ERTA London Calling Notes and Tasks: Reliable Volunteers Welcome.

#ertarail Over recent years, ERTA has debated what improvements in and around London public transport-wise, especially rail are needed. Here's a rough list. It is not exhaustive, but could you email any other ideas, suggestions and why/justification and any comments for/against and why/justify please?

richard.erta@gmail.com We are looking for volunteers to help us with report production, any reliable offers are welcome to entertain.

Here's the list:

1. All London's suburban rail services must be devolved to TfL (London Overground) as soon as possible

2. Better integration of London's suburban rail with TfL bus, tube and tram services, including new and improved interchanges with these services

3. Chessington Line extension to Leatherhead including station for Chessington World of Adventures

4. cooling the Tube network (especially in summer) where feasible and affordable

5. Crossrail

6. Crossrail 1 to Windsor & Eton Central

7. Crossrail 2 [SW-NE]

8. Double-track Frimley Green – Ash Vale

9. Epping – M11 Park & Ride

10. Extend Docklands Light Railway Bank – site of old Broad Street station(underground)

11. Extend LU lines - Edgware – Stanmore-Watford

12. Gospel Oak-Barking line (GOB) services integrated more with existing London services and

13. Heathrow Rail Links

14. Heathrow Southern Railway (short tunnel from Terminal 5 and then a mainly surface route parallel with the M25 to new junction with the Windsor-Staines line. HSR will then continue alongside the M25 to new junction with the Virginia Water–Weybridge/ Byfleet Junction line north of Chertsey. Could also incorporate old West Drayton - Staines West branch and be linked into reopening old Great Central mail line in the longer term.

15. Improved pedestrian access between Dorking West/Dorking Deepdene

16. Lack of Light Rail in Central and West London despite growing volumes of people.

17. Light Rapid Transits should be allowed to grow organically via local planning systems in North/South /East/West/Central London e.g. Croydon Tram link - extend to Crystal Palace and Lloyd Park curve eliminated (site of accident Autumn 2016)

18. lines, with better interchanges at stations along the existing route?

19. London Orbital Railways

20. London Underground Extensions

21. LU:

22. Mill Hill East-Edgware

23. modern signalling systems

24. More disabled access for both LT and National Rail stations, particularly on London Overground and LU stations.

25. Muswell Hill Metro

26. new air-conditioned trains which are energy-efficient with regenerative breaking

27. New Lower Thames Transport Tunnel

28. New platforms Willesden Junction Low Level for London Midland and Southern services, thereby enabling interchange with North London Line, West London Line and LT Bakerloo Line.

29. New rail link Southend Airport – Rayleigh/Pitsea parallel to A13, A130, A1245

30. New station Old Oak Common (interchange Crossrail 1/HS2/West London Line); it must be built before HS2 begins

31. New station on London Overground North London Line at North Acton (interchange with LT Central Line and possibly Crossrail 1, adjacent Chiltern and First Great Western Services).

32. New station on London Overground West London Line at Battersea

33. North Downs Line

34. Pitsea-Rayleigh new build project and Grays-Dartford railway tunnel under Thames for more by rail north-south including Woolwich-Southend Airport access direct and vice versa.

35. Re-open Bank-Aldwych (closed for sake of new lifts!) and old Fleet Line to Charing Cross

36. Restoring through services to Bromley North from London Bridge/Charing Cross etc.

37. Sites close to railway lines offering potential locations for rail freight terminals and logistics centres must be protected from alternative transport proposals these include disused railways and rail sidings

38. Thames Tunnel Grays – Dartford (Lower Thames River Crossing scheme), built to HS1 standards, to include Crossrail 1 extension and cater for freight between ports and Channel Tunnel.

39. -That GOB network should extend eastwards to Barking Riverside and Abbey Wood via a Thames Tunnel.

40. -That GOB network should extend eastwards to West Hampstead -Dudding Hill – Acton – Kew Bridge -Heathrow

41. The lack of cross-Thames tunnels and bridges for north-south rail travel within London as well as getting more freight off the roads and back onto the rails, freeing up capacity/reducing hazards.

42. The lack of orbital rail links around east and west London for enabling through traffic from the radial rest of the country get to and from the South East, South Coast and the Channel Tunnel.

