Notes from ERTA Meeting Great Central Re-Railing Project/Corridor 29-01-2021 15.00 hrs.

Notes from ERTA Meeting Great Central Re-Railing Project/Corridor 29-01-2021 15.00 hrs.

Present: Cllr Rupert Frost, Colin Crawford, Simon Barber, Cllr David Bill, Owen O’Neill, Richard Pill, Harry Burr, Cllr Peter James, Kathy Keeley and Edward Blackman.

1. Chairman’s Welcome: Simon duly opened the meeting with his one liner of introductory.

2. Apologies for absence:  Chris Heaton Harris (MP for Daventry and Government Rail Minister), Cllr Richard Auger of Northants CC, Cllr Martin Tett of Bucks CC, Cllr Tim Mills of Aylesbury Vale, Mr James Tierney of Maritime Transport and Mr Mike Reed.

3. The need to save and re-rail the corridor with deviations where blockages cannot be overcome: Richard explained that ERTA’s goal is to get people to join and inform a team of assistants under Simon to nurture the project along, trackbed watch, protect the route as much as possible from piecemeal development threats and court professional and political support as much as possible, who in turn are to invest in studies and take it on to the next phase towards delivery. People were encouraged to let Simon have their details and ideas of who else to contact for his database.

4. The need for studies, BCR Listing and Business Case firmed up: Owen O’Neill said we should wait until England’s Economic Heartland (EEH) complete their passenger study phase 2 looking at transport demand in various nodes along this corridor. It is due to report in April 2021 and includes south of Rugby. Census figures were also mentioned. Cllr David Bill said we have a plethora of depots springing up, some rail-connected but generate many lorry movements as well and that was a concern. Owen explained to us what the Golden Triangle loosely meant consisting of Lutterworth-M1, M6, M69.

Peter James mentioned that Magna Park was a development which is near the GC cordon and was not there as an example when the Rugby-Leicester lines were closed. Owen then gave a useful look at his paper to be published and diagrams of Rugby-Narborough via Magna Park using the old Midland route out of Rugby. It was said about the ownership of the corridor through Rugby and the loss of the old viaduct. This is a setback, but on the other hand economies of scale are that were it HS2 for example, they would think nothing about putting a new one in.

4. Route SWOT – Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats: This was deferred to elsewhere and to wait for EEH’s study. It was stressed that unless we can raise enough people to trackbed watch, we cannot have intelligence on development threats and the need to protect the corridor was vital. We need local councils on board as well as Government and other agencies.

5. The need for a loose coalition of reliable volunteers to work together and share roles

- let Simon have your details for his database: See item 3.

6. Area focuses:

a. Calvert-Brackley-Woodford Halse

b. Banbury-Woodford Halse

c. Woodford area to Willoughby-Barby and into Rugby

d. Rugby-Magna Park-Lutterworth-Narborough for onwards to (freight Knighton) and passenger (Leicester).

These were put on hold until EEH report, showing what demand. Lutterworth has 10, 000 population and is expected to grow. It is also where the east-west A14 from Felixstowe meets M1 and M6 corridors. See note below *

7. Local, conventional rail link with passenger and freight in scope from Southampton/Bristol-Oxford-Rugby-Leicester in scope: Discussion on local, regional and wider national implications was discussed. On the one hand HS2 is expected to create capacity down the West Coast Main Line (WCML), whereas a bottleneck existed between Didcot and Oxford. Reading was also cited (freight from Southampton for example) as getting stuck on the cushions at the curve from Basingstoke to the Didcot main line. Discussion was had on whether the Bucks CC and Windsor Link idea of reinstating the Bourne End to High Wycombe line with Grendon-Calvert (GC) would provide more flexibility of operations to ease things? Likewise, once off main line tracks north of Oxford, GC link provides extra capacity so may relieve going via London or Birmingham tracks more and attract new as yet not being done new to rail from along the line and end-to-end wherever to wherever via these metals. It was also discussed about intermediate locations and stations. HS2 is a fast line and won’t provide a station at Brackley for example, so the scope for a domestic line alongside HS2 which does, remembering Brackley has A43 and Silverstone orbits as well as a growing place in its own right. Likewise, Woodford Halse, Southam-Daventry via the A425, which GC intercepts half way roughly with possible Parkway Station opportunities. North of that with Willoughby-Rugby/Barby-Rugby Midland needs specific studies on various aspects. Demand is one, engineering and inclusivity scoping another – the re-railing of growing communities, bringing rail access closer.

