The bid or aspiration of the Head of East West Rail to build a new rail link to Bedford from Milton Keynes via Olney is fanciful inasmuch as whilst converting the level crossings to bridges or underpasses on the Bedford-Bletchley railway may be more costly (stating beyond to bring home the short sightedness of the actual level crossings policy?) http://orr.gov.uk/rail/health-and-safety/infrastructure-safety/level-crossings/level-crossings-policy means that legitimate rail reopenings are being held back on cost-resource allocation grounds.
What any new rail link between MK and Bedford means is that you have to bridge the Great Ouse Valley somewhere and Olney is surrounded on 2 sides by the River Great Ouse with perennial flooding. Yes the A509 is a busy road which a rail link could capture and yes, coming into Bedford Midland from the north has some benefits but which way will you go out to Bedford-Cambridge? If you go across the top, you avoid Bedford, if you go via Wixams you go down to come back up. If you go via old St John's and Cardington Road Bedford you hit a level crossing dilemma. Moreover the disjointed way this initiative is being sprung on us whilst we face 2 planning applications which would scupper our goal of Bedford-Olney-Northampton by putting a development over the Handley route and a road over the trackbed literally assuming the corridor with no wriggle room at Northampton means that the opportunity for strategic considerations has been lost and so Northampton could be jepardised and getting around Olney on an east-west axis likewise. Afterthoughts are fine, but may not be unpick-able. It is a pickle! We welcome all rail development per se, but as with pastry on a pie, has to be trimmed to fit the lie of the land and avoid blight of communities.
Have we got the balances right? As for Level Crossings, most accidents come from abuse by road users anyway as per hitting bridges with high sided vehicles beit lorries or buses. Poor maitenance is a organisational/budgetery deficit which should be prosecuted, but to ban all Level Crossings prohibiting reopenings of these strategic rail links seems draconian and knee-jerk over-kill. Some have mooted preservation but again needs a backer and at £1 million per mile, some people we do not command at present. Getting Bicester-Bletchley reopened and fully functional in a timely manner is vital first step and unless and until that is ticked off as done and all singing and dancing, I suggest there's a danger of over-reach. Does East-West Rail Consortium have ability to take profits after all costs to cascade to new projects? That's the sort of innovation we need. Oxford-Bicester is open and fuctional, is it deriving a profit? Part must be cascaded to reopening these rail links. Tolling A421/A422 and the proposed Super Highway for the railway and condiments would again be some justice to the equation. Otherwise we're dependent on others money and they instead will want their cut and stake-holdership in the ownership and direction of projects. Likewise strapped for cash local government could also want money generated for their budgets. Proper Taxation is where Government could step in but there are votes at stake in it.
Thus tolling the roads seems logical to inform a rail deficit rectification budget and on the back a freight modal shift plan for actually getting long hauls by rail and local distribution by smaller lorries with less wear and tear. This needs some overall coordination and as yet, we're yet to see any emergent persons or powers which are taking responsbility for this. The National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) did a report and suggested bypassing Bedford for East-West Rail which would be a cruel irony to put it mildly and a devastating blow to regenerate Bedford Town Centre and inform a market share. So we're inputting to these agendas and welcome people to join our free email loop: richard.erta@gmail.com to compare notes and join ERTA and get involved.
What any new rail link between MK and Bedford means is that you have to bridge the Great Ouse Valley somewhere and Olney is surrounded on 2 sides by the River Great Ouse with perennial flooding. Yes the A509 is a busy road which a rail link could capture and yes, coming into Bedford Midland from the north has some benefits but which way will you go out to Bedford-Cambridge? If you go across the top, you avoid Bedford, if you go via Wixams you go down to come back up. If you go via old St John's and Cardington Road Bedford you hit a level crossing dilemma. Moreover the disjointed way this initiative is being sprung on us whilst we face 2 planning applications which would scupper our goal of Bedford-Olney-Northampton by putting a development over the Handley route and a road over the trackbed literally assuming the corridor with no wriggle room at Northampton means that the opportunity for strategic considerations has been lost and so Northampton could be jepardised and getting around Olney on an east-west axis likewise. Afterthoughts are fine, but may not be unpick-able. It is a pickle! We welcome all rail development per se, but as with pastry on a pie, has to be trimmed to fit the lie of the land and avoid blight of communities.
Have we got the balances right? As for Level Crossings, most accidents come from abuse by road users anyway as per hitting bridges with high sided vehicles beit lorries or buses. Poor maitenance is a organisational/budgetery deficit which should be prosecuted, but to ban all Level Crossings prohibiting reopenings of these strategic rail links seems draconian and knee-jerk over-kill. Some have mooted preservation but again needs a backer and at £1 million per mile, some people we do not command at present. Getting Bicester-Bletchley reopened and fully functional in a timely manner is vital first step and unless and until that is ticked off as done and all singing and dancing, I suggest there's a danger of over-reach. Does East-West Rail Consortium have ability to take profits after all costs to cascade to new projects? That's the sort of innovation we need. Oxford-Bicester is open and fuctional, is it deriving a profit? Part must be cascaded to reopening these rail links. Tolling A421/A422 and the proposed Super Highway for the railway and condiments would again be some justice to the equation. Otherwise we're dependent on others money and they instead will want their cut and stake-holdership in the ownership and direction of projects. Likewise strapped for cash local government could also want money generated for their budgets. Proper Taxation is where Government could step in but there are votes at stake in it.
Thus tolling the roads seems logical to inform a rail deficit rectification budget and on the back a freight modal shift plan for actually getting long hauls by rail and local distribution by smaller lorries with less wear and tear. This needs some overall coordination and as yet, we're yet to see any emergent persons or powers which are taking responsbility for this. The National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) did a report and suggested bypassing Bedford for East-West Rail which would be a cruel irony to put it mildly and a devastating blow to regenerate Bedford Town Centre and inform a market share. So we're inputting to these agendas and welcome people to join our free email loop: richard.erta@gmail.com to compare notes and join ERTA and get involved.
Train crosses London Road Bicester 2018. These Level Crossings are perfectly safe as long as road users don't cheat or abuse them and should be rolled out saving cost and enabling pinch-point reopenings and enabling rail reopenings to serve urban town centres where space and location may be prohibitive to bridges or underpass developement.
No comments:
Post a Comment