Dear Friends and Colleagues,
Further to my email in recent days, I disclose the case officers details and survey being held out for people to engage with. Thank you for those who have responded. My job is to inform and orchestrate for what we believe to be the better option in any given situation. Others can do better and are welcome to join, get involved, take a lead, improve our whatever. Meanwhile we keep doing faithfully what we believe to be a proper act of raising concern on wider impacts and cohesion in the planning in the round. This at a time of lock-down when many are switched off, locked down and unable to engage in such monumentous decisions processes. It is easy to be unphased when far away (time or space or both) and taking a view it doesn't affect oneself. But getting this land protected is crucial and that does not mean dormancy. Rather it could be made into a 12 carriage washer plant to utilise the land interim off the current Bedford-Bletchley line which has slow speeds and plenty of capacity. Another consideration is that Bedford Midland in the Local Rail Plan is to have segregated tracks through Bedford Midland Station but it is yet unclear whether the new bridge at Bromham Road (A4280) has passive provision for fanning out south thereof from the two slow tracks. Already a long standing issue is commuter trains stopping south of Kempston Road Bridge to wait a clear way to access the platforms at Bedford Midland Station. You have travelled 45 minutes from London and are left standing sometimes up to and beyond 10 minutes. What with electrification to Corby and Market Harborough and more passenger and freight coming through those very same platform interfaces? Will the problem be exacerbated? Also there is no station north of Bedford for about 20 miles, all that audiences fanning out and growing with incremental development will want to access the nearest and main transport railway station, namely Bedford Midland and where to find a parking slot? That is why lands west of Bedford Midland need to include more parking, ideally a second booking hall and access/exit from a new pathway cum cycleway off of Platform 4 and maybe a one way system from Bromham Road-Ashburnham Road-Ford End Road-Hurst Grove-Bromham Road to make access easier with contra flow being buses, taxis and cycles only? I fear that this and the St John's Plans, understandable the Council is under pressure to utilise brownfield land for social housing, none-the-less have to consider the trajectory of travel. If you want a bigger, beefed up Bedford Midland, it is prudent to save adjacent lands as a part of that expansion. If you don't where are the people to go and what impact on other parking and local roads?
Please have a perusal and I attach some pictures my colleague Simon Barber recently took of the old trackbed and St John's site. It is also another consideration that given support expressed for a Bedford-Northampton rail link being reopened, you have to consider:
a. How it will junction with the slow lines of the Midland Main Line (MML) given 100 mph fast lines won't want facing points (former Oakley Junction) - so how can it be passively included in any designs and east-west rail northern arching route which wants to verge off the same sort of area? Northampton-Bedford trains could come through Bedford Midland and out via St John's heading eastwards, whereas the northern route segregates that potential and that is a concern to us.
b. If we want to get more freight off roads and onto rails, we need the tracks to go where the main places and logistical hubs do. Northampton and its link with onwards to DIRFT and Birmingham is a pivotal link and needs route protection, bids for funding for studies, new route options around Olney and pro-active support from all councils working together now, otherwise again we throw it away with words like:
" Bedford Borough Council would be broadly supportive of plans to see the Northampton-Bedford rail line rebuilt and re-opened. However our current focus remains on the delivery of East West rail and improving Midland Mainline journeys to the North and South." Action is required in design now, otherwise when we get to 2030 or whatever, it will be too late.
'Richard,
Thank you for your comments and for your interest in the development briefs. As you may already know we now have a website hosted by our consultants HTA specifically for the development briefs and the link to the website is below.
The presentations given at the virtual presentations held on 5th and 6th May are included on the site and the write up of comments and questions will be published shortly. https://bedfordspd.htadesign.co.uk
Please also find below links to survey monkey questionnaires which have been developed for both sites. The surveys will be available until May 29th.
Ford End Road
South of the River
If you have any further comments relating to the project, please email
Carolyn Barnes
Senior Planner
Planning Policy
Bedford Borough Council
Borough Hall
Cauldwell Street
Bedford Borough Council
MK42 9AP
Tel 01234 718568
Ext 47568
End.
Yours sincerely,
Richard Pill
ERTA Chairman
richard.erta@gmail.com
Bedford-Tempsford Central Section of East-West Rail Thoughts
June 2020 RP.
1. Bedford St John’s site and trackbed down to Cardington
Road in imminent threat for other than rail uses and will be developed over
unless an 11th hour recall by a power of on reflection of the
Bedford Borough Council. If this site and access is lost, it locks in the route
north of Bedford.