43. up-grade on the District Line (with population increase crowding is set to increase on that line from Richmond in next 25 years; that line is also notoriously crowded in peak-hours between Earls Court and Westminster),

44. West Hampstead - new platforms for Chiltern Line services and possibly Metropolitan Line, thereby enabling interchange with North London Line, Thameslink and Jubilee Lines.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55322340

 Notes of ERTA London Meeting Saturday 28^th November 14.00 hours. Disclaimer: These are notes taken during the meeting and are for general reference and flavour only, not forensic.

 Present: Simon Barber, David Shamash, Conway Castle-Knight, Eleanore Pond, Richard Pill, Peter McBeath, Ian Sesnan, Gillian Radcliffe, Anne Newton (Muswell Hill Metro Group), Mr Hugh Richards, Kathy Keeley and Cllr Hilary Gander.

 1. Chairman’s welcome: Richard who chaired the meeting, welcomed people to it.

2. Apologies: Mr Ivor Wiggett, Cllr Awale Olad, Cllr Georgia Gould (Camden), Cllr Dan Tomlinson (Tower Hamlets), Cllr John Locker (Wandsworth), Cllr Rowena Champion, Richard Watts (Islington), Cllr Steve Curran (Hounslow), Cllrs Muhammed Butt, Shama Tapler (Brent), John Dulwich (Barking), Cllr Claire Toghill.

3. Covid19 Considerations and Impact: Public Transport – general rules of wearing masks, washing hands before and after and taking precautions. Avoid rush hour and check beforehand if and where lines are closed or bus-substituted.  Revenues are reported to be down on the general rail network 95% and this has a devastating impact.

4. Muswell Hill Metro: The proposal is to re-rail the Finsbury Park – Alexandra Palace rail link. Not much happening because of Covid19 lockdown. The group wants to recruit especially younger support. It and ERTA will forge links for 2-way support and making common ground.

5. London Underground Extensions: Contact as a significant contact: Ms Caroline Pidgeon.

Concerns current are safety on the tube/underground. How safe are we? Theft is a concern.

Schemes raised included:

Kennington – Nine Elms, Bakerloo Southern Extension, Cockfosters-Potter’s Bar, Barnet – Napsbury (a new station south of St Albans) and via a duck-under to terminate either into a reinstated second bay at St Albans Abbey and/or amalgamate into Watford Junction.

The Croxley Link (Baker Street Met into St Albans Abbey, with added proviso of Aylesbury-Watford sharing same tracks for link up as well. Watford West could be retained as an overflow capacity and/or a Metroland Museum.

Edgware and Stanmore to Watford – problem is development has hit hard route options and accommodation. Could be looked at and whether they could do more.

It was felt the various transport systems around London need to be better integrated generally.

Hammersmith Bridge closed as in danger of falling down, may reopen to pedestrians and cyclists but traffic will have to be diverted elsewhere. Someone said there may be a ferry, but as yet no hard and fast news.

6. London Orbital Routes. Dire lack of outer orbital rail routes. Freight comes from Felixstowe-London-West Coast Main Line and vice versa. If more direct rail links existed across north of London i.e. East Anglia to the Midlands as per the A14 goes, then that would free up a lot of capacity. Likewise, ERTA had called for an integrated approach of 3 proposals for rail links from the south and west to Heathrow, to share same tracks and go on to Old Oak Common (OOC) with a tunnel provision under it to link with the Chiltern Main Line. That optimally would give an Aylesbury – Guildford rail arc and Guildford-Horsham reinstatement would enable more for more and buy-in to these new links and journey opportunities.

It was felt by many that Heathrow is a polluter and noise issue and yet, regardless of whether it stays open or shut, the legacy of better rail links utilising the opportunity afforded, remains useful to court and usher along surely.

Peter said about his Lower Thames Crossing Link for road and rail. He wants shipping to come to UK than Europe, so we export more and raise revenues and drive down costs. That means some 7000 lorries per day by rail which is better for the environment.

His tunnel would link Kent and Essex and send more to RAF Mildenhall – so out of London.

He also said digital signalling will create capacity more as well.

