Rails for Guildford and surrounding areas a must-have to control development impact and congestion!

24-04-2023 Casual Notes:

Notes from Guildford Public Meeting at St Nicholas Church Hall Saturday 15^th April 2023. Disclaimer: These are notes taken to assimilate the main points raised rather than who said what exactly.

 

Present: About 30 present in the audience.

 

Richard Pill opened the meeting and Zoe Franklin then addressed it for about 35 minutes followed by extensive questions and comments. An agenda and attendance list were circulated at the start of the meeting.

 

Zoe Franklin, Lib Dem Prospective Parliamentary Candidate raised the following points amongst what she said:

1.             Transport of choice, creating emissions, air quality and the health impact of it. We need a shift to environmentally friendly transport.

2.             Buses and trains deal with volume and distance issues.

3.             33 million cars and 2-3 cars per household adds up.

4.             Car ownership surely is about convenience or perceptions of?

5.             Train versus Car access and convenience. The example of the local Guildford railway station – if we are to get more journeys by rail and fewer to/from stations by car, we need diverse modal access beit walking, cycling, bus and less road usage?

6.             Modal Shift needs to be practical; how do we integrate our public transport?

7.             London, Nottingham, Cambridge, Portsmouth are further ahead than some other places including Guildford.  Can Guildford learn and get a better integrated transport system?

8.             Cycling and rail use. How good is cycle access in and around Guildford? The one-way system on a bike does not feel safe. A key concern is safe accessing Guildford main and other smaller stations by cycle.

9.             A call for new stations at Bairn and Merrow. These are tied to major development.  Park Barn for University, hospital and research park.

10.        Electrification: rail travel needs majoritively electrification beit North Downs Railway, but we have no firm plan, but would cut diesel train operations and thus emissions.

11.        Rail Network falls short on disabled and sensory access accommodation and service. Needs new stations to have such things built into the design. Trains need better signage, simplified fares, ticketing, and lower costs generally.  We must make rail usage as attractive as possible. We must empower people to choose and use rail.

 

Question and Answer Session:

1.      Renationalisation as an answer? Is it not a quick and easy option? Longer term maybe plus enable local authorities to have more of a say to invest as well in local rail schemes and services.

2.      Cycle infrastructure – 15-minute towns and cities solution.

3.      Parking – a place called ‘Austin House’ in Guildford was mentioned. Underground parking useful idea.

4.      Better bus-rail integration and whether recent redevelopments have enhanced this or not?

5.      Guildford Bus and Rail Stations, need better clearer transit route by foot between the two.

6.      Shalford/Cranleigh Rail Link and onwards for Horsham/Shoreham/South Coastal links and vice versa. Hamble and Parrish Council was represented. The advantages of reopening were flagged up and the need to pro-actively protect the corridor.

7.      Matters around Dunsfold Park and an airfield and impact of more development without a rail-based infrastructure.

8.      There has been a post-pandemic shift from mere commuting to more leisure travel.

9.      Cranleigh-Guildford and modal shift balances. Some think a bus improvement needed, but rail offers more on numerous fronts. A281 is congested and upgrades just accommodate more traffic, we must have the rail back, it was a short-sighted closure in the 1960’s anyway.

10.  A Liz Townsend apparently voted in favour of the Canal over old trackbed, whereas we need canals and cycleways slewed to make way for the railway to take its rightful course. We are not calling for cancellation of non-rail leisure pursuits. The Downs-link is under threat from the aspirations of the Wey and Arun Canal Link.

11. Office for Road and Rail (ORR) don’t want electrification on the Southern e.g., East Croydon-Uckfield an example. They need lobbying to think again.

12. There on complexities on moving the Guildford-Horsham rail link et al forward but we need a can-do approach by all in leadership for it.

13. Waverley area: Alistair Smith Chairman of Guildford Society cited in Liverpool Battery and electric powered trains but called for electrification in the medium term.

14. Tram-Trains were flagged up, unsure on cost and versatility comparatives to a conventional rail, especially if one throws in more freight by rail adding to the case for rebuilding the railway?

