I would like to request any photos of freight trains on the current modern railway network anywhere. Please send me Jpegs with dates and captions for me to use for ERTA purposes beit newsletter but also a dedicated pamphlet on the Solent-Midlands freight route which currently goes Southampton-Reading-Oxford-
The report https://www.
Whilst a direct passenger line to serve Cambridge from the West is needed 'somehow', there is a capacity issue of getting intensive freight through the same 'box' between Shepreth and the Newmarket Line in a mainly urban area. Track capacity is needed for intensive passenger use, so why not use the opportunity for new lines between the Soham/Ely Junction Lines across to the East Coast Main Line linking onwards with our suggested route of Tempsford-North Blunham-Willington area - old route into Bedford St John's? It makes a lot of sense and could serve new built development and other areas not served by rail currently. We aim to give options and welcome further study and consideration.
Minutes for Brackmills and Northampton Area Meeting
(Zoom) Hosted by Ms Sara Homer sara.homer@brackmillsindustrialestate.co.uk on June 25th 15.00 hrs
Present: Ms
Sara Homer (host) Richard Pill (Chair) Cllr Rupert Frost, Colin Crawford, Cllr
Phil Larratt, Mr Alan Rimmer (local resident near London Road, Northampton),
Harry Burr, Simon Barber, Owen O’Neill.
1. Apologies for absence: Cllr Peter James.
The agenda was reinterpreted to cut to main issues, news
and items:
2. Brackmills Branch Re-Railing Project: Sara
had had various meetings with others including Andrew Lewer MP for Northampton
South who was unsure the case and viability/outlay of the project could pay its
way. Cllr James Hill was a more fruitful discussion and several pots of Section
106 could be a start for courting match-funding to pay for case and demand
making studies and on/off road/rail benefits of re-railing. 1200 new homes
being built at Wootton and Hardingstone. (See Note 1 below). Sara is working to
get parishes on board with the rail project. (See note 2 below). Discussion was
had on getting the specification right and impact. There was concern from Mr
Rimmer about reinstating access across London Road and associated delays to the
free movement of traffic impacting local residents. This was countered by the
fact that widespread development is happening now and without a rail choice,
existing gridlock will be exacerbated. Chicken and egg scenario. Discussion was
had on whether bridging London Road was a goer from a rail point of view or
whether a lobbying of Office for Road and Rail (ORR) (see note 3) for special
dispensation in that a. there was a railway there until recently, b. we have
got to get a rail solution to alleviate chronic congestion and c. Grade 2
Listed Buildings adjacent/landscape does not lend to bridging and demolition
per se? Harry Burr said that level crossing issues on the Bedford-Bletchley
Railway (alias Marston Vale) are problematic being converted progressively
ditto plans looking at Bicester which have not happened yet. Owen gave us a
walk through the England’s Economic Heartlands (EEH) study: His Power Point
slides doc is large but available on request to richard.erta@gmail.com Concern was that the EEH is putting too much emphasis
on using existing rails which are capacity laden and fails to grasp they need
more not just more capacity on existing lines, but new links to fill gaps and
give closer-to-home access to make rail a more natural daily choice for
transport of people and goods. HS2 is mooted to create capacity on the West
Coast Main Line, but if we are to declutter the M1 and address the east-west
rail deficit, we need new and more creative rail-based solutions such as we
discussed this afternoon. See notes 5/6 below.
It was recommended that multi-aspect studies are
needed to consider things like
congestion/traffic reduction, on/off line benefits, case-demand merits and
engineering and environmental impact to name but a few. Getting bigger agencies
like EEH, SEMLEP, Councils and wider community on board is a valuable goal to
bring about. The studies making the case/showing demand are crucial and such
evidence in favour, hopefully will be taken seriously/cannot be ignored.
4. Northampton-Market Harborough: Richard said
he had submitted on behalf of ERTA in favour of the rail link being restored as
all development, however green-clean will still be using roads and impacting
urban areas without a modal choice to tap into. So, the rail corridor is
foundational. Moreover, given we have walking, cycling, preservation and other
interests, calling it a green transport corridor and widening it for
accommodation where reasonable with a proper railway for end-to-end passenger
and freight can be looked at in the round. ERTA has said a North-West curve
would enable direct running into DIRFT. See note 4 below.