It was agreed Richard to put the ERTA ideas into a basic umbrella report to bring together the ideas and circulate it with a press statement which ideally organisations like TFL, new London Assembly, Network Rail and elsewhere can pick up on and work with to next stages/give our ideas a boost.

London is growing again with M25 cordon mooted as a natural boundary. Utilising M25 space in pertinent for orbital and new rail links, extensions and integrated public transport designs. Land is premium and must be retained for enabling rail projects like England’s Economic Heartland (EEH) Southern East-West Rail Link to be realistic. The old St Albans Abbey-Hatfield Line could be a candidate but about 8 houses sit on the old formation and would need to be relocated which is always a sensitive issue. Otherwise brand-new lines radiating and linking with a new station at Napsbury needs wider consideration. Hertfordshire County Council say they have no resources.

The Highways Road Tunnel idea has been rejected. East London River Crossing / Silvertown is a road only, a missed opportunity.

7. Heathrow Rail Links: dealt with see elsewhere. But David Shamash also said when this Pandemic is over it is likely that the use of public transport will not go back to what it was before this Coronavirus Pandemic as people are now used to working from home and going to Zoom meetings. The rush hour commute will not be like it was before the Pandemic. The new normal will be different from what was normal before the Pandemic and people will probably not eat out and drink out as much as they used to so stay at home more. This means that before the Government plan any more major transport improvements they should wait until this Pandemic is over so we see the likely future demand.

8. New Lower Thames Transport Tunnel – is road and rail in design. 50, 000 homes going into Essex but a key issue is water supply. Discussion was held as to suitability of desalination plants like they did for Perth’s water issues in Australia?

9. Crossrail: Things are happening according to Simon. Many of these projects take a long time. They also seem to over-run costs. Crossrail 1 will serve Bond Street, Tottenham Court Road and Farringdon in central London and reach between Reading and Abbey Wood/Shenfield. Crossrail 2 is on hold but would serve Clapham Junction, Euston and Victoria. These links could relieve other parallel lines and free up capacity generally it was felt.

10. Pitsea-Rayleigh et al scheme: ERTA has long mooted it but so far, no backers for whatever reason. It needs working up. But consists of a rail tunnel between the Dartford area and Grays/Pitsea and a new-build link, taking on 4-5 trunk roads to link Pitsea to Rayleigh. This would give Southend and South-East London direct arcing rail links avoiding the need to go in and come out, freeing up seats, saving time and money. Woolwich-Southend Airport could be a typical journey possibly. See rough diagram which we want working up:

11. Appointment of area reps: It was decided to have North East, North West, South East and South West Area Reps charged with taking a general interest in what is going on, forging our interests, recruiting new members, growing teams and liaison via these meetings. An overall coordinator would also be welcome and could come on the Executive Committee for liaison.

12. There was no other business.

13. Day, Date, Time, Place of Next Meeting: Next Zoom Meeting will be Friday 26^th February 14.00 hours. All welcome/open to all/please try and introduce a friend to us.

Meeting finished 15.30pm

Notes:

1. ERTA is enjoying more success and better turn-out with Zoom and for large areas like London is easier and more cost-effective time-wise than numerous area meetings at cost to ourselves. So, a Zoom future is a way forward for now.

2. If any wish to be on our free no obligation email loop, please send to richard.erta@gmail.com

Sustainability from notions to grassroots applications – still a way to go!

Sustainability from notions to grassroots applications – still a way to go!

In 1992 there was a United Nations (UN) Conference on the Environment in Rio-de-Janeiro, South America hence the name ‘Rio 92’. (1) I was sent by the then Railway Development Society (RDS) to the British UN follow up in Manchester to capture what may be in it for rail. 1992 is all a very long time ago and sadly, much of my archive has had to be recycled due to downsizing over the years. However, what I do recollect is someone from Seattle in America leading a seminar saying how this word ‘Sustainability’ is about holding the social, economic and environmental in balance and equally being squared to inform a ‘sustainable’ anything. If we build without regards to the environment, collectively the environment comes back in various forms which ultimately presents a global threat. If we only do ‘social’ and neglect ‘environmental’ or ‘economic’ aspects, then again, the environment suffers and feeds back to affect people and communities. Everything has to be paid for and yet money as an end in itself is nothing if we neglect the social and environmental considerations.