Warwickshire County Council is apparently doing a Public Transport Survey – Simon to follow up and report back. RFI = Rail Freight Interchanges. Colin offered to talk to Maggie Simpson of the Rail Freight Group (RFG). It was also recommended he and Simon talk with Mr Andrew Pritchard of the East Midlands Transport Group of Councils.

8. Getting bigger fry on board:

a. developers: Gazeleys was mentioned. DB Tritax Symmetry – lorries part, if they are focusing on rail east-west that could be Liverpool and East Coast, but lorry movements could hit M1 for north-south as no rail choices exist between Leicester-Nuneaton and Rugby for example, which is a strategic gap in the rail network.

b. rail industry/business people: Colin and Simon would seek a meeting with Chiltern to try and see what comes of it. East-West Rail are toying of dropping their Claydon-Aylesbury arm and so someone else may wish to fill it passenger-wise, given Calvert is to be developed to new town size. Could it be that Chiltern could aspire a domestic rail (or build a coalition) to re-rail Brackley alongside HS2 as a domestic line with Parkway Station for catching A43, Silverstone (bus link) and growing Brackley commute options which could negotiate running to or having a connecting station with East-West Rail? So, if we got Rugby-Narborough and Aylesbury-Brackley, the ‘gap’ between then then intensifies to get re-instated rail corridor.

c. Political will at all tiers: Chris Heaton Harris MP for Daventry and Rail Minister as well as other MP’s along the corridor who can sponsor Westminster Meetings. Simon manages a database for the ERTA Westminster Team to work on these matters as well as a Government stipulated rail corridor protection initiative. Needs more people and via Zoom under present circumstances, to be operationalised now. Guildford-Horsham and the canal threat was mentioned as another example of trackbed vulnerability. Once lost, locks growth into roads and that is why GC also has credentials as providing a rail choice to roads.

d. public: Please recommend ERTA to others, to join as a member, to attend meetings like today and grow our teams.

9. Appointment of any volunteers and for what/where/how – answerable to Simon and the Executive Committee (EC): There were none currently.

10. Any other pre-notified business: There was none except to notify next Zoom Meeting for GC Matters was 12 March 2021 15.00 hours. Would enable updating notwithstanding EEH’s later date of delivery.

Note from item 6*: Midland route out of Rugby/GC through Rugby or variations takes on the western side approach to Leicester of the M1 corridor. Northampton-Market Harborough with a widened base for footpath and railway corridor takes on eastern side of M1 approaches to the Leicester area. We must support both for their own merits, reducing road congestion, traffic and informing modal shift is the name of our game for good social, environmental and economic reasons. Yes, Northampton-Rugby-Leicester may be advantageous asking why we need another line for purposes of optimising demand, but there are other local-regional reasons why we need both.

Please note, it is ERTA’s goal to see the re-railing as we are convinced it has merit, that is not up for discussion. Finding means-ways and people to get it delivered is the next step. Northampton rail matters are for the meeting 19-02-2021 15.00 hrs via Simon Barber T. 0208 940 4399, E. simon4barber@gmail.com

https://ertarail.co.uk/events/ 

Some reflections response to Mr Andy Roden's Rail Article 'Ten Rules for rail reopenings.'

Some reflections response to Mr Andy Roden's Rail Article 'Ten Rules for rail reopenings.' Published in Rail Magazine Issue No. 923, Jan 27-Feb 9 2021 pages 32-35.

