Agenda item

To consider and note the Wisbech Rail Update.

Members considered the Wisbech Rail Update presented by Rowland Potter.  Councillor Mason introduced Rowland Potter and welcomed him and Councillor Seaton to the meeting.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows:

·         Councillor Booth asked where the timescales for the project were and expressed the view that more research needed to be done. He asked when they would see the project undertaken and asked for more context around timings. Rowland Potter appreciated the frustration over the time taken and explained that there had been challenges due to the line being out of use. He explained that a detailed business case had been created for the heavy rail option and that this had been put forward. Rowland Potter acknowledged that they had put in a strong submission for restoring the existing railways but this had been rejected on several grounds by the restoring railways fund application, including the high-cost estimate and the fact that the proposal suggested two services per hour from Wisbech to Cambridge which Ely Station did not have the current capacity for. He explained that they had been advised that they could continue developing a third-party scheme and that it would be reviewed once the Ely capacity issues had been resolved towards the end of year. Rowland Potter stated that after positive engagement with the relevant areas they went back to Board and requested further funds to progress to the next stage. He made the point that the first business case had failed to engage with Network Rail, explaining that Network Rail had a project control framework with a section called 3 and that they had opted to go down the 3b route which is the technical build up and  Network Rail then completed 3c which was the review, with there being some challenges as they had gone directly for heavy rail and had discounted light rail early with Network Rail stating that there needed to be evidence of the review of light rail. Rowland Potter informed the panel that they had received one report back which was the technical report, summary of the business case and recommendations on how to progress and that they were awaiting the other report on demand modelling and how profitable it would be commercially, with it being the intention to return to the Transport Committee Board in March with the reports. With regards to the question about the programme, he stated that if they got approval then they were expecting that there would then be a recommendation for a refinement of the business case based on the recommendations that had been given which would lead into consultation and the consideration of light rail. Rowland Potter hoped that the process would be sorter as they already had a strong business case for heavy rail and predicted that it could be completed within six months.

·         Councillor Booth stated that he had heard that the new Mayor was considering the light rail option and asked what the difference was to heavy rail? Rowland Potter responded that there were a variety of potential options, heavy rail was the traditional service that could run on main lines whereas light rail cannot run on the same rail as heavy rail due to safety concerns. He explained that the cost was a significant difference, with the heavy rail option needing a significant upgrade to the current tracks and the problem with the heavy rail option lay with the crossings as the old ones could not simply be reopened as they would need full barriers. On the other hand, Rowland Potter informed the panel that light rail could work with crossings that have half barriers or traffic lights and that it could also potentially run-on refurbished tracks. He made the point that they were also looking at whether a shuttle service would be possible and whether connectivity would be possible with an option to join the main line. Rowland Potter explained that they needed to present both the feasibility and affordability, but they also needed to consider whether the people of Wisbech want a shuttle service to just March or whether they want to travel to the rest of the country.

·         Councillor Miscandlon asked whether they could come back to the panel with a definitive update on where they were once they had a better understanding as the Council and public need to understand what is going on. Rowland Potter stated that they could come before the panel again after the papers were published as they were still building up the details at the time. Councillor Seaton responded that as soon as the papers were published in March he would be happy to circulate the details to panel and members in detail.

·         Councillor Count stated that he was disappointed about the update as it was very short and brief, making the point that light rail was not even mentioned in the report despite it seeming to be an option on the table. He expressed the view that there seems to be an old piece of paperwork on heavy rail and a new vision on light rail and also the mention of the possibility of new innovative mass transport. Councillor Count made the point that it had been quoted that by ruling out heavy rail the chances of the incinerator being built in Wisbech would be non-existent but that there had been nothing else mentioned about other alternative innovative means and it was a shame that the other options were not detailed as they seemed possible. He also noted the possibility of connecting other communities such as those in Friday Bridge and Coldham. Councillor Count expressed his worry that next paper would not give the options to allow people to pick a preference and questioned what the timescales for the different possibilities were and asked what position the Mayor was taking. He stated that it was previously part of the levelling up agenda and that without bringing Wisbech in via better transport links the issues there would never be solved, explaining that they wanted to put Wisbech residents in reach of better jobs. Rowland Potter accepted Councillor Counts point on the detail of the report and explained that in relation to the Mayor’s position he would not predetermine the outcome and explained that it was and had always been his intention to get a connection between March and Wisbech. He explained that the lack of detail in the paper was down to the fact that they had not received the reports from Network Rail yet and that there were a variety of solutions, with some possibilities including an automated system with light rail that could have the technology for on demand stopping. Rowland Potter explained that all of that had to be looked at in the proposal and that there were different financial challenges with different possibilities. He explained that there were all sorts of possibilities, from heavy rail and new hydrogen trains down to revolution very light rail which for all intents and purposes looks and feels like a train and they needed to look at modelling for commercial viability for just the shuttle only service as the difference could be considerable based on the difference in expenses. Rowland Potter informed the panel that in terms of detail they were trying to give as much as possible but that they were still working on a lot of the detail at that time.

·         Councillor Count expressed the view that any business case for rail would be aided by late rail services in March and people cannot work in Cambridge as it was not accessible by rail due to early and late trains being non-existent. He stated that it was important to get early and later trains for this reason. Rowland Potter explained that he was engaged in talks around this and that they had brought together the train operators to look at challenges with the last Mayor. He stated that they were looking at connectivity with buses alongside the railway times and that there had been recent meetings following the opening at Soham but whilst the issue was on his radar there had been challenges throughout the pandemic.

·         Councillor Cornwell expressed the opinion that ultimately the decision would be financially driven and questioned whether they should be consulting with Wisbech residents already about what they want as there was no point going down certain routes unless the demand was there. Rowland Potter agreed that they did need to ask the people of Wisbech what their preference was, but they also needed to consider the people of Wisbech of the future. He explained that they want to bring new people in as well through the scheme and make Wisbech a more attractive place and the consultation would be aimed at the wider community and businesses as well. He referred the mention of freight being an option and explained that palletised freight was being considered and could be an area worth further exploration.

·         Councillor Cornwell asked whether they were considering further links noting that if they went down light rail route they could link in with other areas such as Downham Market.  Rowland Potter stressed caution on expanding the scope of the scheme as the focus had always been on Wisbech to March and he would be hesitant to widen the scope at this stage as it would slow down the whole process. He explained that there was the possibility of future links but that they wanted to focus on what they had currently. Councillor Seaton explained that they did not want to dilute what they were currently doing, with the project having been going on for a long time and that they did not want to lengthen the task further. He explained that until they knew what was feasible they could not go to consultation but that they would be undertaking this as soon as possible. Councillor Cornwell reiterated that there was little use in producing a business case for something that no one wants. Councillor Seaton explained that they would be presented with options and costings and that it would not be a single take it or leave it case.

·         Councillor Wicks referred to the change from Network Rail to publicly owned rail and asked whether this would be another issue to overcome? Rowland Potter responded that Great British Railways were looking to streamline the processes and explained that they were already engaged with them but that they still needed to look at the process with Network Rail until the change was complete but the change to Great British Railways could be beneficial. He stated that there could be an opportunity to create further access but that it needs to be affordable and be a service that gets people to where they want to be and back when they want to come back. Rowland Potter explained that they were not looking at the transition to Great British Rail being a negative at this point.

The Wisbech Rail update was noted for information.