ely that will need to be assessed as part of separately funded programme.
Q: Why do you need to look at 127 level crossings? Level crossings introduce the greatest risk to the railway because of the interface with road and rail infrastructure. If we want to run more trains across these level crossings, we must undertake additional risk assessments. These may require level crossings to be upgraded which provide a greater level of protection for all level crossing users.
Q: Will you need to close any level crossings? In some circumstances the frequency of trains running across a level crossing may mean that the barriers are down for significant periods of time, especially in peak hours. If this happens, it may be better to close a level crossing permanently. OFFICIAL
Any such proposals would need to be consulted with the local authority to determine if an alternative route across the railway would be required to maintain road connectivity for vehicles. We would also need to check if any existing rights of way will need to be adjusted.
Q: Why will increasing capacity affect the level crossings? To accommodate a higher frequency of faster train services along a given route means that we must assess existing level crossings to make sure that they meet the required safety measures set out by the railway industry.
For example, we may need to upgrade the barrier equipment and/or the detection systems at some level crossings to improve safety and provide more warning of an approaching train particularly if train speeds are higher. In some circumstances barriers could be closed for longer periods in each hour and if they are closed for too long, we may have consider closing a crossing and look to provide an alternative solution to cross the railway.
Q: Could some level crossings be closed? Except for Kiln Lane which is part of the Round 2 consultation, we are reviewing which level crossings will need some form of intervention to realise the benefits of increased rail capacity. Details of our proposals will be presented at future consultation rounds for those level crossings together with information on proposals for alternative diversion routes for roads and or public footpaths.
Signalling
Q: Do you need to change the signalling system? In order to increase capacity through Ely we will need to look at changes to the signalling system to maintain safe distances between trains (called headway) while accommodating more frequent train services.
Q: Why is this important? The signalling system is the brain of the railway, controlling the speed of the trains, when they can run through a section of railway and maintain the gap between services (called headway) which is a very important to provide a safe railway system for millions of passengers.
Q: Isn’t Network Rail already planning to make changes to the signalling system around Cambridge? Yes. The Cambridge re-signalling relock and recontrol project is proposing to replace almost 700 pieces of signalling equipment around the Cambridge area.
Q: Are you working together with the signalling renewals team to minimise disruption? Yes. The EACE team is working collaboratively with the signalling renewals team to make sure plans are integrated and won’t preclude future changes as part of the EACE programme.