'Experts' (p. 32) seem the buzz word of standard aim and audience, what of local/lay people aspiration? Andy declares links to the Northern Route Working Group, Exeter-Plymouth. Re-railing Exeter-Okehampton is one thing, getting to Tavistock and Plymouth quite another matter and yet people have been advocating it for years - where was the railway media then? Many other campaigns have come and gone, largely un-covered and ignored by obsessive rail media coverage of existing lines, traction, rolling stock designs, power and pandering to professionals on the one hand and enthusiasts on the other.

Rule 1: Don't look back: But if the case is valid and if - given no retrospective inquiry assessed the issues pertaining to the before and after closures by stealth - if there was foul play, and new demand now can be detected, action is required now at the 11th hour even as a rebuild can take decades to bring about - lessons need to reduce complexity, cost and duration from concept to delivery. We cannot sit back and say 'blockages prevent reopening' as you surely have to balance pain and gain? You may say HS2 is a replacement for the loss of the GC Main Line but does not serve Leicester and probably won't cater for freight except by default on existing lines which do not directly link Southampton/Bristol/Oxford with Rugby/WCML and Narborough/Leicester/East Midlands and vice versa for example, let alone growing catchments around Brackley, Daventry, Magna Park and Lutterworth for example. The real default of such thinking is that it all goes to the roads, compounding congestion, pollution and expansion destroys land more. That in the context of a Climate Emergency seems very short sighted if not myopic? We are supposed to be de-cluttering roads and informing modal shift back to rail more through making the network more comprehensive, re-railing and mixing passenger and freight customer services tuned to what people will use/do. 

If blockages or opposition meant "reopening simply isn't possible" (p32) HS2 would never have been built and about 80-90% of reopening in rebuild or select rebuild/new build terms is ruled out, which leaves a deficit locking in road demand.

2. Identify your markets: If you have loads of money - studies are upwards of £100, 000 plus, then fine, this article is for you. But most people do not possess such, what's in it for the Bridport’s, Ilfracombe’s, Ventnor’s, Maldon’s and Keswick’s of this world? The tenor of the article seems to rule them out the game from differential criterion fronts. Again, it defaults to roads and more demand for roads but for want of taking the pragmatic true bull by the horns and re-railing. Lay people seem to be dismissed from:

a. having a view

b. advocating a scheme as best they may (subjectively)

c. being taken seriously "ignore part time gardeners..."

Yes, do as much homework on any proposition as may reasonably be done.  But apart from 50 plus years of route abandonment, neglect; the route abandonment then and now including other and competing uses (cycle paths, walk-ways, canals, development) means the loss of routes and corridors is ever-present and article if it had space could have put forward a call to Secretary of State to make arrangements to protect routes and consider their case merits with suitable incentives and sanctions to keep options open. Helston may be the proverbial Swaffham for not reopening and closing respectively, but what of the Dunstable’s, Brackley’s, Daventry's and Witney’s of this world, do we write them off or strategic relief lines or duplicate lines? All defaults to spiral roads and disparity, whilst the existing rail network looks on and people are locked into driving lifestyles for want of more choices.

Mr Roden's view on assessing demand seems limited. On the one hand it could be a combination in normal times such as coastal resorts having all year round visitorship, which may not have been so common 50+ years ago. Likewise, bus substitutes may be less cost, but are they as versatile as rail could be were a line-born freight and passenger growth plan for every line to be mandatory? We have downsized, airlines and sterilised what the railway can do, so rule out a click and collect/send parcels depot x per population 10, 000 upwards on the back of plethora of problem rather than solutions except money can solve most of them it seems?