5. Northampton-Rugby-Narborough: Owen reported
that Warwickshire County Council seemed interested whereas Leicester City is
less so but Leicestershire County seems interested but on a sliding queue of
other projects like Leicester-Coventry, Burton and Midland Main Line capacity.
It was noted that a Bedford-Northampton-Market Harborough integrated rail link
could alleviate and free up capacity on the Midland Main Line for other
services.
6. Welland Valley Project: Owen was beavering
away and it looks promising. Still awaiting funding and hopefully it will go to
the next stage. Kettering-Peterborough and beyond is on the cards if it
succeeds. That then leaves Wellingborough-Northampton as a missing gap.
However, Harry Burr raised the idea of that link being restored and the
following was mentioned:
a. many former level crossings to bridge or whatever
b. close proximity to the River Nene and flood issues
c. given development at Wellingborough, will need some
careful examination as to how to redress as well as crossing MML fast tracks
and access to MML slows?
d. Bedford-Northampton with an east-north curve of
some descript would enable the link to double up on the Northampton-Bedford
design ticket and serve any new stations for the Rushden/Irchester area.
7. Any Other Business: Harry Burr said he was
meeting a Mr James Dean of Network Rail West Coast Management Leader. He was
asked to raise the issue of capacity and more trains like for example
Oxford/Aylesbury-Milton Keynes and onwards to include Northampton more. See
notes: 5 and 6
8. Day, Date, Time and Place of Next Meeting –
see https://ertarail.co.uk/events/ for updates and email your wish to attend next
meeting here to sara.homer@brackmillsindustrialestate.co.uk It was confirmed that 20th August at
15.00 was the next scheduled meeting for this Brackmills and Northampton Area
Meeting on Zoom via Sara Homer to be included please. See Note 7.
Meeting finished circa 16.25pm
Please Note:
Whatever the differences of opinion, we want to find solutions to problems, not
be overcome with them. Please think constructively, invite key people you think
could make a positive contribution and help grow positive policies and actions
by all our leaders to deliver in a timely manner. Conflict between rail
projects should be avoided, rather see what we have in common and how diverse
rails can compliment on-off rail agendas, not least cutting congestion and
giving more alternative rail choices, currently denied.
Notes:
1. Given the average household has approximately
2.5 vehicles which at about 2.5 vehicles per household x a 1200 house
development will mean an extra 3000 vehicles added to existing, congested roads
which means more gridlocked congestion, delays to deliveries and pollution from
exhaust and tyre particles on hard surfaces. We need a rail alternative which
serves specific communities like Brackmills, University Campus/Delapre Abbey
and the main station as a gateway to and from these outlets including
employment accessibility. Howdens large warehouse complex is being demolished
and more Section 106 funding could come from that as well. Ref: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/adhocs/009922numberofvehiclesperhousehold for more data.
2. ERTA Brochure advocates an LRT heavy rail scheme
(shared by Richard) which could have halts (small station access) for picking
up/dropping off intensive use/people to and from Castle Station as a gateway
to/from South Northampton areas calling at University of Northampton Waterside
Campus/shared with Delapre Abbey, Brackmills which could have an out-of-town
parking and rider scheme to ease town congestion radials to/from the main
railway station and Great Houghton so far. Could be extended to the Brafield
Racecourse/Horton Road/edge of the Castle Ashby Estate/Compton Estates/formerly
Piddington Station area. As long as a heavy rail scheme with clearances and
engineering appropriate incorporating use of spare capacity for any sourced
freight-by-rail interest (if no rail it hardly arises, but if re-railed… would
you use it for freight? May be a pertinent questionnaire question?). In short,
the scheme can be upgraded and any conventional Bedford-Northampton rail scheme
say ‘Thameslink style’ could be bolted on/amalgamated to the railway/upgraded
to incorporate the bigger scheme. A consideration is to plough on as we are and
get a something but may be superseded in say 10 years’ time. Unless a Marston
Vale traditional sort of service pattern, I would suspect riddance of halts for
just one main station or possibly 2 – Parkway at Brackmills and
University/Delapre shared if lucky.
3. Office for Road and Rail (ORR):
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/level-crossings
4. Also, this is the current Harborough consultation
on climate change related issues https://www.harborough.gov.uk/climateconsultation Everyone is encouraged to pile in and give support
for the rail reopening please. It feeds into and is itself fed by other links.
A review of Harborough's local plan is likely to be
commencing in the near future, which would be a further opportunity to
highlight strategic transport issues.
