Speed up delivery of local rail links not speed up speed!

Rail Magazine has both a Heathrow rail link from the south article and extension of Borders Rail to Carlisle = good = rail/less road reliance. However it seems we have a media blackout beyond local letters pages and that every rail scheme except what we want is being pursued the length of the country. I will write in to the Bedford Local Plan as an individual, the central issue is loads of houses urban and rural, throwing loads of cars onto existing roads, urban congestion/sky high parking demand/cost and trade offs and didley rail agenda - the railway needs to be done and dusted by 2035 and it will only, if done, be started by then, let me spell out:

1. Oxford-Bedford 2024, that's 40 miles ish of wire brushed relaid track on an existing rail course with stations and some form of rolling stock = 2 trains per hour hardly intensive - X5 timetable should be the normative template from day one - contrast HS2 120 OOC-B'ham 2026 - just 2 years after opens. In short Oxford-Bedford should be do-able much earlier especially now we have a bypass of Network Rail to do the works - so why the delay? Technicals and legals must be pitted with HS2 the same but more and yet it is to be done and dusted asap in relative terms. Plus we're getting a new £3.5 billion road - not needed - the aim should be to take volume-capacity via the rail corridor incrementally to X5 + x8 X5's to a train-load x 4 per hour = modal shift (passenger and freight). Something is deeply wrong I feel, but am on the outside looking in and even a planner said at the Harpur Centre "some of our questions are not being answered".

2. Bedford-Cambridge. My view is Bedford-Sandy is enough minimally and the Ickleford curve for a start to be opened same time as 2024 Oxford-Bedford for a basic through route/relieve into, across and out of London freight + passenger services:

a. Stevenage - Bedford (Thameslink integration/stock use)

b. Bedford-Cambridge (new)

c. Peterborough-Bedford (Thameslink/stock use)

Then 2024 do across to Shepreth to relieve Hitchin-Royston

Then look at options for bypassing Cambridge (freight). Having visited Trumpington Meadows and seen the curtain of housing across the trackbed going in, compulsory purchase and returning to rail looks a bridge too far!

3. Oakley and Sharnbrook and Wymington are needed MML/electrification which should also have a plan for making consistent 9'6 freight clearance for London-Bedford-Northampton-DIRFT container relief to West Coast = more trains for MK Central.

4. Ampthill and Wixams needed - they serve different catchments and demand centres. Flitwick has poor road system, overload from Olney, MK, M1 and Marston growth areas and south of Wixams infill - Ampthill with western Steppingley access could mop up these wider commuter/growth catchments. Bedford-Olney-Northampton would stem it further out.

5. Retail Interchange Kempston - 19, 000 population Kempston, 000's of cars to Retail Park/parking demand and long queues per day - the station informs more footfall and spend, alternate access and town centre may also benefit indirectly.

6. New Bedford Midland with Midland Road pedestrian isle for town gateway access 'clean and green' Bedford, not congestion, fumes, smoking on narrow pavements and high volume everything 'harmogenised' without cohesion = relative chaos in growth context.

7. Tracks into and through Bedford from St John's need sorting with 3rd under A428 Bromham Road which needs widened bridge span or third span inserting, can be done I believe.

In sum, Olney is easier than Cambridge now for recovery/reopening purposes. We do need a Cambridge rail link but ideas of going via Twinwoods, St Neots, Cambourne and new towns to Chesterton seem daft as you still need - at great cost and upheaval to get to the Newmarket lines for the East and you are entering Cambridge from the north and West?

I feel Bedford is the junior to Milton Keynes is it all, the Consortium seem MK centric than shared coexistence focus inclusive? It should all be done by 2026 if HS2 can, so should these. Otherwise it is going to be gridlock, congestion, fumes and parking issues galore. Bad for business and the environment but where does the supreme buck stop to address? Dft, Parliament, The Monarch?!

Tailbacks down St Cuthberts from Lurke Street Lidls are becoming more common-place. Could a Lidals be allocated to Goldington/Brickhill to spread the load and give more options off the radial road system and/or bypass? There is a plot of land on corner of Caxton Road/Goldington Road corner - near Hatters, likewise field off Cleat Hill/Woodlands with a through bus lane for Grant Palmer to serve? Personally I know many middle class people prefer Lidls to some other supermarket chains and as many new houses will be semi's more Lidls seems logical to avoid town centre proliferation of tailbacks? Plus safer walking and cycling options.

Finally, the path from Newnham Rail Bridge - Beach Pool-Tesco needs drop down kerbs, widening for cycle-pedestrian access share, more litter bins and cycle racks. Path to Tesco is a dumping ground for fly tipping and rats are in the bushes having regular food deposited. Is it time to ask Mr Tesco to work on a joint improvement plan?

Northampton town centre and Bedford have common issues and only the rail link can properly address them going forward.

With all the housing promoted in the new Bedford Local Plan 2035, it will all be heading to urban areas for work, education and commuting, will demand land take for more parking and put pressure on families as travelling to and from venues takes longer and commuting ever more for the £'s to make the costs-incomes meet.

We need an inquiry as to:

1. Why is East-West Rail taking so long to deliver

2. Why the defined route to Cambridge is not being done with more haste and land protected amidst development growth

3. Why Bedford-Cambridge via Shepreth is not being done at one and the same time as Oxford-Bedford so 2024 is a 'finishing date' than 'start up date'?

4. There is no excuse not to speed up as we have a mechanism from Chris Grayling, Secretary of State for bypassing Network Rail schedules.

Likewise Bedford-Northampton should be being pursued alongside East-West as integral to it and also the benefits in cutting emissions of a Luton/Airport-Coventry arc via Bedford and Northampton spinal core missing link agenda. 

Everyone is seemingly sworn to silence including local media and that is not in the public interest. The public want the railways restored and our elected representatives must put grist to the mill to find means and ways for delivery sooner than later - our town centre economies depend on such for sustainability. To just crest of the wave 'let the market decide' is akin to putting a bet on the horses - flimsy prospects - only sustained effort and push can inform delivery vehicles are found to deliver what we need in a timely manner. There seems no excuse.

Hope of interest,

Richard Pill