Lay people can make anecdotal but part of the problem has been:

a. lack of support for route protection/Cinderella status many years.

b. Costs of studies. One over-arching is not enough, many sub studies on aspects like engineering, environmental impact, demand for casting, BCR Rating and so forth exist. It just goes on and meanwhile the routes are under threat as never before - see Olney in Milton Keynes as a prime example. 

c. Complicated maths and formulas put many lay people off, it is the preserve of the specialist or enthusiast for complicated maths and problems it seems - Highways Agency and British Roads Federation and similar do it for roads, who does it for rail?

d. Other 'political' aspects. E.g., Oxford-Bedford-Cambridge has numerous studies commanded as a pre-qualifier at huge cost, but continually was deferred for decades. People saw Bedford-Bletchley and said "basket case, why do we want more?" contrast where actions of faith did prevail, Oxford-Bicester was a resounding success. Same line, different approaches and apprehensions. In short 'can't, don't won't' v 'can-do, will do, must do'. EWRL was pursued after 7 years of knocking on their doors, by a consortium of councils and public interest has grown and diminished in waves intermittently. We're still waiting and could be another 10 years before all singing and dancing delivery infill happens, contrast development of roads/Black Cat Roundabout and houses being pushed to the fore now. The consortium came about through campaigning and advocacy by lay people first.

3. Define rail as a solution to a real-world problem: Examples could be a missing link, population has grown since closures, other growths, new markets and lack of choices on strategic corridors or intermittent places needing better connectivity.  There can be a view that the closures from the 1950's - Serpell (early 80's) were 'political' in nature, rather than purely demand led for example. The view "not enough people used them" may only be partly true and the question why, bring up a demand for modernisation to cut overheads for example and no money for it, so closure was the answer? Bus competition was much more abundant and subsidised, government switched spending from rail to road, power switched from coal to oil, surveys of demand-use could be done in quieter times, avoiding peaks and term time for example. Poor promotion, a lack of coordination in the original build of laissez-fare - can/do we learn today? 

LRT/Trams and buses raises the issue of freight – what good for it/can you send parcels or bikes by bus/tram? There’s guarantee LRT is cheaper per se and horses for courses, taking to the streets is one thing, adding destinations and populations to a nationwide rail-net-work is a different thing and scope of the latter broader providing you get your marketing right. Otherwise all but main lines to close brings us back to Serpell, which is a wrong way to go if we are serious about environment, public transport and cutting emissions surely? I feel the dismissive of Helston as the example with the 10, 000 people scoping contrasts to the fact that Cornwall is a much sought-after places with multitudes of visitorship and whilst many drive to/from it and their homes, they do, like Wales, use the local rails. The treatment of Helston serves as a cautionary note, but also sad because it makes grim reading for smaller communities being re-railed and remnants getting upgrades.

4. Timetabling is vital: The polemic of trade-off may be false or what of harmonisation of services, timetables and patterns? Versatility including rolling stock is a key here surely as well? That is why historical appreciation can be telling (see Q1). Knowing the history – highs and lows, may lead to a SWOT analysis for fine-tuning a proposition. Growth and the fact many reopenings have exceeded predicted usage shows a degree of switch from road to rail not anticipated for example and higher than predicted take-up of a new rail service from Bathgate to Borders, from Aberdare to Ebbw Vale and indeed Oxford-Bicester started on just 3 trains a day 1987 albeit on freight-only upgraded track. They all exceeded expectations and bucked cold sceptics on demand.

5. Ensure the infrastructure really is up to the job: Unsure who the article is pitted for, but these issues seem suited to engineers to answer, not lay people. Lay people (the public!) are part of wider Stakeholder-ship and so should be included and valued. Again, the qualification seems to be “if you have £000’s to spend fine” whereas the public and power need inspiring to bother, to do what they may and should have called for better ladders for funding access like a level playing field may inform like the un-green example of £27 billion new roads contrast a mere £500 million Reopening Railways Fund. What more could more parity inform?

6. Justify the reinstatement: Okehampton is not a reinstatement, Tavistock drives because a closure was pre-Beeching does not render them then or now as ‘basket cases’ by default per se. Many speculative developments banked on growth to the new stations and only 2 World Wars dented that trend mainly. Had the wars of been avoided, Great Central may well have survived to this day with select others.

7, Siting Stations is critical: I suggest people use what is available and Parkway status brought nearer to where populations are means less drive time, less traffic, less emissions, so re-railing is aggregate gain. We need a map and a plan of coherence and intent, not pontification, dithering and fragments.