15. Someone flagged up Wisley needing better rail access.

16.  Trevor Jones said new stations must meet certain conditions like not putting them on curvatures on railways.

17. Capital costs were flagged up.

18. Barry Williams of Guildford Society Transport Group cited 1500-5000 Dunsfold Housing Development and local impact if we do not have the railway. Remembering the 2.5 cars average per household – all adds to congestion and pollution if we have no rail infrastructure. It has a traffic impact on Guildford and elsewhere and this is an example to bear in mind.

19. It was pointed out the local authorities work within the bounds of Central Government stipulations and frameworks and constraints.

20. It was raised if extra platforms and services at Guildford can be done or not. An extra platform west side may be feasible.

Meeting closed just before 4pm and we thank all who came and gave so generously.

Subsequently: There is a push to form a small nucleus of people to focus and push for the local rail link via Cranleigh to be restored. All interested should contact Mr Eric Brough: eric.brough@bluevalley.co.uk or join ERTA and help us inform area reps and a team and work through us. Every little helps! We can all liaise and work together. Thank you.

R.B. Pill

24-04-2023

 

16-04-2023 Update (photos to follow):

Guildford Meeting Success! On Saturday 15^th April some 30 people gathered at St. Nicholas Church Hall, Bury Street, Guildford to hear Zoe Franklin, Lib Dem Prospective Parliamentary Candidate speak about transport related matters in and around Guildford, a major centre in Surrey bordering between urban and rural balances with a plethora of rail links and transport issues including congested roads blighting town and rural areas. Traffic management and addressing pedestrian priority, integrated bus and rail and cycle-ability safely in and around Guildford, including getting safely to local railway stations. Zoe gave a lively talk followed by questions, answers, and discussion. The matter of reopening the rail link to Cranleigh, Horsham and beyond was raised by several people. 

Protecting the route, studying the prospect with a ‘how to’ not ‘if but…’ approach is required. Through journey choice both to and from Guildford, decluttering trunk roads and urban blight as well as more freight by rail were raised. Dunsfold and elsewhere development is going in but the infrastructure is less-than what is required. Richard Pill, ERTA Secretary also spoke after Zoe and stressed that local MPs are more likely to take an interest and act if local people get galvanised and write to them encouraging support for reopening the rail link. Likewise, local councillors and councils. It needs a concerted effort and membership of ERTA acting as a bridge to bring people together is recommended.  Join ERTA and give support! Enquiries via richard.erta@gmail.com

Our limited photos from saturday: If you can do more and better as a volunteer, join ERTA and offer to be our photographic officer. Reliable, good and flexible are the key requirements. Thank you. Please email richard.erta@gmail.com for enquiries.

12-04-2023 Agenda and diagrams for Saturday's 'open to all' Public Meeting in Guildford - pray for good weather too!

Not the final word, but gives a flavour, a vision of intent. Join ERTA or donate and give us your support: https://ertarail.co.uk/become-a-member/

Just a reminder of our forth-coming Public Meeting with Guest Speaker Zoe Franklin coming up. If a new rail link between Guildford and Horsham, Shoreham, Chichester and Brighton is to be opened up with outwards journey opportunities and inward footfall and spend, then the drive, vision and commitment to nurturing such relies with local people to determine and their elected representatives to be told that is what they, the people, wish for. 

ERTA can only do so much. We have limited human and financial resources and rely on people to join and get involved with us to progress the initiative. Reading/Heathrow-Brighton/Chichester arcingly is what is on offer potentially with traffic reduction, more rail-based capacity and benefits thereof. Having to go into London and out again is a cost-time-chore and opening up the Guildford area for more by rail means it makes sense to save land around the station and plan development for rail tracks and platforms and station facility expansion with integrated bus links. Instead, the temptation and danger is we do other-than rail expansion development and think of land as a commodity and dispose of it for non rail purposes and then when we have a chance even to re-rail to Cranleigh, getting the volume of trains through platform interfaces is restricted? If trains have somewhere to run on to, it clears tracks and platforms for other train operations. 