I recall, even in Bedford where I come from, there was much talk, committees formed in Rio 92’s name and the buzz word ‘sustainable’ and ‘sustainability’ was banded about. But Bedford, like many other places was a congested place. It was geographically central between London and Birmingham (north-south) and East Anglia and the West Country (east-west).

Before the 1960’s and after over many years, we British, having led the world in giving railways as a global transport system of doing things with many dependent industries; post war for whatever reason, we progressively dismantled our integrated public transport and rail based majoritively freight systems to a road only agenda.

Closing trams and rail links, locked-in the the-road reliance pattern and in 1969 for example, the railways lost their Common Carrier Status (2); they just could not reach and range as once was.

The instigated policy and spend direction were no longer rail and shipping but roads and aviation. That platform was predicated on fossil fuel, namely oil.

Great ideas for sustainability but a locked-in unsustainable transport system and way of doing things which was now lifestyle reliant, systemic and increasingly universal.

Of course, then and now not everyone had cars for a variety of reasons.

Since the early 1990’s more use of what railways remain is more than ever; but car, van, lorry, road, oil is still the norm. Roads and Rails are congested, informing the question what can give, what can take and how do we move to a more environmentally, socially and economically sustainable transport system for people and goods?

Since 1987 I had led a campaign for route protection of part of the Bedford-Cambridge railway (Bedford-Sandy section mainly) and advocating reopening. It was the minimum piece of rail infrastructure for restoring an Oxford-Cambridge railway. Upon reaching the East Coast Main Line (ECML) it was envisaged trains would run through to Cambridge either via a new build Huntingdon-St Ives-Cambridge railway or via a new curve at Ickleford north of Hitchin onto the Letchworth-Royston-Cambridge line or both. The counter to our efforts, small as they were, was the going rate at tiers of Government levels, society as a whole and cheap petrol/convenience was to build more houses, find other uses, fallow, defer, reject and well, the sums and all considered was against! Maybe a good idea environmentally, some social benefits but economically, who was going to pay? Then in 1994 the Standing Conference of East Anglia Local Authorities (SCEALA) formed the East-West Rail Consortium (EWRC) (3) based out of Ipswich and that got Bedford Borough, Mid Beds District and Bedfordshire County Councils to join and support the aspiration for an east-west rail link.

From there on, whilst as campaigners we interjected ideas, suggestions and directed to a purer form of basic, local railway upwards movement, they took the principle to Government and informed pots of expenditure on numerous studies we laity could but dream of.

In 1997/1998 2 things of significance happened. First, Labour got elected and got their White Paper on Sustainable Transport (4) under way which signalled a shift to more things like walking, cycling, buses and rail doing more ‘modal shift’.

Sadly, after 2003 9/11 and the costs of wars overseas were eclipsed by u-turning on delivery and follow through. The 2003 London South Midlands Multi Modal Study (LSMMMS) was a last gasp advocating Bedford-Cambridge and Bedford-Northampton. However, in 2004, the then Department for Transport/Secretary of State for Transport the Rt Hon. Alistair Darling MP demanded further research for Oxford-Cambridge and directed focus on the Western Section (Oxford-Bedford) first. The focus of the East-West Consortium moved from Ipswich to Aylesbury. In 1997 the Steer Davis Gleave Report vindicated what us campaigners had said that realignments at Blunham and Sandy were possible and should be done. Oxford-Bedford had much support. However, during the Labour tenure of office until 2010 delivery was not done and Bedford-Northampton was long grassed, literally!