8. Stakeholder engagement is vital: Yes, but if that was true, HS2 would have been turned down on the back of mass protests to it, they were all over-ruled, literally!

9. How will you reopen the railway? You have to start where you are at and do what you can. However, power closed the railways and so power must by and large address matters of such scale, cost and challenge. There is a wider socio-economic and environmental cost if we do not re-rail and needs to be done sooner than later. Otherwise, we pay for the loss in different ways then, subsequent and now.

10. Avoid wishful thinking: 45 mph is quite good contrast crawls on roads and junctions of less-than due to congestion in normal times. As long as people can be on the move, speed of itself is not necessarily the main consideration. This especially for local lines serving poorly served rural areas, linking principal local places and ensuring accessibility is more universal, not the preserve of those with time, money or specialist interest. For years professionals dismissed parts or all of Bedford-Cambridge for reopening as ‘pie in the sky’. That cynical approach informed a failure to protect ‘why bother’ (?) the route. Then, when studies found there was a case, a good case, the route by then was sadly lost and now the conundrum of a brand-new route with as many if not more upheavals, challenges and costs is the name of the game, but with development and road proliferation happening now, 5, 10 or 15 years hence beg the question of practicability however worthy the case. So, some joined up coherence here as part of a nationwide approach plan, is what we need our railway media folks to start advocating, not just niche interests and negatives out of reach for most ordinary hard pushed people of any and all ages.

Richard Pill

26-0102021

richard.erta@gmail.com

Notes from ERTA Meeting Herts Southern East-West Rail Links/M25 Corridor 22-01-2021 14.00hrs

Notes for ERTA Meeting Herts Southern East-West Rail Links/M25 Corridor 22-01-2021 14.00hrs

Present: Simon Barber, Colin Crawford, Richard Pill, Cllr Steve Jarvis, Owen O’Neill, Cllr Nigel Quinton, Cllr Ian Stotesbury and Kathy Keeley.

1. Chairman’s Welcome: Richard and Simon duly welcomed people.

2. Apologies for absence: Cllr Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Cllrs Chris White and Jackie Taylor.

3. Background: Several links are in existence; others present as possible and then there are gaps which moderately could link up to inform a through route with inter-links with radial north-south lines and principal places.

4. The Croxley Link to Watford Junction: It was felt the rail project should go ahead but had stalled following TfL’s refusal to fund it and a deficit of who will/can? It was felt it should be terminating at Watford Junction for interchange. It was felt a tunnel linking it to the Abbey Branch was unrealistic. Likewise, Colin Crawford felt people for Amersham and Aylesbury can change at Moor Park, rather than use the direct curve from the Aylesbury direction for dual running, even though it would enable Chiltern access to the Junction and Watford West and bridge a missing link between Watford and Aylesbury direct by rail.

- Cllr Ian Stotesbury confirmed the renewal of Watford Junction Station.

5. The Abbey Branch: It was acknowledged a new loop at Bricket Wood, but some felt it should be considered as a public transport corridor of some descript beit conventional rail, LRT, Guided Busway. Old route to Hatfield has development on it at St Albans.

The meeting did not seem too sure of a new rail link from Bricket Wood to new freight depot and linking with MML at Napsbury. The new freight depot was to be rail-served from day one and would in all probability require a duck-under rail link from the north-south Midland Main Line slows to it in the Napsbury area. This new depot was given the go-ahead and is being promoted by Segro.

6. Napsbury Interchange Junction Station: ERTA has raised the question of whether a new Parkway Station south of St Albans City on the MML could utilise the depot’s new rail infrastructure and double up for passenger use as well? The station could serve growing populations south of St Albans but also if lands are protected, enable the following to be studied further as to feasibility:

a. Extension of the Northern Line from Barnet to St Albans Abbey Station (reinstate second bay)

b. A new rail link (same or additional tracks) veering off from south Napsbury to the east alongside the M25/serving the London Colney area and onwards to link with the ECML at either Potters Bar, Hatfield or a north-south junction in between.

c. If Abbey Branch was retained as heavy rail, the new link to the depot could be extended to Bricket Wood and enable inter-urban-London Thameslink services to go on to Watford Junction, making more of the branch infrastructure.