ERTA especially wants the councils to come and work together and we need the public to write to them and their MP's as well. Please join us for the meeting and join us as a member to help us.

Many thanks for your interest.

Yours sincerely,

Richard Pill

ERTA Secretary

richard.erta@gmail.com

27-02-2023

The Transport for the South East recently communicated is full of stuff, but they, like other similar quangos, don't pick up on our suggested pro-rail choices to a roads only agenda.

Whilst all the South East matters and needs east-west rails to save time and cost going into London and out again (default is driving) and capacity issues on main lines like the Brighton Main Line and gaps in the network beit Polegate-Stone Cross or variants thereof, Guildford-Horsham/Shoreham for Reading-Brighton 'not via London' arc and all in between. Likewise a rail link to Heathrow and Old Oak Common (OOC) interchange with numerous other lines and ultimately HS2, third-rail electrification of the North Downs Line for enabling semi-fast Thameslinks to include Guildford on their network e.g. Luton Airport, Eurostar St Pancras and East Croydon and vice versa footfall, spend, flow and regeneration as well as revitalising the North Downs Line itself.

We need your support for making our meeting a success and enabling us to do more. If not a member, please join. If you are an elected representative, to make it in your interest to advocate and speak up for our rail agendas to give local people more choice, save land, and enhance the environment in the broadest sense. Otherwise it is more roads, more congestion, pollution, emissions and 24x7 noise intrusions.

Any offers to help us are welcome to entertain. We are not resourced to do it all ourselves, rather we float ideas and encourage and welcome councils and other agencies (often paid by public funds) to do the public bidding, to come off the fence and invest in nurturing re-railing and better rail-based transport options.

Any enquiries via richard.erta@gmail.com please.

https://ertarail.co.uk/events/

Join our free email loop: richard.erta@gmail.com

Tel: 01234 330090 or 0208 940 4399

re: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/21122800/rishi-sunak-railyway-bus-row/?

We don't need to play off between bus and rail, rather, put people, places and environment (back door to good public health) first! 

ERTA is planning an 'open to all' meeting in a hall in Guildford for April to try and bring people together to discuss what they want and what they would wish for in relation to rails for the Guildford area. 

We can only be as good as collaboration with local people, more members and volunteers may inform. 

We are mindful however, that there seems to be tension on what is happening in the Guildford area.

1. More lines and platform capacity is needed; rebuilding to Cranleigh and beyond to Horsham would enable more trains to depart the station and move on to elsewhere.

2. Development off the rails must take into consideration the needs for a growing railway station and facilities on and off the rail and the close proximity of the bus station should not be lost either, as they feed each other.

3. A rail corridor can and must assume the old railway course of way with realignments where blockages exist. Cycleways can be relocated easier than railway lines and this flexibility can still retain off-road usage of cycles and walking, but the rail handles bulk movement of people and goods with the associated masse benefits that may inform.

4. Our suggested new-build rail link would enable an arc of Reading-Brighton direct (not via changing in London) and save time, create capacity and inform more footfall and spend in town centres minus the congestion, land-use parking demand and associated ills.

5. Studies on the railway have centred on Cranleigh, but as a through rail link, it could do a lot more. There's a need for policy to support the rail nurture, there is also a need for numerous studies to a. make the case creatively, b. examine how engineering can be done to satisfy all mostly, c. see a local and regional picture of a more sustainable transport corridor for all.

6. Cranleigh is a growing place, the old route seems compromised. A study to look at new routing options would be required. 

7. Route protection and tailoring development to avoid Cranleigh problems elsewhere, is vital to retain this option for re-railing. If lost, it locks in dysfunction on and off the rails and responsible powers at any level must work with us to avoid it.

I attach 2 diagrams, which are not the last word, but give a flavour of what could be achieved. We would welcome your support for it please. Our meetings are open to all and we aim to grow to service a nationwide landscape. Please offer to help and fill gaps for leadership, move towards delivery of the rail projects. The date we are looking at is 15th April, but this will be confirmed nearer the time. Thank you.