In the current ‘Climate Emergency’ the saga continues. Bedford-Sandy has been lost as has Cambridge-St Ives-Huntingdon. We are to get Oxford-Bedford by 2024-ish. It is making some progress, but given the 35-year history of effort, it should be made an equivalent of a Government backed Nightingale Project and speeded up! Then, the social, environmental and economic benefits can be enjoyed by the places it would serve with sustainable footfall and spend minus the congestion and pollution in a context of growth and global diminutives we are all awaking to afresh. We have to see real evidence of Boris Johnson and his Government are listening. Jury is out currently. If he was saying “no” to a £27 billion new roads programme and “yes” to an increase of the Rail Reopenings Fund (5) (currently a mere £500 million); a rebalance or indeed move towards rail expansion for local, conventional rail rebuild and slicker time and cost delivery that would be something. Likewise, some ‘carrot’ and ‘stick’ measures to interim incentivise rail route protection. But whether power, politics or other lobbying interests (oil, gas and a locked in lifestyle and design layout adapted to roads majoritively), rebalancing is remiss. If the analogy of the Titanic and the Iceberg holds up, the collective ‘we’ are aware of it, know we need to change course, but are still moving towards collision at some speed.

Government is elected and charged to give Leadership and Direction.

To inform the path, shape and adjustment patterns successive generations will aspire to build their lives around. People will use what is available, cheap and convenient. If done sustainably fine, if not, we must face the consequences. Start redressing and re-railing and gradually the rebalancing at least can have a chance to happen. If we keep putting it off, we are 'playing with fire'. You can only speak truth to power, if you know who and what and where the power is and it realises it is in its interest to act.

Richard Pill

Chairman of the English Regional Transport Association (ERTA).

A voluntary, membership-based association open to all.

W. https://ertarail.co.uk/

B. https://ertarailvolunteer.blogspot.com/

Notes for Further Reading:

1. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/milestones/unced

2. http://archive.commercialmotor.com/article/14th-july-1967/33/are-the-railways-common-carriers

3. https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1998/jul/20/the-new-deal-for-transport

4. https://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/

5. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/re-opening-beeching-era-lines-and-stations

New Vision for North London and East-West Hertfordshire Connectivity

During these turbulent times of Covid19 we reflect that the wheels of Government do not stop turning. Also that the recovery and what platform we base the call to 'build, build, build' on as to whether it is a sustainable platform or laissez-faire ribbon development creep which is lacking in a balance, facilities, strategic public transport infrastructure and critically whether for the sake of the environment, let alone people and communities. Moreover, that we are sending more freight by rail and adding less tonnes to our road networks which backs up adding to congestion and maintenance costs?

The English Regional Transport Association (ERTA) is of the view that re-railing Hertfordshire is in the wider national interest. The geographical layout of the county lends to an east-west be-straddling of the area but most existing rail links are radial of London, meaning a drive or bus. Given growth and other developments including Government Reforms of Planning and Development gambits which could lead to sprawl around greenbelt areas but lacking the critical choice of transport infrastructure, so essential to balance things out. This article sums up the conflicts some face: 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/04/boris-johnson-nimbyism-planning-changes-disastrous-england- 

These issues are not only intrinsic to Hertfordshire, but across the English Regions and our call is for investment in better public transport and roads only solutions should not be the automatic solution. Sadly funding slants towards roads more than rail, whereby the new roads budget this year is 

£27 billion contrasting the Rail Reopenings Fund of a mere £500 million out of which some is allocated for new stations. They should be balanced equitably, let alone the argument that a Climate Emergency could mean an absolute need to slant more back to favour rail links over road. Land is a precious commodity, once gone, hard if ever to recover and so how we steward it matters. 

This is why we turn our attention to Napsbury. We note the following:

1. The old link from St Albans Abbey Station to St Albans City is built on, ditto the old trackbed at St Albans to Hatfield. 

2. St Albans Abbey-Watford is to have a new loop at Bricket Wood for capacity creation.

3. There is a proposal for a new road to rail freight depot nearby which presumably will require a new rail duck-under off the slow lines to serve it off the Midland Main Line?

Our view is that if a new Parkway Station at Napsbury were built, it could serve as an interchange and junction station linking the Watford-St Albans Abbey Branch with the Thameslink services by building a new link from the Abbey Branch to link it. That could enable a London urban - suburban link of Thameslink to Bricket Wood and Watford respectively, currently it goes only to Luton to terminate on through tracks.

In addition, from Napsbury you could consider and study whether the Underground from Barnet could be extended to also link with Napsbury serving London Colney enroute and terminating at either St Albans Abbey (reinstate the second bay platform) and/or Watford. 