7. Extension of Barnet Northern Line to Napsbury and duck-under to terminate / share either St Albans Abbey or Watford Junction or both. It needs studying and coming together of interested parties to work at it and see the bigger picture, opportunity and again make the case for funding.  

8. New-build local rail link from Napsbury to Potter’s Bar with ECML link up inclusive of London Colney: This is thinking aloud but choices remain – either all roads with growth of development and loss of lands for rail options or we consider what local rail solutions may offer and work at it.

9. Extension from Cockfosters to Potter’s Bar rail link: This was raised but again needs studying further and issues of crossing over/under M25 and what inter-link access opportunities and how it could link to station interface at Potters Bar – either an underground station and/or redesign to allow access to a new bay for example.

10. Potter’s Bar to Harlow – Stansted – Braintree via Great Dunmow/A120 corridor: It was acknowledged that extending the Central Line from Epping to Harlow could make sense, exact routing needs studying. Lands in all these scenarios needs protecting and that costs, balanced to the cost of not doing so. Cllr Nigel Quinton said “we need balancing rail and development to work together”. There was also the question of whether Herts CC has examined the issue and question of county-wide east-west rail infrastructure and the role it could play? The Croxley-Maldon Link joining up, courts 3 large and powerful counties – Bucks, Herts and Essex. They could bring formidable influence to their Government to look favourably and ensuring policy does balance and join up the dots sustainably. Rolling stock was discussed and eco-friendly. Class 230 by Vivarail are in use on several lines and will soon be battery powered. They are fairly versatile and act as an example of what could traverse these lines as infill. Once you reach Harlow, tracks exist to Stansted and so new build is needed from Stansted – Braintree for access to the GE Main Line at Witham. Witham – Maldon is a very few miles of reinstatement, but would create capacity for commuters and inform all year-round footfall and spend to the resort, famous for shell fish amongst other things.

11. Witham-Maldon Branch: There has been local vocal calls for the reinstatement of this link.

This could make a joined-up railway with shared tracks with conventional local trains and Underground stock services.

12. General Discussion around pros and cons. What cost to roads if we don’t protect lands and nurture policy for a joined-up rail corridor? There was heated and muted discussions. It was felt that our Westminster Team must press Government for land/route protection measures which are applicable for a number of reinstatement schemes across the country. It was noted Grant Shapps, Sec of State for Transport grew up in the Croxley area and is sitting MP for Welwyn, Herts. So local familiarisation should make talks slicker potentially.

13. Any Other Notified Business: It was raised on numerous occasions that clear graphics mapping out were needed to be provided by ERTA. The answer is that we all have different talents and some excel at mapping and computer software crayoning more than others. We are voluntary and rely on volunteers to offer their able services to Mr Simon Barber who is keeping a database of volunteers and work together with him. Meanwhile we do the best we can, tabling and facilitating discussion of ideas is at least a start and much needed. Our door is open to budding talent, rather than same tired people doing everything and collapsing under the weight of it.

Notes: We will work at these things and want to build a loose alliance of friendly inclined and favourable to conventional rail people.

Background: Network Rail's Report talked of a southern east-west rail. Our idea is seeing what can be done interim, not 2050. Piecing together chunks and bite sizes, joins a localised rail base network. Unless lands are protected and buy-in to the ideas are accepted by politicians and councils, development sprawl will scupper any hope or chances. Then you face the difficult decision of the middle east-west rail Bedford-Cambridge section of which is a lesser of two evils route. 

Croxley could be done.

Whether a tunnel under WCML south of station off Croxley to feed into Abbey Branch is feasible is unknown, but needs studying as to pros / cons.