2. The traditional route needs a level crossing at Cardington
Road, the same at Priory Park entrance, the evoking the clause won at the 1993
Side Roads Order 199 A421 Bedford Southern Bypass Inquiry that DfT would give
sympathetic for getting over or under the bypass in the event of a rail being
pursued.
3. From east of the bypass you head eastwards at an angle off
the old formation at that location adjacent to Willington Woods and cross the
River Great Ouse twice veering back to go through the Willington-Great Barford
Road (bridge or level crossing) and curve round with bridge or level crossing
over the Great Barford-Blunham Road and embankment alongside River Great Ouse,
north of built Blunham to curve round and across River Ivel and A1 to the
Tempsford plain approaching the ECML from the south western angle with
junctioning to allow through services (passenger and freight) south of
Peterborough and north of Stevenage including East Bedfordshire to Bedford and
the Oxford corridor proliferatedly.
4. The old route means passenger services reversing at
Bedford Midland and whilst it adds time, could be quicker if a. baying is
provided for 8-12 coach trains or through tracks segregated to existing tracks
b. the lines from 1984 St Johns Halt/Danfoss/old Hitchin arches (currently a NR
owned car park) are straightened and upgraded to 20 mph than the current
circuitous 10mph. Freight could go through on the reinstated triangle with other
operational benefits.
5. The north of Bedford option begs the question where does
it leave the Midland Main Line? Field south of the A6-A428 Bypass is now built
on. North you have the challenge of bridging over or under the A6 Clapham
Bypass, engaging the River Great Ouse, dealing with a perennial flood plain and
to do what? Go into tunnel climbing until Ravensden/North Brickhill? Such
expense and avarice compared to the straighter and cheaper/less distance land
use of the former rail trackbed? From Ravensden you head across to the Wilden/Colesden
area, you have to cross both the A421 Great Barford Bypass, the A1/Black Cat
Roundabout, descending to bridge the River Great Ouse/Ivel and enter flood
plains of Tempsford from a north-westerly direction. This is contra for heading
east to Cambourne and the ascent to Shepreth Junction Cambridge.
Conclusion: I appeal to all to think again and consult on these 2
options. Please put on hold any non-rail use development of the St Johns
Station site in the strategic interest. If you junk it now and block it, you
lock in the northern route which is more problematic and expensive and not
without a NIMBY element as well. c/o richard.erta@gmail.com
18-06-2020
We face the imminent danger of the old St John's site and trackbed down to Cardington Road being junked and redeveloped for non rail use. This would throw away the rail route option and lock in getting through busy Bedford Midland to an uncertain at this stage 'how you would do it' northern arcing route which begs many questions.
I appeal to the Mayor Dave Hodgson and the Borough Council, our MP and the Government to call-in this situation for further scrutiny. 1. The original route option was never consulted on, so 'public preference' was always stifled for genuine, inclusive options, however challenging. 2. Tempsford was never hitherto mooted as the location for linking with the East Coast Main Line (ECML). Granted the Sandy access from south of Blunham is lost/screened off with more housing north of Sunderland Road and yet, had the intent of Tempsford of been disclosed earlier, more design consideration could have been entertained.
Some say my route suggestion is not without problems. Some say level crossings are unpopular. However consider this, Cardington Road was dualled for part access to Tesco and could be made single carriageway at the point where it and the rail interface and fan out eastwards. The road has been bedlam for pedestrians and accidents a plenty along the stretch which is a bit of a fast track. Confusingly signs say 30mph going east (away from town centre) but on the roundabout with Rope Walk (facing west) it says 40mph! Surely a consistent 30mph throughout the built area and 20 mph on side streets would give pedestrians and cyclists more of a chance?
The rail link could take traffic off Cardington Road if we have through services without changing at any new station at Tempsford, coming direct to/from Bedford and beyond.
You can see the links to maps from here:
I feel personally, after 35 years campaigning around the Oxbridge Rail Link we are at both the 11th hour and a new dawn with much uncertainty hanging in the balance. Bedford politicians rightly want to build up the status and interchange of Bedford Midland. But by developing the western side of Ford End Road, rather than looking at a second booking hall and more parking/traffic management one-way schemes; are facing pressure for other uses, understandable were it anywhere else. We have one chance to get it right or face locked-in congestion on and off the rails going forwards.
Please write to Bedford Borough Council, your MP and support ERTA as it seeks to build a constructive dialogue and point out helpful options for debunking scenarios of potential misguidedness. Thank you.
