What is freight? A Working Group Discussion Paper outlining our understanding

The Working Group received the following discussion document which we found useful and hope may inform members of the public. Please feel free to make comment or further information by emailing clerk@greatshelfordparishcouncil.gov.uk with a message headed FREIGHT COMMENTS. Thankyou.

Rail Freight

In former times sending freight by rail meant loading wagons which could be coupled up, uncoupled and shunted in marshalling yards, and attached to several trains before reaching their destination. The Beeching report found that in 1961 the average time a wagon spent in transit between being loaded and unloaded was 11.9 working days. Nowadays trains are more likely to travel as a fixed formation between their origin and destination.

We can distinguish three broad types of freight: dedicated, Network Rail’s own movements, and container (or intermodal).

Dedicated

By this we mean a regular movement of a train carrying one type of cargo. Examples are fuel, biomass for power stations, china clay, steel strip, quarry materials, vehicles, and building rubble or other waste. In the past coal would have featured massively – Beeching noted 145 million tonnes of coal per year moved by rail – but that traffic is almost extinct. Generally the timetable is constructed to allow regular movements of these trains between the same points, it being understood that the train may not occupy its “path” every day. Local examples are an aggregates train from a Leicestershire quarry to Harlow, which comes through Shelford at around 0505 or 0835, and the train bringing landfill from the London area to the former quarry at Barrington: the track from Foxton to Barrington was relaid a couple of years ago to accommodate this. However, we see relatively few of this kind of train, as we are not home to, or on a route between, much in the way of quarrying, mining, or heavy industry.

NR’s own movements

We get quite a few of these as Network Rail (NR) has a large depot at Whitemoor, near March, where they store ballast, sleepers and rails. Trains go from Whitemoor to wherever track renewal or repair work is taking place in our part of the UK. This is normally a night or weekend activity, so Friday night often sees trains trundling out from Whitemoor, to return at some point before the start of services on Monday. There are also some regular movements, for example a train from Kent to Whitemoor which comes through Shepreth Branch Junction off the King’s Cross line at around 1425 on Mondays to Fridays, and more specialised trains such as inspection trains which use ultrasound to detect cracked rails, and the leaf-clearing train in the autumn. We needn’t worry too much about these NR trains, except to note that fully-loaded ballast trains are probably the heaviest to pass through our lines.

Container, or intermodal

This is where containers arrive by ship, are off-loaded, then loaded and transported by rail, usually to a point where they are again offloaded and complete their journey by road. Ports refer to this traffic as Lo-lo (lift on, lift off). Recent years have seen massive growth in both container ports and in the inland terminals where the containers are transferred to road vehicles. The UK’s largest lo-lo ports by containers handled are, in order, Felixstowe, Southampton and London, the last being very much a growth area since the opening of the London Gateway port in 2013. To make economic sense, the inland terminals need to be sufficiently far from the ports to make a double transfer (ship to rail then rail to road) attractive. For shorter distances it’s cheaper to load the road vehicle directly at the port. Thus the terminals served from the three ports mentioned tend to lie from the Midlands northwards: examples are Daventry, Trafford Park, Doncaster, Leeds, Mossend (Lanarkshire) and the recently-opened East Midlands Gateway.

So in general freight from Felixstowe, Southampton and London will want to access the East Coast Main Line (ECML), for Leeds and Doncaster, or the Midland Main Line (MML) for the East Midlands), or the West Coast main line (WCML), for the West Midlands, Manchester and onwards towards Scotland. This is why there has been and still is concentration on the Felixstowe to Nuneaton corridor (F2N, in the jargon), as this route (Felixstowe – Stowmarket – Ely – Peterborough – Leicester – Nuneaton) enables trains from Felixstowe to access the ECML at Peterborough, the MML at Leicester, and the WCML at Nuneaton. This route is constrained by single-track sections on the Felixstowe branch itself and between Soham and Ely, and by the junction layout at Ely: for years there have been plans to remove these constraints and to electrify the whole F2N route, but so far the only visible results have been some double-tracking on the Felixstowe branch and the opening of the “bacon factory” chord to avoid reversal at Ipswich.