Email richard.erta@gmail.com to be on our loop.

Government lacks a sense of direction on Transport?

re: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/21122800/rishi-sunak-railyway-bus-row/? 

Whilst history has taught some of us maybe to take headlines with a pinch of salt, given the precarious nature of our financial situation, the disregard for environmental considerations and the fact many upper tiers of society tend to drive everywhere (or fly?), bus and rail use, walking and cycling all need to be put in proportion and perspective and a better appreciation of their vital roles. 

ERTA would request people email their local MP's and the Secretary of State for Transport Mr Mark Harper: https://members.parliament.uk/Government/Department?departmentId=23 and Huw Merriman MP Minister for Rail. 

1. £27 billion found for new roads, whereas the Rail Reopenings Fund was a mere £500 million. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/27billion-roads-investment-to-support-64000-jobs

2. Rail can do freight from parcels, post and pallets to container loads and all in between. That is the potential, but the network is not robust enough for the markets which have and are emerging since the closures of the 1960's. The government is doing nothing to protect rail corridors old or new and when it comes to levelling up, it is not getting it where it counts like giving the go-ahead to Colne-Skipton as an example of long called for, case made but no action and dithering adds to costs, makes route protection less certain and the model repeats elsewhere from Bedford-Cambridge to Guildford-Horsham/Shoreham and elsewhere.

3. Government needs to get a grip. It has a pivotal role in terms of frameworks, policies and joining up the various components.

4. Bus usage would be boosted by making an under 65's concessionary card available for all who want one. Car ownership is a cost and for low income people, raises affordability if not versatility, whereas affordability is an issue on accessing buses and age use seems to be under 18's people who can't drive and over 65's people with a free concessionary bus pass. So loads of audiences to court. 

£2 cap x a family of 4 is £8 each way, each time. It can add up. Bus cuts have disenfranchised people in places like Olney or getting between East Beds and the County Town of Bedford. Frequencies cut, so X5 was split with 905 (Oxford-Bedford separate to Bedford-Cambridge now) and reduced from a through service coach with a toilet on board for a 3.5 hour duration each way journey, to double decker buses with no toilet facility. That hits people with hidden disabilities and dumbs down the Oxbridge arc service identity as a joined-up unit. 

5. Cost of congestion - Chancellor - rail makes sense! https://www.transportxtra.com/publications/local-transport-today/news/64673/congestion-cost-uk-economy-6-9-billion-in-2019/

Yet the idea of reversing trains at Bedford Midland with reopening a rail link east of Bedford via St John's is anathema to many, whereas a through route to the north, Northern Route E, is hilly, more expensive and puts all through Bedford Midland including freight. There's a debate of two slow or 4 tracks north of Bedford, the latter requires some 50 houses be brought down. Our route, east of Bedford, which enables east-west freight on the back of a reinstated triangle, to pass through without recourse to Bedford Midland and enables a east-north train movement, currently not in the design, which restricts potential rail-based reach and ranges.

Conclusion: What the government needs is a big picture, a vision and a route map to get there in a timely manner. Some rail reinstatements are more or less 'ready to go' and would bring immediate benefit and yes, create loads of jobs, including the supply chain industries which are overlooked. Opposition need to do likewise, mere criticism does not get us out of a melt down and transport crisis where Government scapegoats the soft cheeses and panders to road investors and associated without regards to environmental issues beyond mere greenwashing by planting saplings everywhere, whilst congestion and pollution rises for want of rail alternatives. Congestion is a cost and preventative medicines as cleaner rail-based transport can inform, can bring other savings. Suffice to say last Saturday going to our Rugby Forum, X5 Bedford-Milton Keynes now only has an hourly frequency. The disabled toilet inside the booking hall is constantly locked unless one asks for it to be unlocked. There were 2 out of 4 booking hall ticket office windows open and a queue of 20+ soon built up. There was no visible staff helping with ticket machines. On occasion at Bedford Midland, I've been charged more and a different price with the machines than via the booking offices. In short, people are best to deal with unless you have pre-paid and for troubleshooting. Remember those old PC's where novices wrote wonderful stuff and lost it for want of a back up due to some anomaly? Machines are right unto themselves, but can have short-comings and I would suggest people understand people better. The cost of de-staffing could be a culture of alienation. Let your MP know of your experiences.

