21-02-2023
The reason why I had a sense of urgency is because the railway corridor needs protecting and the best way to do that is to provide leadership pro-affirma with a steady rail proposal. I fear now that the new development whilst not on the old railway route, will none-the-less have impinging consequences beit transport access roads, objections to rail because of noise or other blight. We had a couple of years, locals have not stepped up to the plate and this is the result. Offence could come from 2 directions, saying too much, or saying too little. I took the first of these given a time-frame of necessary 'get organised' but it appears to have back-fired in some quarters. Northampton seems an opportune place for radial rails to be restored, 200, 000+ people, most freight apart from off the M1 comes from the east, guess what? No rails to the east. Andrew Lewer MP talks a great talk on East-West Rail, yet is sceptical of the 'business case' for a rail link to it eastwards from Northampton! Still not too late to make representation on the rail imperative, but I fear the status quo with more congestion is the locked-in result of indifference or cynical hostility. Housing stats quotas being tick boxed wherever one can get away with it, is not sustainable development, considering the role rail-based solutions can play is.
Just like cup and saucer, we need a balance of both and yet on the rail, media and others are silent, as if it was of no consideration. Meanwhile, the lack of a Government incentive to re-rail and more funding to secure it as an option, deters all but the most fool-hardy. This despite £27 billion for new road schemes contrast a mere £500 million for the Rail Reopenings Fund. https://www.gov.uk/
Preamble and other 'concerns' if we do not re-rail!
ERTA wants adjacent development to old corridors tailored and landscaped to mitigate against NIMBY objections to noise and intrusion in the event of a local rail link to Brackmills or Bedford or indeed, going north to Market Harborough.
Puts Northampton top of a league for pollution with many other places trailing behind, but without restored rail links, development is unsustainable, throws all transport to the roads and pollution, wasted time and fuel/costs is the result. We need to have traffic reduction plans and measures and get on with it. Rail must be a central feature to such a care and plan.
Sitting back and doing 'business as usual' should not be an option, because it is irresponsible and does not consider impacts on others.
ERTA cares about people and places and wants support for restoring local rail links on a nationwide plan basis. Please join and help us do and bring that closer to being a reality.
I attach more details for those who wish to write in favour of rail and call for the development at Ransome Road to have design features which cater for a 25 KV electrified railway at some point. We're not against housing, we're not NIMBYs but we need a balance with better public transport for people and goods.
We need to keep rail options 'open' and ensure planning is balanced and sustainable.
Case Officer Details - please write and object notwithstanding the rail consideration and adequate clearances/noise barriers for event of railway being fully considered in design.
https://www.westnorthants.gov.uk/
Dear Friends, Colleagues and Elected Representatives,
Planning Application WNN/2023/0027 - Valid From 05/01/2023
Land For Redevelopment Ransome Road, -, Northampton, Northamptonshire
Residential development of 217no dwellings, landscaping and open space with associated infrastructure and works.
We all know that there is a push and demand for more housing x nationwide.
However, thanks to the post-war restrictions and cuts of the 1960's, the closures of local rail lines (purportedly on a basis of inadequate demand) preceded London overspill and new town development which increased potential demand but all of which has had to go by road, fuelling more road building 'demand' and successive governments have failed to restore, protect and reopen local rail links for a more equitable transport and environmental balance, namely sustainable development and outcomes.
This housing application may not physically impinge on the exact course of old railway east of Northampton, but in an urban cordon, with Delapre Abbey grounds one side and Waterside University Campus the other, surely these modern houses won't want a double track standard gauge railway with passenger and freight accelerating lion's share of the day or night causing noise and vibrations? These residents would surely object to a railway intrusion?
Therefore, if we want any rail links east of Northampton Castle Railway Station, we need to protect a green corridor either side of the railway corridor as a buffer zone to deter objections? The old Northampton-Wellingborough/
ERTA, following on from its predecessor name 'BRTA', supported a Bedford-Northampton Rail Link as a Thameslink and freight artery. That was supported by the Government along with Bedford-Cambridge via Bedford St Johns until 2004. Since then the land at Olney has been compromised severely prohibiting recovery of the old route and a new one needs studying whereby scouting to the north of Olney (greater or lesser) instead of at Turvey the railway crossed the A428 and went south and west, a new build may have to come off earlier going west, turn north and head west and match up via the Castle Ashby Estate (cut or tunnel) to link with the old trackbed west of former Piddington. It is not an exact science, all sorts of protracted negotiations from land to design, engineering and landscaping would need to be done, but the idea can be done and is sound. At Bedford the current East-West Rail Northern Route E would preclude a flyover from the slow lines to veer to Northampton West, whereas the route the East-West Consortium supported 'east of Bedford via St John's' would enable the Northampton arm (see diagram).
On Northampton-Wellingborough, it seems more impractical, as:
a. how would you cross the old Bedford Road and/or bridge or tunnel into a flood plain if it were routed east of Brackmills Industrial Estate?
b. on-coming facing points are a no, no and the fast lines are on the western side of the Midland Main Line (MML), how would you get to the slow lines?
c. the old route is obliterated at Wellingborough and the curvature east of MML is too tight without demolitions to come up facing north onto the east-side slow lines.
d. If you wanted to have a curve to the south, River Nene basin to Irchester Parkway Station (proposed) is a massive gradient and again you need lands to go under the MML fast-lines to link to the slow lines before heading into the Wymington loop and tunnel?
h. I fear LRT/HS2 desktop software is all well and good for the design applications they require, conventional rail links are a different country altogether and nothing beats field observations and experience to ascertain whether an idea fits or not.
In sum, Bedford has much to commend itself and should not be written off. The councils need to talk together and come to a view of progressive, incremental working and tailoring development to foster these rail links, not lock-out only to lock-in more gridlock congestion, pollution, emissions and goods going no-where fast.
Please object to these developments pending a consideration of the rail potential and impact of a railway being driven through the cordon or adjacent to it. Thank you.
Yours sincerely,
Richard Pill
ERTA Secretary
.JPG)
No comments:
Post a Comment