So it is significant that the only freight service, as opposed to freight capability, mentioned in the recent EWR documentation is for the stretch between Oxford and Bletchley: this makes perfect sense at it allows trains from Southampton to reach the WCML at Bletchley. We would not anticipate large volumes of freight on “our” section of EWR, not because of objections to it, but more simply because it doesn’t go the right way for the main freight movements: no connection is planned with the ECML, and those with the MML at Bedford and the WCML at Bletchley both point the wrong way, i.e. towards London rather than towards the Midlands. However, it would be possible to install north-facing chords at those locations, with some property acquisition and demolition, and EWR is clearly a possible route for the trains which currently run from Felixstowe to Bristol or Cardiff.

Freight traction

Less than 10% of the UK’s rail freight uses electric traction. There are two underlying reasons:

  1. Only 46.5% of the UK’s rail mileage is electrified, and electrification is concentrated on the main passenger lines and commuter routes;
  2. The “final mile” issue. Most freight trains begin and end their journeys in sidings and terminals which are not electrified, and sometimes for good reason: you can’t load and offload containers if the train is sitting under overhead power lines, for example. So operators prefer to avoid the expense of attaching or substituting a second locomotive for these “final mile” movements, leading to situations where although a freight train may cover most of its journey “under the wires”, it can’t take advantage of them.

This picture is evolving. Not counting some ancient diesel locomotives which can also operate on the Southern Region’s third-rail electrification, the UK now has 10 bi-mode locomotives which can be powered by the overhead wires or by their own diesel engine. There is a gross disparity in power between the two modes (4MW electric, 0.7MW diesel), but the diesel engine is adequate for shunting and for slow movements along freight-only branch lines.

Currently 30 tri-mode locomotives are on order and due to enter service from 2023. As the name suggests, these can operate in three modes:

  1. From the overhead electric wires
  2. Using the diesel engine, boosted where necessary by the batteries
  3. On battery power alone. This is to facilitate final-mile movements with zero emissions, for example where a terminal is in a built-up area.

The batteries are charged by regenerative braking and, if necessary, from an onboard transformer. These locomotives will have a better balance of power between modes, enabling them to operate at speed on non-electrified lines, and will switch modes during journeys to take advantage of the overhead power on electrified lines.

We will avoid here any debate about possible future power sources such as fuel cells.

Five final points:

  1. Of the three ports mentioned, the big growth area is London Gateway, from where there is easy access to Stratford and its connection to “our” Liverpool Street line, which trains can use to go via Bishops Stortford and Cambridge to join the F2N route at Ely. There is already a timetable slot for a Leeds to London Gateway train which, when it runs, passes through Shelford at around 0345.
  2. More jargon: railway lines all have the same track gauge, but have different “loading gauges” to denote the size of trains they can accommodate. Our understanding is
  • W8 gauge means the line can accommodate the standard 2.6-metre high shipping containers
  • W10 gauge can take 2.9-metre high “hi-cube” containers
  • W12 gauge matches W10 for height and is slightly wider to accommodate refrigerated containers.
  • W12 is the standard for new lines: even if they are not expected to carry freight, this builds in future capacity and allows them to be used as diversionary routes.
  1. The capacity for rail freight through the Channel Tunnel is chronically, and sadly, under-used. There is a history of technical compatibility problems, arguments about track access charges, perhaps a lack of political will, and more recently concerns linked to security and stowaways. A lot of goods moved by lorries through the tunnel could be on trains if these issues were resolved.
  2. The relevance of (3) above to us is that some Channel Tunnel freight trains use HS1 and its crossing under the Thames to reach a terminal at Barking. It would be easy to continue from there on the route via Stratford as above.

    So it’s possible that more freight will reach us off the Liverpool Street line, either from London Gateway or from the Channel Tunnel via Barking. At present this line is only W8 gauge, whereas F2N is a mixture of W10 and W12. However, NR’s Freight Network Study (April 2017) stated:

    “The key W10 aspirations include: West Anglia Main Line via Cambridge to Ely and Cheshunt to provide diversionary capacity for the traffic on the Felixstowe to the West Midlands and the North route and flows from London Gateway and Tilbury, and for the southern section of the East Coast Main Line.”
  3. The above text is not authoritative but is a summary of what members of the transport and travel infrastructure working group understand.

Summary of EWR’s plans as understood by GSPC

This document represents a summary of the TTIWG’s interpretation of East West Railway Company’s Consultation Report, released on 31st March 2021.

