Friday, 21 August 2020

Northampton and Bedford Rail Links

The east-west rail could come into extended bays and reverse out east or west at Bedford Midland. Bedford-Willington area-North of Blunham-Tempsford is much easier than the hilly northern route laden with blockages. Peterborough via the proposed Corby/Luffenham Curve yes, Cambridge via Tempsford and Cambourne okay, but via St John's is the better option. Still serves Bedford Midland, still enables through running, but saves £'s and is quicker/easier/on the flat via St John's. Cardington Road needs traffic calming anyway, so bridge or dispensation for a Level crossing should be sought ditto invoking the bypass A421 clause of 'in the event of a railway being sought, DoT would give favourable consideration to over or under the bypass provision.' I paraphrase.

Bedford-Northampton needs pursuing alongside and the two junctioning north of Bedford being inclusive not exclusive in design. The A6 Bypass makes things harder, but it is not insurmountable at this stage. 

The last meeting of the Northampton Meeting ERTA tabled in Northampton seemed to come to a consensus that re-railing the Brackmills Branch with some sort of initial light rail configuration like a Parry People Mover (PPM) be implemented with halts at places like Waterside Campus (doubles up for Delapre), Brackmills and Great Houghton for example.

However, we are all aware of the challenges getting this done presents practically, politically but also we need someone with some capacity and time on their hands with a professional twist to spearhead the project with ERTA supporting/interjecting from behind.

It needs all on board to succeed and the quest is on to find a captain and inform a team to take the project forward.

I have drawn some thoughts together as a starting point. 
I welcome your thoughts and support.

Hopefully our tabled Zoom Northampton Meeting can consider this (an agenda will be drawn up) on Friday 18th September. 
We need outcomes tangible and specific from that meeting and it shall be tabled bi-mothly to show we are taking the matter seriously and want action. Otherwise we get development, more of the same and dysfunction and potentially lose the corridor. I am sure we all want better public transport and this is a way to go preluding more.

Studies at every step are needed and someone to take on to bid for Rail Reopening Funds would be advantageous - it is free Government money which can add to any sponsorship pot. 

ERTA is too stretched, too small and resource constricted to lead, we can usher and encourage and reify where appropriate.

Please give your support. I appeal to Bedford and Northampton Borough Councils, Milton Keynes/Olney and England's Economic Heartland (EEH) please do not throw away options, help us keep them open and support Bedford-Northampton as a strategic missing link now and going forward. A428 may be sparse, but end to ends are Brighton-Bedford, 3 airports and London and Northampton, 1 airport, several campuses and Birmingham/West Midlands and wider strategic links. There's a 21.5 mile gap in the rail network and both Bedford and Northampton would be pivotal. Thank you.  For pdf of paper/correspondance richard.erta@gmail.com



Wednesday, 5 August 2020

Draft Transport Strategy for Green Recovery

I am responding to the consultation for your draft Transport Strategy for green recovery, with the following comments:

In the main document (DRAFT TRANSPORT STRATEGYTransforming Journeys p.38 East-West Main Line - the Central Section must be completed before 2030 at the latest, ideally even earlier. Furthermore I have reservations in regard to the chosen route option for the Central Section and I would prefer the original route via Bedford St John's ( as per the attached diagram). In fact your organisation should call-in Bedford Borough Council's non-rail development plans for the old St John's Station area and get them rejected to keep contingency options open should the chosen route prove problematic for any reason. Comparative costs and challenges should be done and approaching Tempsford from the south-west avoids the need to negotiate A421/Black Cat Roundabout/A1 and descent to Tempsford Flood Plains. Please also see: https://ertarailvolunteer.blogspot.com/ (7 and 21 July). Furthermore, there should also be stations on the East-West at Kempston Retail Park, Claydon and Calvert (which is the potential site for a new town).

Transforming Journeys p.39 Other East-West Arcs - both these other two arcs (Banbury - Northampton- Peterborough) and Bucks - Herts) are vital.These are also referred to in the PASSENGER RAIL STUDY Phase 1 pp. 81-82

Connecting People with Opportunities p.45 Transport Orientated Development - both the Mass Transit Systems for Milton Keynes and Cambridge (also see p.88) are top priorities. As regards Milton Keynes, its Council's Mobility Strategy Infrastructure Delivery Plan 2018-2036 had proposed a Light Rail Transit. In addition the old Wolverton - Newport Pagnell railway should be re-opened and much of the original track-bed survives. As regards Cambridge, the Mass Transit system should be a Metro which should not go underground since this could bring more cars on to Cambridge's roads ,many of which are not designed to modern standards.

I had also looked at the PASSENGER RAIL STUDY Phase 1, and referring to the section Upcoming Rail Enhancements in the Heartlands p.91 Midland Main Line - Associated Enhancements & Schemes. The Midland Mail Line electrification (already in delivery) should be extended beyond Market Harborough to Leicester/Nottingham/Derby/Sheffield.