5. Decluttering the M1, our rail proposals for
Bedford-Northampton-Market Harborough deals with north-westerly-south-easterly
axis rail alternative based on a Luton-Northampton-Leicester arc. Decluttering
Oxford-Northampton via East-West Rail, relies on sufficient capacity between
Bletchley, Milton Keynes Central and Northampton. Meanwhile
Banbury-Daventry-Northampton and Rugby-Calvert needs to be looked at with
intersection where the two lines meet to feed each other passenger and freight
revenue. A43 still a busy corridor, a new station at Brackley could intercept
and integrated buses or LRT to places like Silverstone and Towcester, somehow
across to Northampton have been tabled.
6. Bedford-Bletchley extension to MKC, Southern
Hourly to CMK, Aylesbury/Oxford – CMK + all other more (passenger and freight),
means alternative routes and capacity beit physical tracks, baying and station
reconfigurations let alone reopenings (Roade/Castlethorpe?) will surely welcome
any non-specific movements going on new lines as we have suggested?
7. Please help spread the word, encourage
people to take an interest/give support.
One way is to encourage members of the public to join
ERTA:
https://ertarail.co.uk/become-a-member/
Our Facebook ERTA Pages exist and are:
a. https://www.facebook.com/bedfordnorthamptonrailway
b. https://www.facebook.com/RerailNorthamptonandshire
c. https://www.facebook.com/RebuildNorthampton2MarketHarboroughRailLink
d. https://www.facebook.com/GreatCentralCorridorReRailing
Relevant Twitter sites are:
a. https://twitter.com/NorthantsRe
b. https://twitter.com/G8Central
Blogspot contains a wealth of information/scroll down: https://ertarailvolunteer.blogspot.com/
Our thanks to all who attended and made contributions.
These minutes are a rough guide only. Any tweaks, please send to richard.erta@gmail.com
You may wish to peruse this article as a reader:
The English Regional Transport Association (ERTA) supports more freight by rail, the targeted decluttering of existing roads. M1 (which goes London-Luton-Milton Keynes-Northampton-Leicester - there is no joined up corresponding rail equivalent currently); for example often comes to a standstill with long tailbacks. This cannot be sustainable, however judged? We need the rail alternative to be relevant and determined to carry more. Capacity is needed on the rails and for the rail network to be more comprehensive for enabling small to large consignments of freight and people to more and more be enabled to make rail a natural choice for conveyance.
Buses tend to convey a certain core audience. Privatisation saw decline of bus networks and increased costs at the point of use. Today we have Government touting its investment in buses, but the reality is a sticking plaster and whitewash to the mainstay use enhancement of daily, depending on these fragmented networks. Value for money, affordability, accessibility, reliability, cleanliness, driver attitude, company hands-on management and direction/leadership and the adequacy of integration with rail stations, access to public toilets of a civilised standard and abundance open during bus operations at very least not part-time. These things attract or repel bus usage on a regular basis or not. In Bedford, out of the 3 main operators, Stagecoach, Grant Palmer and UNO, Stagecoach are probably with the edge in professionalism across the piece. Grant Palmer tries, but like the other day, bus failed at the Bus Station (thankfully) but not a word from the driver (10.30am No. 44, Wednesday 14th July 2021); people had to decide whether to stay or look for another bus at inconvenience to themselves. Likewise, the 28 and 21 wait only a fraction few seconds before departing at the Bus Station and better duration waiting may enable people changing buses from elsewhere around the bus station to have a chance to change, whereas miss it and 30 minutes or 1 hour wait not uncommon.
Getting off peak buses to link with Bedford Midland and Bus Station has been a post privatisation endeavour, but only of limited response. It should be flagrantly obvious and advantageous. Take buses out and unadulterated car dependency and congestion, add buses in, politicians and car drivers think congestion is compounded, but no! It is a choice and some carrot and stick could draw more to bus usership if the price, convenience and frequency when needed is tuned to what the customer needs and demands. Alas, getting hands-on coordination, rather than aloof science study procedures by people who drive very often is the convoluted order of the day... things must change. Extending the Concessionary Bus Pass to Under 65's and making them obtainable for all who want to use them and merging bus and rail cards to enable more public transport lifestyle/environment usage should be seen as a part of the jigsaw to cut congestion, emissions and pollution. It would also fill off-peak public transport - another goal fulfilled.