Great Central New Build to 21st C Corridor - Rugby Transport Forum Minutes - please join and give support.

Notes of ERTA Rugby Transport Forum: Saturday 21^st January 2023 at Rupert Brooke Wetherspoons 01788 576759 8–10 Castle Street, Rugby, Warwickshire
CV21 2TP https://www.jdwetherspoon.com/pubs/all-pubs/england/warwickshire/rupert-brooke-rugby Convenor/contact: Mr Simon Barber: T. 0208 940 4399 E. simon4barber@gmail.com
 
Present: Simon Barber, Kuljit Maan, David Ferguson, Richard Pill
 
1.     Appointment of a chair for the meeting: Simon Barber
2.     Apologies for absence: Leonard Lean, Tom Longstaff, Colin Crawford, Mark Pawsey MP, Cllr Wallace Redford of Warwick’s CC, Cllr Rupert Frost of West Northants Council, Cllr Peter James, Harborough Council.
3.     North of Rugby (Rugby-Magna Park-Lutterworth-Narborough area physical rail linkages):
a.      Kuljit to liaise with Simon on informing a team of volunteers to assist with delivery of the ERTA Leicester Flyers around the Narborough area. What is left over, can be done elsewhere/used to recruit new members etc. A date needs to be set before 11^th March MH meeting. Likewise, Simon to furnish Kuljit with Cllr Peter James for delivery of the MH specific flyers in a timely manner and to liaise with Simon for a team of volunteers to deliver them 2 weeks before 11^th March to give people a chance to know and come to the meeting.
b.     It was agreed a study is needed on how to get out of Rugby existing station to Magna Park and Lutterworth and connect to the Leicester-Nuneaton existing lines for access to Leicester for passenger services and Peterborough (freight) and also Knighton for Burton upon Trent and Derby (freight bypass). Land has and is being developed, time is running out unless councils can be persuaded to buy into the idea, find a junction land and protect it to keep options open.
c.      It was agreed that Kuljit would inform a delegation to Leicestershire and Rugby Councils to try and persuade them to buy into the idea and round-table to find resources for a study to make the case and look at routing options.
d.     It was noted that the main line reconfigurations north of Rugby Station, means on-coming points to contra fast lines would not be entertained in all likelihood and so the old Midland route does not lend itself for such a new junction these days. One balmy idea, was to put the new link on stilts over the existing lines and have a two or three tier station complex, not higher than the adjacent station car park tower for example.
4.     South of Rugby (Rugby Central Parkway – East-West Rail and Aylesbury for wider linkage to Bicester, Oxford, Bristol, Southampton and all in between, beyond as well as London Old Oak Common/OOC. This via the areas of Willoughby, Woodford Halse area, Brackley East Parkway). Nothing is easy or straight-forward. But this is a new 21^st Century railway for the carriage of people and goods, more capacity, modal shift from road to rail and catering for sustainability more amidst spiralling growth and a lack of rail-based infrastructure. It was agreed that this second part of the project (north of Rugby being one half, south of Rugby being the other half) and maybe a third aspect linking the two/including orbitals of Rugby. The southern limits of the railway (physical) would be physical arms to link into Aylesbury and a western curve towards Oxford. If that can be done (complicated by the knuckle hump of east-west going over HS2, fine, but it has already knocked out an arm from Aylesbury-Claydon (eastwards curve) and a study to look at routing options, including of course Calvert-Grendon or Aylesbury-Princes Risborough for our proposed link from Chiltern Main Line to OOC and Heathrow-Woking-Guildford for example. It was agreed strategy-wise, but we are terribly short on willing volunteers.
5.     How to get from south of Rugby to Rugby WCML/Northampton Loop and beyond via DIRFT to Lutterworth and associated aforementioned linkages? It needs a study. Indeed, every aspect needs a study to look and identify options from construction/reconstruction, engineering, costs and environmental impact. Agreed that a study on practicalities is needed as well as routing options. Essential to get councils on board and for that we need to know/have volunteers who grasp the strategic significance of the project and gather support from councils, business and other sectors. Connect Midlands say they are ‘neutral’ which given their roads agendas, seems less-than ideal to put it mildly. We vitally need people like Colin to help with diplomatically bringing these points home and ushering council and others on board with the ideas, aspirations and them working out finer details. Some relocation/knocking down for a 20-meter width railway structure/land would be needed in some places. These things need studying, which needs councils on board and that is where efforts are best located.