Bricket Wood to get a loop. Needs direct link to freight depot and Napsbury Junction Station with duck-under to join slows and onwards to serve London Colney and split/integrate with extended tubes from Barnet which in turn could go under Napsbury and terminate at a second platform at Abbey/make more of it.

London Colney-Potters Bar or north thereof - Harlow, links with lines to Stansted. Stansted-A120/Great Dunmow-Braintree Branch link up has long been called for but nil action.

Finally, there is a localised call for the Maldon Branch to be reopened for commuters to the main station at Witham. 

So, pieces coming together informs a localised east-west link with principal lines and places not well served by rail east-west. Saves going into London and checks traffic growth on local roads in normal times.

Moving such ideas forward is the heart of the discussion. Hope this helps.

Please liaise with Mr Simon Barber on offers to help: T. 0208 940 4399, E. simon4barber@gmail.com  and campaigns-wise richard.erta@gmail.com likewise any amendments to these notes. https://ertarail.co.uk/events/

Road v Rail Event - It is time for a national plan of modal shift from road to rail and that means local rail reopenings and nurture.

This event is free apparently and 'open to all': https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/roads-vs-rail-reducing-emissions-by-2030-tickets-135985449139?ref=esli&utm_campaign=201308&utm_source=LinkedInenivtefor001

Roads v Rail is a polemic, whereas what we may need to see is more nurture and integration as follows:

1. a rolling programme of local, conventional rail reopenings/rebuilds/realignment lands and select new pieces of rail to enable rail to do more, court new markets and nurture modal shift by default of rails going where flows go. Thus north-south capacity - our call to re-rail/new-build a Great Central Link between Calvert/Banbury and Rugby/Lutterworth/Narborough (for East Midlands), Northampton-Market Harborough another. Default capacity creation is a nice idea, but passenger demand post covid may go up but in any case if the rail gaps exist, rail cannot be an answer. East-West Oxbridge rail link, but a new dedicated rail alongside A14 from Felixstowe to the West Coast Main Line with radial links in between would also seem logical, as 100 mile gap between North London Line (which takes a lion's share) and Peterborough-Leicester-Nuneaton rail link.

2. A plan for every line for rail-born nurture of freight by rail. Like Green Energy we tend to be presented with a big is beautiful or bust and trade reports on costs and locations, when small and plentiful can also reduce carbon.

3. A plan for formal protection of routes/lands to keep re-railing open. The new edition of Rail Issue 922, page 16 'Regional News' today has a bit about a canal threat to the Guildford-Horsham line, saying it will not stop a rail reopening. Personally having walked the line I think it is less clear cut, especially adjacent to line edge development and issues of double track and cycle/footpath access - can it really sustain it all?

4. A national plan for modal shift from road to rail, but also more combining road and rail interim like intermodal swap-body wagons, a dedicated Piggyback rail route from Channel Tunnel to Heart of England, an inland roll-on, roll-off rail network, bring back motor-rail and every train able to carry small loads of freight by rail like parcels, pallets, bikes, luggage, and dedicated freight again wagon loads to mixed goods to Speedlink style to full block trains. If we don't have the infrastructure, can't be done, but needs to be nurtured. One planning rule could be that warehouse complexes must be rail connected and have a percentage by rail from day one, not an after-thought of retrospective nice idea without inclusion of rail.

Hope these thoughts are of interest. I am sure you may have some of your own too.

Oxbridge East-West Rail Event and Thought

There will be an important conference/event: https://peloton-events.co.uk/rail-east-west-main-line-2021/?fbclid=IwAR24JK0FNPiyfqeu7UiUrRbjECbEWz_AeEf3mDT-qB0g-hRPsU1wmtiKdUc Please pile in and have your say/advocate more of what we may wish for. If unsure or wish to discuss it, please email me. 