In the section Gaps in the Rail Offering throughout the Heartlands pp.80 etc., the following railway lines should also be re-opened and much of the old track-beds survive in these cases: Bedford-Northampton; Northampton-Market Harborough; Great Central (Calvert-Brackley-Rugby-Lutterworth-link existing Nuneaton-Leicester line at Narborough); Luffenham Curve (linking Midland Main Line eastward with Leicester-Peterborough line); and Northampton - Wellingborough. All these routes need protection, urban corridors need protecting for integration and coordination,and furthermore most of these routes could also be used for freight traffic. Banbury-Northampton (Northern Arc) needs to link with the Great Central somewhere in the Woodford Halse area.

The Southern Arc should involve the re-opening of both the disused St.Albans Abbey - Hatfield and Watford - Croxley lines.

I would also like to add that the delivery of the rail components must be made at the earliest opportunity to meet Climate Change targets.

Finally, I do not support the Oxford-Cambridge Expressway since it will bring no benefit at all to the Englands Economic Heartlands.This new road will affect Green Belt areas ,and will also be an incentive to build new housing and will not solve traffic congestion at all,and in fact, the road will bring in more traffic which is already increasing with the significant housing growth between these two towns. This increase in traffic will in turn increase CO2 emissions and also air pollution (a serious health emergency), both of which the Government is pitifully complacent.

Yours faithfully,

Simon Barber
ERTA Vice Chairman
T. 0208 940 4399, E. simon4barber@gmail.com

Tuesday, 4 August 2020

Great Central Corridor Re-railing

Great Central Corridor Re-railing between Oxford/Banbury/
Woodford Halse or Oxford/Bicester/Calvert and Brackley-
Woodford Halse and onwards to Willoughby, Rugby, Barby, 
Lutterworth and the Leicester/Nuneaton Lines Gatewaying to/from 
East Midlands Direct.

Who
The English Regional Transport Association (ERTA) is an unincorporated voluntary membership-based association which takes a particular interest on the agenda of forwarding better public transport especially rail around the English Regions.
It has a growing membership across the regions and welcomes more.

What

Our concern and interest here are the re-railing of the former Great Central corridor which we believe could play a significant role in the areas and inter-regional connectives it could serve for both passenger and freight. It is not born of nostalgia but of the fact that if we are serious about climate emergency matters, modal shift pro-active is an essential ingredient to get traffic volumes, congestion and pollution down and re-railing incrementally is a key part of that.

Where

The section of Great Central corridor we are focusing on is in scope between Calvert and Narborough and possibly Banbury and Northampton as an interceptor link with mutual benefit. Places like Brackley, Woodford Halse, Willoughby, Barby and further north Lutterworth need re-railing. They are busy areas, loads of upgraded roadways, but a long way from rail connectivity.

Why

Currently trains between the triangle and all between Southampton/Bristol and Leicester/East Midlands have to go via London or Birmingham. This means few paths are available, restricts growth and takes capacity other trains could utilise.
GC re-railing would enable. Freight, South Coast-East Midlands, South West and Wales-East Midlands and all in between and vice versa.

East Midlands being a gateway to wider distribution networks. Currently there’s a feeling that East Midlands is being shadowed and second fiddle playing to West Midlands spotlight and both should be equally getting new/reopened lines and investment to optimise potential and that sustainably with a view to environmental impacts. That means rails and this is a prime example. The ambition of vague ‘defaultive capacity’ created on the backs of HS2 for example, still leaves no direct rails to/from the East Midlands but via London and/or Birmingham and that is a capacity problem compounded unless new/rebuilt rail links are provided like this GC re-railing idea. Passenger-wise direct access ‘not via Birmingham or London’ means Cross-country could be beefed up to offer more diverse services like Penzance/Paignton-York/Scarborough via Oxford/Banbury or Bicester/Brackley – Leicester and East Midlands principal stops and vice versa. New audiences and new markets.

A real chance for rail to woo off roads reliance to rails and a Nottingham-Bournemouth service is also potentially in the frame as well as new links and services between East Midlands/Leicester/Burton and Derby for example to Marylebone (London), Old Oak Common (via Princes Risborough or a rebuilt Calvert-Grendon link), Heathrow (a link between Chiltern Main Line and the Guildford-Heathrow Southern Proposal has been made to the DfT in numerous communications) and finally via a new chord onto the east-west rail Oxford lines via Bicester to Reading for example and via the Didcot avoiding lines to Bath and Bristol for example. In reverse these new flows to Leicester and beyond offer sustained flows of footfall and spend, visitorship and exploration including access to the Peak District if the Matlock-Buxton line is reinstated and Sheffield-Manchester via Woodhead. All called for rebuild in recent years to take traffic pressure off the road system and cut emissions as a result whilst enabling more mobility to all.