6.     Seeking backers, sponsors, business interest and political support from councils, agencies and government. Kuljit Maan after May to be willing to be the Project Coordinator and direct it, grow a team and pool support and take it to councils for their support and buy-in to the idea. Richard can do some desk-top thinking and clerical support and email, Simon and David may be willing to help with meetings, leafleting and general support. But we desperately need more local-based people and younger age profile with energy, get up and go and yet ably to engage with councils and gently say “what about it?” and court their support and better placed to start a consortium to move towards funding studies, protecting lands with councils and getting the rail agenda advanced.
7.     Association needs: This needs to focus on a. upping our presence in Rugby, b. getting and growing a team of support, c. leafleting and marketing, d. rails from Rugby Central south and rails from Rugby WCML to Magna Park, Lutterworth area and linkages to Narborough area existing rails. It needs backers, sponsors and professionals to take the ideas and make progress with them towards delivery. It needs buy-in from councils and public as well as MP’s. How we get there/preliminary strategies. ERTA is not equipped to do studies (they start at upwards of £50k), but we do plant ideas and seek to identify gaps and potential as yet unserved markets by rail to consider and pursue hopefully. Traffic and emissions reduction must be a main consideration in all our endeavours.
It was agreed to hold a Public Meeting at The Quakers 3^rd Saturday of May or following Saturday with a speaker – like Guildford. This would be preceded by a leafleting campaign and seek to rally public support. Wetherspoons 12 Noon for lunch, 1.30pm set up and 2-4pm business. Wetherspoons is not suitable for more than half a dozen people and noise levels are difficult to speak over. This needs to be the pattern if funding can cover it. Simon to make enquiries: Address: 28 Regent Place, Rugby CV21 2PN Phone: 01788 522365
8.     Growing support in the Rugby area. Ideas of how best to do that on a very meagre budget. Leafleting is one option, but so far has not roused people to join ERTA. Richard has 4 blocks of leaflets needing younger volunteers to reliably deliver door-to-door north, south, east and west of the town centre. If willing to lead and coordinate please let Richard know by email richard.erta@gmail.com
9.     Any Other Business:
a.             Kuljit suggested he would be willing to make representation to get us a discount at Wetherspoons since we use them often.
b.            Kuljit suggested a WhatsApp for ERTA people. Simon, David and Richard not keen, because we’re of an older age and not ofay with a lot more technology preferring email and telephone for communication. However, others are welcome to do it with Kuljit.
c.             Please read all emails and respond in a timely manner, as crucial we all work together.
d.            Richard to compile a GC Corridor New-Build Rail Link A4 outline strategy which gives options to help Kuljit. The public Meeting can be the hand-over to Kuljit to lead it.
e.             Kuljit asked about the vacancy of Chairman and this remains open for any Member and/or EC to apply, but must have a track record of engagement and reliable service. It is open to all. We work as a team respectively.
f.              Richard shared that in 4 years’ time he will be 60 and will be retiring. So is seeking people to hand on chunks of responsibility to and we need younger, keen and motivated people to come forward and do that for ERTA to carry on.
10.         Day, Date, Time and Place of next meeting: 3^rd Saturday or 4^th Saturday (whichever available) at the Rugby Quakers Meeting 2pm business. Please liaise with Richard on flyer delivery as he, David and Simon may not be able, but will attend the meeting and bring a sales stall.
a.             Market Harborough Public Meeting: Saturday 11^th March from 2pm
Details: To discuss Northampton-Market Harborough (MH) rail link being restored and accentuated others including stations, Rugby-Leicester, Magna Park and Lutterworth.
Market Harborough Methodist Church/Hall, Northampton Road, Market Harborough, LE16 9HE www.harboroughmethodistcircuit.org.uk  Opposite the Market Hall.
ERTA personnel will meet at the local Wetherspoons from 12 Noon. The venue is only a 5-minute walk from the Wetherspoon Pub. The Sugar Loaf: https://www.jdwetherspoon.com/pubs/all-pubs/england/leicestershire/the-sugar-loaf-market-harborough 01858 469231 18 High Street, Market Harborough, Leicestershire, LE16 7NJ
Local contact Cllr Peter James: peter341@btinternet.com
ERTA Contact: Mr Simon Barber, 20 Fitzherbert House, Kingsmead, Richmond, Surrey, TW10 6HT T. 0208 940 4399 E. simon4barber@gmail.com
 