Glossary of technical terms

CRConsultation Report issued by EWR Co on 31st March.
CSConsultation Summary issued by EWR on 31st March and sent to residents’ home addresses via the post.
EWREast West Rail: the proposed new railway that will connect Oxford and Cambridge.
EWR CoEast West Railway Company: a company set up by the Department for Transport that has the responsibility for delivering EWR.
Grade-separated junctionA railway junction whereby two railways merge by one railway crossing the other at a different height (grade). This may be achieved via a flyover or an underpass. The railway junction at Hitchin between the East Coast Main Line and the SBR is a nearby example of such a junction.
Non grade-separated junctionA railway junction whereby two railways merge with both of the railways at the same height (grade) via a system of points. The current layout of SBJ is an example of this.
SBJShepreth Branch Junction: the railway junction where the SBR joins the WAML. It is located in Great Shelford between Granham’s Road and the allotments, underneath the footbridge.
SBRShepreth Branch Royston line, known locally as the “Kings Cross Line”. This railway line runs from Hitchin on the East Coast Main Line, through Royston to the WAML, joining at SBJ in Great Shelford. It is also known as the Cambridge Line in some quarters.
TRTechnical Report issued by EWR Co on 31st March.
WAMLWest Anglia Main Line, known locally as the “Liverpool Street Line”. This runs from Liverpool Street Station to Cambridge through Great Shelford.

Background

EWR is a proposed major new railway connecting Oxford and Cambridge and is a critical component of the Government’s Ox-Cam arc project. The government believes that EWR could deliver significant benefits to South Cambridgeshire but, unfortunately, the proposed route alignment through our County and the manner in which it has been developed are causing serious concern within Great Shelford and other nearby affected parishes.

A consultation covering the section from Bedford to Cambridge began on 31 March and will run until 9 June. This document provides a summary of the project’s potential impact on Great Shelford parish and the Sawston and Shelford County Council division.

EWR’s plans for Great Shelford parish

Overview

CR; Section F

TR; 11.6 & 11.7

Assuming you are approaching Great Shelford from the west, the EWR line will run through Great Shelford parish on the SBR line before joining the WAML in the village at SBJ. It will then run towards Cambridge Station where trains may terminate. EWR Co states that the plans for this section are “at a very early stage of development” and so few details are currently available. (TR; paragraph 11.2.2)

At present, EWR Co anticipates that it won’t need to 4-track the SBR line to SBJ, “but this needs further investigation in the coming design phases” (TR; 11.1.2). Note, however, that the CR is more definitive as it states that the existing 2-track railway will be maintained without qualification (page 25).

EWR also states that the bridge over the railway on Cambridge Road (A1301) will not need “significant alterations” (TR; 11.4.1) and that no properties will need to be demolished in our parish as part of this project.

Shepreth Branch Junction

SBJ will need to be rebuilt to cope with the extra railway traffic and EWR Co is still considering whether the new track alignment should be grade-separated or non grade-separated.

If the new layout is not grade-separated, the EWR tracks will lie to the west of the WAML; if it is grade-separated, the tracks will lie to the east. No discussion as to the advantages or disadvantages of either layout is provided by EWR Co, but we can infer that it has consequences for the approaches into Cambridge South and Cambridge stations and the subsequent design of those stations.

It seems likely that for operational purposes EWR Co would prefer the lines to the east of the WAML so that they line up with the through-running platforms at Cambridge station. This would mean a grade-separated junction at or near the current location of SBJ.

A reasonable working assumption is that the grade-separated junction envisaged by EWR Co will require a fly-over as that is the design that is exclusively discussed elsewhere in the consultation documents and it is likely to be cheaper. Nevertheless, a grade-separated junction with an underpass is a technical possibility and is likely to be preferable to a flyover to residents; however, EWR Co has stated in public webinars that this option is not under consideration due to technical and cost challenges. The following discussion is based on an assumption of a grade-separated junction with a flyover.

Trains can withstand a maximum gradient of 1:80 to be freight compliant (TR; 3.10.6), so it is reasonable to expect the flyover to comprise a viaduct that is at least a kilometre long, depending on the vertical clearance required. It is reasonable to imagine the clearance of the viaduct to be on the order of that of the footbridge currently located at SBJ.