How

The missing rail links are between the Oxford-Bletchley line – Brackley – Woodford Halse/Banbury-Woodford Halse-Willoughby-cross WCML/M1 on new viaduct to cross back to either serve Lutterworth or a wider area station and freight interceptor station east of the Mi with links between rail and the merging M1/A14/M6 Junctions and onwards to west of M1 to link anew with the Nuneaton-Leicester existing lines. At Knighton freight for further afield and indeed a diverse passenger alternative to Leicester could be to divert to the Knighton-Burton line for quick access to Derby with connections. The Knighton ‘Ivanhoe Line’ and Leicester access lines could share the passenger and freight business on offer and enjoy more apiece. There would be plenty of business and benefit on offer and buoy up any business case and that could work back as a plus for the case to re-rail by return. It needs backers, funding study support and on-the-ground action.

Calvert or Banbury - Woodford Halse

Our original proposal wanted to take a spur off the being rebuilt Oxford-Bletchley lines onto the redundant GC trackbed to south of Brackley and via a new descent to raised trackbed in the valley to go to the east of the town intercepting the busy A43 and a bus link to Silverstone to make the most of the catchment served initially by a railhead station. The old formation was lost years ago with demolition of the old viaduct and houses built to the north of the old station. Thence a Phase 2 would be to extend to the north of the GC trackbed unimpeded with more or less relay to Woodford Halse where some realignment or relocation deal would have to be struck.

Now HS2 wants to utilise the old GC formation adding extra complication and cost and the ‘throw everything at Calvert area’ by multiple schemes of one sort or another means getting a chord onto a new domestic line alongside HS2 is potentially problematic. Moreover, the trackbed or alongside new domestic build to that of HS2 would require more land and some demolition/compulsory purchase upheaval. That is always controversial even as big brothers seem to have more ability to assume that displacement role than domestic others. So, getting to north of Brackley and indeed serving Brackley is the most expensive bit, complicated and controversial. North of Brackley, with HS2 veering away to Solihull at a north-westerly angle, we assume the old trackbed.

Another suggestion has been to utilise existing tracks and rebuild a new rail link north of Banbury to Woodford Halse with modest distances and negotiations, albeit would have to negotiate M40 and HS2 and maybe some smaller developments en route. This gets you there quicker, this cuts the cost of the Brackley link, but also means Brackley is still disenfranchised by being served by rail.

Once in the Woodford Halse area we proceed to south of Willoughby (new station) and a split with a link off serving Barby and linking to where the WCML fast and Northampton Loop lines diverge on a graded flyover which going south would veer to the west. The other GC route – old alignment would go into Rugby and have a second station (Rugby Central) and cross the WCML via new viaduct.

Our view is we don’t mid overly. Both have merit and should both be studied. If HS2 brigades were to offer to passively design rail access for domestic link to serve Brackley, that would be a kind and welcome gesture given they have no intention of providing such a station.

Both options should be studied and weighed on their merits. In terms of getting things done, the cheapest, least protracted option and quickest to deliver should be done.

Direct link to Rugby Central and beyond
We have already mentioned our suggestion of getting into Rugby (WCML) for linkage (passenger and freight). The old Rugby-Leicester formation and line would have been useful even as far as where they intercepted with the GC/M1 area so a loop and chord onto the GC ‘new build’ could be considered.

Deviations around built areas would be required. But again, the idea of a new link between Rugby and Leicester with their connectives commends itself for consideration. Likewise, a direct new viaduct GC cross and go alongside the M1 to Lutterworth/A14/M6 Junctions and onwards crossing back over or under M1 to lands west entering via a new chord to descend to flat junction link with the Nuneaton – Leicester lines.

You could have a west and east junctioning, which from the Nuneaton line direction, would enable early GC access and reduce transits along WCML between Nuneaton and Rugby for example or vice versa accessing WCML or West Midlands via Nuneaton. It is all direct routing, all new capacity and catering for growth not just on existing lines or default, but instigationally. You cannot have default capacity if the lines don’t go where the business is and that is plundering road congestion, not competing between rail companies!

Summary of Passenger AND Freight Benefits:
  • Direct AND Default capacity creation
  • Re-railing a corridor unserved nearby by rail access
  • Taking on the roads, not other railways and operators
  • Open access, open to all
  • Provider of infrastructure must benefit from use
  • Outlying area re-railed giving modal choice
  • Regions better linked not via Birmingham or London dependent
  • Direct, faster uninhibited access enabling more by RAIL
  • Enabling and underpinning sustainable growth
ERTA, 24c St Michael’s Road, Bedford, MK40 2LT (01234 330090)
Join our free email loop/request this as a pdf:
E richard.erta@gmail.com

All support welcome.
1. Join ERTA
2. Join Our Teams
3. Give funds
4. Write to MP's and Councils
5. Trackbed watch and object to potential threats
6. Encourage bids for Reopenings Funding Grants to study further
7. Let's together over-come the problems and re-rail this much needed rail solution!