Note: ERTA has many other calls and we wish to grow a team to delegate these projects to take forward and court support. 

In short, if you want more, be prepared to be part of that and making it happen. Local people participation and local knowledge is indispensable.

Any volunteers, beit professional, elected or lay people, please let Richard Pill know: richard.erta@gmail.com or to talk: 01234 330090
Yes the numbering section has gone slightly wrong in translating to Blogspot, but enough for people so minded to get the gist and get involved with us positively please.

Northampton piecemeal-infill housing on or adjacent to former rail routes wanted for local rail reopening doesn't add up?

re: https://www.northantslive.news/news/northamptonshire-news/plans-build-217-homes-eye-8022251

This makes me very sad.

I guess this is what a vacuum looks like!

It will be the end of the line for any reopening east of Northampton.

We have done all we can, but some key locals have not played ball.

It is daft, but sadly we face the same pattern in Bedford.

It locks in a roads-only future for these areas and once built, very little chance of unravelling.

There's a lack of faith pervading and a sense of proportionality, yes we need housing, but we also need these rail links.

People can object and I am sure ERTA will, but sadly I feel there's an air of complacency pervading where it counts.

We are not resourced to take it all on - people or money - and could have been but for certain dynamics coming to see the best priorities.

It is not too late to object to these plans blocking the rail corridor, please email West Northants Council, local MP Andrew Lewer and the media. Does it make any sense to grow housing and yet have no public transport infrastructure? Yet this is exactly what is happening and some are greenwashing by planting trees alongside the very railway routes they refuse to entertain for reopening = goes across the political parties. This is #northampton!

A point is that some say "you can still get a rail link through" but they fail to realise that objectors west of London Road object to a rail link (exact same one!) because of noise and vibrations, so will these new residents east of London Road as well, even if you could.

Likewise some seem to be applying HS2 and LRT desk-top creativity for a 'go anywhere' rail application. They fail to take into account gradients, landscape and that LRT cannot do what heavy rail does and vice versa. They confuse the old Wellingborough line with the old Bedford line and harmogenise the two.

They are silent on getting across London Road and yet want to get over or under the A428 heading not towards Bedford, but Wellingborough! They say that you can have a link from their rail trajectory heading south for Bedford in the Irchester area, but fail to see: a. wrong side of Midland Main Line (no on-coming points for fast lines apparently) b. fail to show how they would access the slow lines/via Wymington loop.

Likewise getting to Wellingboroughitself, old route blocked many times in the Wellingborough area and their route lacks radial curvature clearance a heavy rail needs, so what about freight? They are approaching it as if it were the Croydon Tram Link! They wanted a rail link to Towcester, but did not have a new route in mind, rather old route now part of the A43 apparently? But really, councils should get a rail vision, a rail plan, a study and tailor development elsewhere to avoid conflict, even if it is greenwashed by tree planting in the same area.

Finally, the folly of cycle or scooter ways linking key places along the corridor, does not preserve the corridor, they become 'objectors' themselves and does not guarantee adequate clearances for any standrad guage railway! Think again!