At present, we can only speculate on the location of any such flyover as EWR Co has not published any sketches or anticipated track layouts, but it seems most likely that any viaduct would be placed on the straight section of track between the current location of SBJ and the Addenbrooke’s Road bridge. It seems unlikely that the viaduct would be sited on the curved section of track from the A1301 bridge to SBJ due to the proximity of houses, but EWR Co has provided no indication of this in its consultation documents.

Some land will need to be purchased to enable this work, but it is not clear how much land will be required or precisely where that land is located. (TR; 11.6.7)

4-Tracking from SBJ to Cambridge Station

To deal with the additional capacity, the track from SBJ into Cambridge station must be 4-tracked (TR 11.7).

As a result, the DNA path may need to be moved (TR; 11.7.6). EWR Co says the link will be maintained, but does not mention whether the DNA artwork will be reinstated.

Effects on the remainder of Sawston & Shelford County Council division

Although the proposed section of EWR from Little Shelford to Haslingfield is outside of our parish, it still has the potential to impact our village and will be of keen interest to many residents who live here for a variety of reasons.

Little Shelford Level Crossing

TR; Section 11.5

Due to the increased railway traffic, EWR Co is considering a permanent road closure which could have significant impact on Great Shelford. Residents in Hauxton often come to Great Shelford to use the amenities, which means they will be forced into a diversion and may stop coming altogether. There may be reciprocal challenges for residents of the Shelfords.

EWR Co has mentioned some possible mitigations including a new road, but it is not clear which, if any, it would choose.

National Rail has a policy in place to remove level crossings and the Little Shelford crossing is assessed by them as high risk. Removing this crossing should deliver a notable increase in public health and safety.

Harston to Little Shelford (“Hauxton Junction”)

TR; Section 10

EWR Co’s preference is for a new, grade-separated junction, which it is calling Hauxton Junction, located around Harston to Little Shelford to allow the EWR line to connect to the SBR line. This will see the new line cross the SBR line on a viaduct at a clearance of about 10m, before sweeping round to merge with the SBR line just before it crosses under the M11.

A new bridge over the railway at London Road will be required as the railway will be moved from its current alignment (TR; Figure 10.10; page 394). As a result, EWR Co is proposing to alter the road layout around the junction between London Road and Shelford Road at the foot of the hill leading to Newton.

Due to the increased railway traffic, EWR Co will close Newton Road in Harston at the level crossing. Note that the consultation documents say that EWR Co is only considering closing this road, but in on-line meetings it has said that it will definitely close. EWR Co is consulting on whether it should build some new roads to mitigate the effects of this, but it seems likely that the most direct link between the villages will be lost.

Harlton to Hauxton Junction

TR, Section 10. See also engineering drawings.

There is no specific consultation on this section: it’s presented as a “reasonable worst case design”. There will be:

  • a 10 metre high embankment carrying the railway across the entire River Cam (Rhee) valley and another section from Haslingfield towards the Eversdens; and
  • 17 metre deep cutting at Chapel Hill in Haslingfield.

The Northern Approach

This is discussed on pages 52-55 of the Consultation Report and Appendix F of the Technical Report (pages 44-103 of the Appendices).

EWR Co remains of the opinion that the Northern Approach is inferior to Option E, as chosen in the 2019 Consultation. It is asking for our thoughts, but this route alignment is not included in the consultation.

EWR Co’s main objections are:

  • A “substantial bridge structure” would be required to cross the A14
  • Long sections of elevated track will be required across northern flood plains
  • WAML would need to be 4-tracked into Cambridge due to capacity constraints, which means 40 properties demolished and a new bridge over the A14

What’s not in the Consultation

The following topics are important, but in the current consultation documents there is limited information.

  • Freight: EWR Co states that It is reasonable to expect that there will be demand for freight routes on the new railway between Bedford and Cambridge. In paragraph 3.10.7 of the TR, EWR Co quotes a National Rail estimate of “around 24 freight trains per day in each direction” by 2044. This compares to the few trains that pass through Great Shelford at present (numbers vary depending on a number of factors).
  • Power: EWR Co has softened its position that the line will definitely be diesel and now instead says the power source is under consideration (CR; page 43). Nevertheless, in virtual presentations it has reverted to its initial position that the line will open with diesel-only engines. EWR Co has stated that an objective of the railway is for it to be net carbon zero (CR; page 41), although how this will be achieved has not been disclosed other than mentions of battery or hydrogen power in virtual meetings.
  • Business case: It seems likely that EWR Co has a significant amount of unpublished information on the business case but we are not yet privy to this information. EWR Co has suggested that this could be released prior to the statutory consultation, due during a future phase of the project. It would be beneficial if the information was made available earlier so it can be analysed.