Who pays? We do if we do, we do if we don't, what then tips the balance? Whether you believe in a Climate Emergency or not and are willing to do 'whatever it takes' to optimise the reduction of car lifestyles by choice than dictate. Any Government who gets it right, achieves a great step in the right direction!
There’s a place for nostalgia in our
recollection of buses as per this historic bus stationed at Northampton on a
special run-about service day circa 2018, by the Historical Society which has
some old buses, some of which are from the days when the Civic Corporation ran
local services for local people as a staple transport. No thought of profit
motive, no disproportionality to incomes of likely users. Now, things are very
different and balancing out the environmental efficiency of using public
transport, is a sense of ‘who would use it?’ and does it present an attractive
alternative to the car/value for money?
You may wish to peruse this link article from the Guardian for a reader:
The A61 goes more or less the same route as the former railway Harrogate-Ripon-Northallerton. Modal shift from road is badly needed at local and regional and indeed, as part of a nationwide effort to declutter congestion, cut emissions and get people and goods more efficiently moved and give more options. ERTA is playing a part. Route protection is badly needed, but the overriding need for rail choice means ploughing through 'here's the cheque, move please' is the new order in a context of Climate Emergency and the dereliction of duty to protect these strategic rail routes in the first place. Local commuting, wider travel, freeing up capacity into and changing at York for everything, freight by rail and new flows boosting existing service demand patterns should chime well. Join ERTA and help us pioneer advocacy of this rail link being restored as a modern, local, conventional rail link. It makes a tonne of sense! We badly need modal shift from road to rail and this reopening/rebuild/new build needs ploughing through for regional linkages. Please give us support, especially if you live north of Leicestershire! https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/transport/how-re-opening-harrogate-northallerton-line-could-link-10-cities-leeds-bradford-airport-1743437
Join ERTA to boost our ability to do more potentially: https://ertarail.co.uk/become-a-member/
Please join us for our event in Brighton:
I disagree with the entire article and premises of its construe. A historical knowledge or lived experience is one thing, but a mainly second-hand sourced view with the benefit of published interests in roads, cars and lorries and the magazines unadulterated support for HS2 and HS3 'whatever the cost' hardly commends as an objective commentary? See: https://www.truckanddriver.co.uk/meet-the-team/profile-pip-dunn/
To the article, in brief, I believe the following is worthy of further consideration in defence of the idea of retaining and studying with a view to rebuilding a new Sheffield - Manchester conventional rail link which serves both end-to-end markets and new markets like access to a National Park by rail, not roads!
1. Page 38 of said article - Mrs Thatcher's dislike of the railways: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/3067563.stm and 1982 was Serpell - so context is a black cloud over unions, railways and contrast unleashing and continuing the infatuation with roads and road-based transport/oil fuelled. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Roberts and https://en.google-info.org/7504178/1/serpell-report.html for background and context.
2. How old was Pip Dunn in 1981? Or Gareth Dennis for that matter? How objective are they? https://garethdennis.medium.com/a-remarkable-achievement-the-environmental-case-for-building-hs2-fc22ff83b024 and https://etrr.springeropen.com/articles/10.1007/s12544-017-0233-0
3. P. 38 'nowhere of note' but end-to-end lines with little in between closure is misapprehended here. For example, the Borders Railway serves mainly a rural location, was seen by many rail people in professional circles as marginal and an enthusiasts dream, but carried 4 million journeys in just 3 years: https://www.railstaff.co.uk/2018/09/06/borders-railway-more-than-4-million-journeys-since-it-opened-3-years-ago/ Where else might the model be applied? What scope and pro-affirmative scoping do these rail magazines offer us, even for Woodhead?! Silence or drab nonsense without declaring other interests. Forget the environment or modal shift, choice and emissions reductions. The joining up to Carlisle as a through route would enable even more people and goods by rail and double if not triple usage... what more for Woodhead surely? See https://www.hull.ac.uk/work-with-us/research/institutes/logistics-institute/our-work/lhoft - utilises what is, but switching from northern supply on a north-south axis to east-west makes sense, so new and more business flows but shorter haul = good for emissions reduction, efficiency and cost reduction, what plan for rail in such a framework or must we continue a diet of denial and suppression of local/conventional rail for exorbitant passenger only High Speed case making by rubbishing other cheaper options even at the £1.5 billion quoted here - a fraction of HS2 Costs: https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/high-speed-2-costs and https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16473296 By any comparable standards, take a breathe by all means at £1.5 billion for a new Woodhead, but it is a pittance to HS2 even the northern arm and HS3... but what of default interim road usage, upgrades and new builds and environmental impact? Woodhead screams from its dormant silence as so many wrong doings, that it has a role to play in a new era of rectified and rebalanced transport apparatus'.