For the latter to happen, fields east and south of Napsbury need protecting and access over or under the M25 considered. At this stage, with careful engineering, design and craft it could be done, but if we build on those fields, it could be lost.

England's Economic Heartlands (EEH) was in discussions with Network Rail on a southern east-west rail route. Is it beyond wit to rebuild/new-build a conventional rail link from Napsbury to Potters Bar linking the East Coast Main Line with the Midland Main Line? All sorts of possibilities could arise including better passenger and freight access and new opportunities for travel in normal times by public transport. It could speed end to end times up for people and goods and give more choices. It needs studying and careful stewardship to ensure corridors exist to enable these rail links. How far can we go, balanced with incrementalism. 

This document may be of interest: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Englands-Economic-Heartland-Rail-Study-Phase-1.pdf

We are putting forward ideas, which need studying further by professionals if so inclined. The evidence shows that if you support them, you work to build coalitions, bring councils, agencies and other funders together, establish the business and engineering considerations amongst others and set to progress it to a successful conclusion. 

If you support our suggestion, please advocate it. More of the same is not an option, as development of 10, 000 houses at 2.5 vehicles per household on average, means 30, 000 extra vehicles on our roads. Times that across the English Regions and walla, you can see the trend and pattern of where we are heading, chaos! We must re-rail/new-build rail links which can cream off that excess and give better options for people and goods.

I attach a rough diagram of pure illustration, but appreciate you need to bring others on board to take it forward. ERTA welcomes volunteers to join and offer time and talent to make these things work. Thank you.

Great Central Railway Reopening Project - Support it now, don't let it be thrown away when we really need it!

Notes from ERTA Great Central Meeting Friday 13^th November. Disclaimer: Please note, these are notes taken during the meeting and whilst seeking to be accurate, are a guide and not formal per se. I have had to use a new sequestration of numbering to that of the agenda in some cases.

 

Present: Richard Pill (Chairman), Owen O’Neill (Zoom Facilitator), Simon Barber, Colin Crawford, Cllr Richard Auger, John Harrison, Harry Burr, Peter McBeath and Cllr Rupert Frost and Kathy Keeley.

 

1. Convenors Welcome and any preliminaries: Richard welcomed people to the meeting.

2. Apologies for absence: Sam Peach, Mike Reed, Cllr Mike Cockerill, Cllr Mark Graves, Cllr Philip King, Cllr Peter James, Cllr Tim Douglas, Cllr Martin Tett.

3. Report from Mr Sam Peach on progress so far followed by discussion: Report from Mr Sam Peach was read by Simon Barber.  Since last meeting Sam has met with Anthony Swift of England’s Economic Heartlands (EEH), Their focus is on east-west transport links. Sam has been doing research on transport along the Great Central Route. Northants County Council produced 2 documents Page 30-33 Rail Strategy Doc ‘Fit for purpose’ (?) 2013 circa. It has a bit on north-south links. Cost in 2013 but under considerations given we are nearly 10 years on from the assumptions of these old docs. North Northants Planning Unit has also been engaged with. There will be a general review of policy to bring things up to date. Anthony Swift advised Sam to look at South Midlands Multi Modal Study which is about 15 years old. Next steps are to build the economic and social case. A discussion then followed: Sam’s study to include:

a. assessment of households along the route

b. economic benefit of re-railing

c. re-railing costs

d. freight/new to rail benefits and capacity creation for more by rail elsewhere too

e. Sam will seek MP and Council interest

f. will also read transport docs released by councils.

4. Discussion was had on Mr Chris Heaton-Harris MP, MP Daventry area and Rail Minister.  Remembering that MP’s and getting them on board (Andrea Leadsom, South Northants, Chris Heaton-Harris, Daventry, Mark Pawsey, Rugby, Alberto Costa, Lutterworth, Narborough).

Harry Burr, a resident from Towcester has run a campaign for a station on the existing West Coast Main Line (WCML) at Weedon near Daventry as a Parkway Station for the town. It had courted media and widespread coverage and popular support. We congratulated him on his sterling efforts and wished him well. He is just 13 years old, but given Daventry is one of the largest towns without a station, is a much deserving candidate to be taken seriously for better rail connectivity.