Discussion points that GSPC are considering

  • The rebuilt SBJ could be extremely impactful on the village if, as seems likely, EWR Co. opts for a grade-separated junction. We need to continue dialog with EWR to obtain more details urgently, if any are available. It is likely that residents would strongly prefer a non grade-separated junction at SBJ to minimise the visual impact, noise pollution and vibrations. Based on currently available information, there is only one potential disadvantage to this option and that is the impact on the scheduled monument between Hobson’s Brook and the railway that is located approximately behind Scotsdales garden centre.
  • It is likely that residents would want the artwork on the DNA cycle path to be restored in the event that the path has to be moved to accommodate the rebuilt SBJ. The PC should ensure a continuing dialog on the issue as much of the path is within GS Parish.
  • It is likely that EWR Co’s plans will impact on potential routes planned for CSET and the proposed Sawston Greenway. In particular, the redesign of SBJ could have an impact on the conclusions of the i-Transport report on the feasibility of routing CSET through the village beside the WAML. EWR Co is consulting with GCP/the Mayor, but there is little evidence of the effects of this consultation to date.
  • The two potential road closures in Little Shelford and Harston could have a significant impact on the flow of traffic in that area as it may leave London Road, Harston as the only link to the A10 from the east between Addenbrookes Road and Fowlmere. This may limit the number of people travelling to Great Shelford to access the business services and amenities here, whilst disrupting the travel plans of our residents.
  • The embankment and viaduct from Haslingfield to Harston reaches across the entire River Cam (Rhee) valley, from the cutting in Chapel Hill to the cutting at Rowley’s Hill. It is 10m high for much of its length and will have a considerable impact on the views across the countryside. In addition, some farms and houses will be demolished as part of these plans. It is already apparent that many residents of South Cambridgeshire, including Great Shelford, consider this negatively.
  • National Rail is predicting approximately 48 freight trains per day on the EWR line by 2044. Many residents are concerned by this, particularly since it is likely that they will run at night and the engines are likely to be diesel.
  • Despite the apparent detail in Appendix F on the northern approach to Cambridge, many of the conclusions are assertions and are not supported by evidence. For example:
  • why does the EWR line need to be significantly elevated on the flood plains when other railways in the area are not?
  • Why does the track need to be 4-tracked into Cambridge, when the busier King’s Cross line does not?
  • Why would a bridge across the A14 be considered an eyesore when it is already a built-up area?

NB, this is not an exhaustive list.

  • No plans have yet been released for the construction phase, but this work has the potential to be disruptive for a considerable period of time. Many local roads will be closed at some point and if many are closed simultaneously this could cause significant challenges. Roads at risk include:
  • Hauxton Road, Little Shelford*
  • Newton Road, Harston*
  • London Road, Harston
  • A10 Harston
  • Long Road (the bridge is being replaced to deal with 4-tracking)

*These roads are at risk of permanent closure.

It’s hard to envisage that there won’t be significant traffic congestion, noise, vibrations and other forms of disruption in the village. Note that there have been complaints already towards EWR regarding the work it has undertaken at the western end of the line and EWR has been forced to issue an apology to local residents.

Great Shelford Parish Council East West Rail (EWR) Position Statement

EWR is a National Infrastructure Project with clear Central Government support which is intended to facilitate east-west travel and to bring economic benefits to the area between Oxford and Cambridge (the “Oxford-Cambridge Arc”). The current preferred route to Cambridge is via a route corridor that inevitably includes coming through Great Shelford.
Great Shelford Parish Council takes issue with the Option E route corridor being selected without proper consideration of the alternatives and believes that EWR should undertake analysis and full public consultation on a northern route.

A perceived imbalance between benefits and disadvantages has led GSPC to oppose option E and support a new review and full public consultation of the northern route.

GSPC has adopted a communications policy with regard to this project and has written to EWR after publication of the preferred routes requesting far greater levels of engagement and confirming the Council’s strong opinion that a Northern approach should be reconsidered and consulted upon in equivalent detail to the current preferred option of a southern approach to Cambridge.

GSPC has pledged money to support action by Cambridge Approaches, lobbying for further consideration of a Northern approach.