4. What Woodhead offers:
a. Choice/choices
b. more freight by rail, not coal, but new flows and opportunities
c. reducing emissions
d. decluttering principal roads and urban interfaces
e. not everyone drives, owns a car or wants to... let the disenfranchised have a better opportunity and be enabled to choose rail and vote with their feet. People can only use what is available, so 40 years without direct rail to the West, means either don't travel or go elsewhere signals and vice versa footfall and spend to the east and sustainability issues abound.
5. P. 38 "Traffic was in slow decline" The article does not modernise to today's need, and seems an arm chair critics retro justification for then and now status quo, with no remedy but to default of passenger only costly High Speed with large swathes disenfranchised between principal locations and no cure but car dependency/congestion and synthetic demand for road upgrades or a long way round to get anywhere.
6. Page 39 Rail Magazine has stalwartly supported HS2 and HS3 but focused on denting reopening aspiration by rubbishing calls for Woodhead to be reviewed...
7. P39 The National Park and non car accessibility: Woodhead and Dunfold are right on the door/gateway and build support infrastructure to make it a gateway to environment, freedom, right to roam and enjoy... with footfall and spend and a cleaner basis for such theatres of leisure and entertainment.
8. P. 39 Fails to appreciate end-to-end populations. South of Newcastle to North of Derby and east to Hull across to Manchester and the Cheshire-North West arc is plenty of scope as well as the Pan-Europe-Hull-Liverpool-Atlantic audiences scope factored in. Local to Global reaches and ranges and translates back to inclusion of interim areas and best managed transport design, usage and options for people and goods.
9. Page. 39: "With capacity on both Standedge and Hope Valley Lines, there were more than enough ways to take a train across the Pennines.":
a. Why then are roads being upgraded at cost and new ones called for?
b. what use is steep gradients and rock tunnels on the Hope Valley to lend to OHLE and 9'6 container traffic... if it was cost-effective, why not done by now?
10. Page 40 Standedge for all trans-Pennine rail freight in a context of axis realignment and growth means one thing... 2/3 will be by road defaultively if we do not re-build/new-build a Woodhead Railway. Failure to apprehend this, is a failure to apprehend what this rail link can bring to the 'now' situation.
11. Page 40 "However, few (if any) container trains go that way anyway" must be contrasted with this: https://www.hull.ac.uk/work-with-us/research/institutes/logistics-institute/our-work/lhoft More study work needs doing whilst at the same time protecting the route from further destruction/redevelopment blight to keep options open, see what potential 'now' and 'then' and if it serves a purpose and saves elsewhere... why not? Why should roads take all the freight tonnages?
12. Page 41: "given it [Woodhead] was 60 mph line speed for most of the way."
a. compare and contrast with average same distance/direction/axis road speeds for people and goods.
b. a consistent 60mph enables quicker end to end timings, obstruction free and keeps things on the move = efficiency, saving and who needs 220mph anyway between Sheffield and Manchester?
13. Page 41:
a. new bore tunnel can be done/savings on road and elsewhere
b. does not have to go into Piccadilly, restore the south Manchester orbital rails and reopen Manchester Central as an interchange with trains from east and west for interchange, connectivity and more capacity.
14. Page 42 Gareth Dennis, firm HS2/3 supporter, how objective is he when approaching perceived or actual challengers and cheaper options/more inclusive options like this? Compare £1.5 billion for an international all-inclusive passenger and freight environmentally friendly solution like Woodhead with costs of Birmingham-Leeds Northern arm of HS2 and upgrading roads with volumes to match spiralling patterns never satisfied - all costs ratcheted and this rail could be done asap... should be in the frame not for dismissal, but revitalisation on and off the tracks. Woodhead presents good value for money and versatility than High Speed trans-Pennine solutions if the truth be known?
This is my initial reflection and the model repeats... time to wake up and re-rail Britian and get things moving in a cleaner and more sustainable fashion - people AND goods!
Richard Pill
ERTA Chairman
15-07-2021
Our London-wide Pamphlet and our latest Newsletter are available as colour pdf's via requests to richard.erta@gmail.com