5. A discussion was then had around Northampton-Market Harborough:

Pros for the rail link were things like:

a. Brixworth – 10, 000 new houses to be built, and with an average of 2.5 cars per household, that traffic along the A508 will end up being congested at Northampton or elsewhere adding to a problem.

b. The rail link would enable East Midlands-DIRFT freight and beyond access

c. Would link as part of a through link between Oxford-Milton Keynes-Northampton-Leicester/East Midlands and vice versa, shaving time, opening more by rail journey opportunities

d. Would take on M1 (Northampton-Leicester) giving rail choice currently not available.

Against it was felt:

a. Local People don’t want it / object

b. Chris Heaton-Harris (who may have been written to) is against it

c. A cycle track occupies much of the route/now used for non-rail purposes

Owen O’Neill said that for that, GC and other projects, there needs to be Assessment of Benefits including Economic. Discussion was had with Cllr Rupert Frost.

It was mooted that in rail choice terms, GC approaches Leicester from the western flank of M1, Northampton-Market Harborough on the eastern flank.

Richard Auger said some have ‘silo views. There’s a need to link to 1. Local Strategic Plans – rail links and connectivity and 2. Government – where it wants to go on it. A discussion was had. On the one hand that is fine, but if Government sits on fence in policy/action terms like the disparity of funding for new roads v rail reopenings they go against the environment whereas the whole issue we want is more environmentally-friendly transport able to carry bulk people and goods and save land for other things. Some people call Northampton-Market Harborough Railway as ‘Brampton Valley Railway’.

It was felt Climate Change/Climate Change Emergency was an important aspect for these rail links.

It was said there is a need to break a project down to chunks. Segment Leicester to Rugby/Rugby-Leicester/Narborough – Owen O’Neil showed slides of the lie of the land and his proposal of a new-build rail serving Magna Park and Lutterworth and as an option was broadly welcomed to be shored up and promoted. If someone comes up with a Plan B, providing the demand and market can sustain it, we have no real problem with such.

6. Peter McBeath interjected on demand aspects by warning that ports are being dredged for larger container carrying ships for 23, 000 container carriage docking and want to use rail majoritively to serve their land carriage. That sends ripples of demand-supply of capacity and pinch points will need sorting, new rails and links will be given impetus and this is happening now and going forward, not some longevity luxury of decades. So, it raises questions of rail capacity and readiness. We will need lines like Great Central to help cater for it all sustainably.

7. Richard Pill, Chairing the meeting laid the cards of ERTA on the table: we can facilitate meetings, bring people together, campaign within resources and nurture volunteers to inform a team who in turn can take and do what is necessary as per Sam Peach to take projects on to a next stage. However, we do not have the resources to commission £100, 000+ studies to tick all boxes. It is for professionals to conjoin and invest in their (private) and nations (Government tiers) interests. It is not about our Executive Committee taking on more work, rather realising new volunteers and them in turn expanding our ideas and working them to fruition/variables on themes included.

8. Key benefits: It was felt environmental land use, route protection to keep options open amidst development bombardments not made to take rail intent into consideration per se and winning over the national political biases. Mr Simon Barber has a Westminster Team and volunteers are welcome to sign up and collaborate with him.

9. Peter McBeath made the point that ports expansion and more trains demand scale.  We need more capacity and alternative routes. Richard said that the scope we felt for the Great Central re-railing (see map) was Southampton/Bristol-Leicester/East Midlands and all in between. With M40 on the west, M1 on the east, it is a critical corridor to re-rail giving capacity elsewhere. Southampton trains have hot spots at Reading and the Reading/Didcot-Leamington Lines were heavily used, getting to East Midlands direct and from it without recourse to Birmingham or London would be a boost for rail and more by rail potentially. ERTA had been seeking discussions with a number of operators and developers into distribution. Convergys, Gazeleys and it was recommended we seek to get ASDA Board on board. Could it be that Owen’s Rugby-Leicester section is the appetiser which brings buy-in for more south of Rugby beit Banbury and/or Calvert for access to wider links to/from?