GSPC will engage fully in the 2021 consultation and will publish details of consultation opportunities for the public on the GSPC website and has committed to explain the council’s position to the district and county council, the Mayor, the Cambridge and Peterborough Combined Authority, our local MP, and candidates for the forthcoming local elections and solicit their support.

GSPC notes the cumulative impact of current infrastructure projects in our locality.

Malcolm Watson, Chair,
Great Shelford Parish Council

1924 Bullnose Morris Cowley found in Woollards Lane, Great Shelford fifty two years ago on display at Freestones Corner by Village sign from 1115hrs on Tuesday 6th October 2020

My 1924 Bullnose Morris Cowley that was found in Woollards Lane, Great Shelford fifty two years ago never fails to amaze me.

How it all started was that there was a garage in Great Shelford in Woollards Lane.  I had stopped to get some petrol and waited at the pumps as there was no one in sight to serve me.  I walked into the garage workshop, that is where I first set eyes on my Bullnose Morris Cowley, registration number NY 4966.

What has always stayed in my mind is if the garage attendant had been available near the pumps, then I would not have had to go into the workshop looking to be served and would never have found this car in the first place.

I looked at the Bullnose Morris Cowley, I was then told the owner wished to sell this car, it all started from that brief visit.  I do wonder if there are any old photographs of the garage that have survived, would so much like to see them.

Ever since I found this car in that garage, Great Shelford has meant something special to myself.  It is only in the last year or so that things have started to happen.  As there are strong connections with my car and the one Agatha Christie owned, it has turned out to be the same year, same type and style plus same colour.  There is a wonderful photograph of myself holding the book “The Man in the Brown Suit”  I had to obtain permission from Agatha Christie Copy write in which they did give permission, they were so impressed with the photograph that they are going to use it on their own social media channels.

There was a comment made by Agatha Christie where she confesses that the two most important things in her life that excited her the most was owning a Bullnose Morris Cowley and having tea at Buckingham Palace with the queen.  I feel this was a remarkable statement from an incredible lady.  

This has lead to a invitation to take part in the “Agatha Christie International Festival” in 2021 at Torquay in which I hope to attend and display my Bullnose Morris Cowley.  I am hoping to give Great Shelford a mention at the event.

I have much pleasure in returning to Great Shelford with my Bullnose Morris Cowley.  I feel as I am returning to a place that I love.

Ray Hammond

Cambridge County Council award a Communities Capital Grant of £109,000 to Great Shelford Playscape Project

Great Shelford Parish Council and the Playscape charity would like to thank Cambridgeshire County Council for this generous Communities Capital award. This investment will enable significant progress towards building an inspiring village Playscape that provides inclusive recreation for all ages and abilities, welcomes nature in and renews an important social hub. This
funding comes at a critical time when access to high quality, freely available outdoor spaces is even more essential.

Councillor John Stanton
Great Shelford Parish Council

South Cambridgeshire Community Safety Partnership Survey

South Cambridgeshire Community Safety Partnership
are currently asking residents to complete the below survey with an aim to
collate information from the public on perceptions of safety within their
communities. The results of this survey will directly affect the way in
which community safety in certain geographical locations is prioritised
among the statutory bodies within the South Cambridgeshire Community Safety Partnership.

https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/SouthCambsCSPSurvey2020

Fish and Chip Van to Resume Operation in Great Shelford

Fish and Chip Van “Pimp My Fish” will be returning to their regular spot at Memorial Hall on this coming Wednesday (3rd of June). They will be fully covid compliant and will only be taking pre-orders. Social distancing will be marked by tape on the floor and payment is by card only. They also request that customers wash their hands before and after attending the van. Opening hours will be from 5pm to 8pm with collection slots every 15 minutes.

To order, text John on 07494 599594 with your food choices and preferred collection slot.

Coronavirus and the Great Shelford Village News

The May issue of the Great Shelford Village News will not be delivered to subscribers. Instead, it is being offered online at https://shelford.org/news.htm

A limited number of free copies are also available in Great Shelford shops (Barkers, Boots, Days, the Deli, Kash and Tesco,)  Please only take a printed copy if you, or a self-isolating person you’re shopping for, can’t download it online.

Judith Wilson

Editor of May issue of Great Shelford Village News

gsvneditorial@gmail.com