East-West Rail tell me they will be doing more consultations in due course 2021 and the route between Bedford-Tempsford-Cambridge via North Bedfordshire and Cambourne will be in the frame for feedback. Will Ravensden get a station out of it? Or a vibration from a 3 mile tunnel? The access from Girder Bridge where the Midland Main Line crosses the Great River Ouse north of Bedford to reach the south of Clapham side of a hill raises some engineering gradient and clearance challenges which again, raises whether for all the hassle and cost, the old route via St John's out of Bedford having reversed at Bedford Midland would be better/cheaper/less hassle? Yes, deviations around Willington have to be done but apart from issues of crossing road accesses and new construction south-west to Tempsford direction contrast the northern route which has to engage Black Cat Roundabout and the Great Ouse/Ivel convergence to the east of it on a flood plain, means our route has probably the edge in keeping costs and engineering challenges down if politics can be kind to it.

Parishes, what is your view? Happy to discuss. I think Bedford needs a rail link to Cambridge. Old route is now lost to development. So using what is available with deviations where blockages exist with some new interpretations may be a way forward. The new northern route seems far less straightforward. Alas, we don't get a local newspaper anymore, so it's hard to know what people think these days in the community. I don't think we need forensics to get a general idea. Whilst Victorians have to take lie of the land more into construction consideration, none-the-less principal ideas and some idea of geographical lie of the land can surely be useful? If we don't get and bid for the delivery in a timely manner, we throw more development to roads only by default and that makes, in normal times, for more congestion at junctions and urban interfaces. The legacy of the closures is an environmental issue our country is grappling with 50+ years on and still pluralism is the answer, whereas we need focused projects which can deliver bulk off roads (passengers and freight) through choice and rail links which connect to principal places inclusive of audiences in between. Serving Bedford Midland is a plus, but it will need rails, platforms and capacity reconfiguration to ensure linkages and competition with other services can all be slotted in. Thus disposing of lands west of the station which could serve for more parking may be short sighted, ditto if we let go of the old Bedford St John's Station site, blocking access to the east, locking in a north Bedford route only option. There is a lot at stake and one suspects post lock-down, it will either be a lot of things happen at once, or we hold conferences on environmental issues, but long grass or develop options away? 

ERTA 2021 Winter-Spring Events Page Information 'all welcome/open to all'

 

The ERTA is organising a series of events on Zoom this Winter and Spring and welcome your support and interest and potential joining and engagement. We face 2 things happening at once. On the one hand a slow-down due to the Pandemic and Lock-Down and on the other, the need to be better prepared for unlock and recovery to a 'new normal'; whereby we balance economic activity with adequate infrastructure to inform modal shift from road to rail more, cut congestion, emissions and balance prosperity with environment the two not being opposed per se, but harmoniously fundamental for well-being.

I attach our latest newsletter and poster of a selection of events/email richard.erta@gmail.com for newsletter or see: https://ertarail.co.uk/newsletter-archive/

You may wish to check our events page on our website: 

https://ertarail.co.uk/contact/ Please feel free to pass on to any interested others. Our events are open to all and all are welcome to get involved. 

This news story shows that if we don't invest in the rail reopenings like Northampton-Market Harborough in this case, but elsewhere other rail links likewise, we throw by default to more roads, more congestion, more pollution and land lost. Choices present themselves and we need to get it right and ensure a local to regional rail network 'fit for purpose', able to serve customers from small loads/parcels to large loads/block trains of goods and all in-between. Government has a pivotal role to play, but we can all do our bit at a local level to nudge right policies and practises and have values which put people, places and the environment before things and vested interests. The re-railing of the Great Central Corridor is crucial to create capacity on the West Coast Main Line as well as more east-west rails to enable more connectivity including better access between M25/Hertfordshire/radial north-south rail links and places like Stansted, Essex Coast and vice versa to Watford and via the Croxley Link to Aylesbury for example. Northampton-Market Harborough deals with the eastern flank of the M1, Great Central the western flank approaches to Leicester.

https://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/business/construction-starts-450-acre-northampton-gateway-logistics-park-m1-3085058?fbclid=IwAR2ix3hYAoXxmexshfmNuuwvpE16UrHfFgMhcaMxTef8q6Yc9-tMgfnEwi8