10. Segmental Status’ – as well as the big picture of what we are trying to achieve with variations on a theme.

a. John Harrison pointed to freight proposal for rail freight terminal near Hinkley off the Leicester-Nuneaton Line, which could potentially benefit from the GC link or variations on a theme from the south.

b. Calvert-Woodford Halse. It was suggested that getting a domestic line alongside the HS2 corridor to serve Brackley area with bus links to Silverstone was a project in itself with options to Aylesbury, OOC and Oxford for 2-way commuting for example. Woodford Halse is next up and as a nodal point of area reference, the connectivity and mutual feed of any Banbury-Daventry-Northampton arcing rail link would intercept GC corridor and interlinking should be considered. One suggestion was for Banbury-Rugby (Rugby is a sectional study issue of access) as a shorter link to achieve than going Oxford-Calvert etc. ERTA is open-minded, but the Brackley issue, with A43 and expansion remains to be addressed. Simon said he wanted a meeting with Colin and Brackley Town Council to try and establish common ground. Woodford does have some blockages which various opponents have flagged up. Land and growth – we need route protection and Plan B to be adopted with a conversion from opposition or neutrality to pro-affirma support for the rail. Discussions with Parishes was to be welcomed to foster good relations and appreciation of what a railway could offer and Simon to seek a meeting with Woodford Halse P.C. too.

c. Woodford-Willoughby. Re-railing Great Central has the issue of Catesby Tunnel and the wind tunnel use of it. Parish Clerk against re-railing options.

d. Getting into Rugby required yes, Rugby to be on board but also, studies on best options. ERTA has a view.

11. MP’s et al. See elsewhere.

12. Overall it was felt:

a. Getting ASDA on board and similar was worth pursuing:

- ASDA Executive – can they input strategically

- insights

- how to take things forward

- Invest in studies

Be a conjoiner to projects

b. demand and assessment led not just of today, but future forecasting with a 10-year scope. What will it be without the railway, what contribution could a railway make positively?

c. Putting together a business case, getting professional support – City of London and then Westminster. KPMG was mentioned. But we have to have a good business case first to interest them as investors.

d. Get Amazon on board – they need to start using rail. Warehouses the size of football pitches springing up everywhere. Simon/Colin to approach these bodies for preliminary sounding out.

e. Look at Local Distribution Networks and Karl Watts – get him on board as focuses on Parcels by Rail Services.

13. Owen O’Neil happy to assist with Rugby-Leicester focus after February and collaborate with Sam Peach.

14. No other business.

15. Date of next Zoom Meeting 29^th January 2021 15.00 hours.

Meeting finished 15.40 Richard thanked all for attending.

Note: Clearly a need for focuses respectively. ERTA has a view, a wish, a plan but can only interject ideas, it is for professionals and those so orientated to take on board, work up and court wider support. We support Great Central corridor re-railing with variations on a theme and rebuilding a new Northampton-Market Harborough rail link and will table meetings and direct activists and would-be campaigners to those ends as our contribution. People are welcome to join ERTA as members and offer to volunteer to help us. To register for the next Great Central Zoom Meeting, please contact Mr Simon Barber Mr Simon Barber: T. 0208 940 4399, E. simon4barber@gmail.com. Please encourage others to get involved and liaise with us. My loop via richard.erta@gmail.com is ‘open to all’.

ERTA can:

1. Facilitate Zoom Meetings

2. Plant Ideas

3. Bring people together

4. Make suggestions

5. Input to consultations

6. Network

7. Head hunt professionals elected or in business who can take an interest and move the propositions on to the next stage.

 

Interim we do need:

1. Local and Government (all tier) support for route protection and realignment/deviation spaces

2. People to join ERTA as Members - helping us

3. Offer time and talent as volunteers - things like website maintenance skills, designing maps and diagrams for general use and helping inform a team more to take on stewardship and growing support for the bigger picture of re-railing, with local chunks acting as patchwork places for growing and nurturing collaboration.

The issues are massive, but what if we do not re-rail? More development means more traffic and congestion with pollution and then what? So, now and going forward, in all interests to cooperate and take heads out of the sand.

Please note, all discussions on Northampton-Market Harborough rail link are held on the Northampton Meetings. If you wish to also register for that meeting contact Mr Simon Barber respectively.