Let's Have Better Buses for Bedford!

 re: https://www.bedford.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/have-your-say/consultations/bus-travel-consultation/

I have done this survey but found it to be inadequate for the purposes of communicating a list of concerns and cares about local buses and associated matters. One is at a loss as to where the buck stop beit operators, councils or Government or a share for all. I do not have a bus officer email for Bedford Borough and welcome this email to be forwarded to appropriate people who may take up matters in the, I believe, wider public interest and potential benefit:

1. X5 Oxford-Bedford-Cambridge now truncated with a required change to a 905 which is a double decker and takes longer, much longer. You can carry a bike anywhere on the X5 coach between Oxford and Bedford, but not the 905. There's a toilet on board the X5, not the 905. There's plenty of luggage space for variety of things on X5, not on 905. 905 may benefit Cambridge local commutes from St Neots, Cambourne and principal radial stops, but end to end is useless from a Bedford-East Anglia quick end to end timing. The excuse was that X5 coaches were too big to do the corner at Ashburnham Road/Midland Road and turn at the front of Cambridge Railway Station. Now, a double decker and still no linkage with Bedford and Cambridge Railway Stations. Whatever purposes the 905 serves, can we have our X5 Oxbridge end to end coach back, maybe missing out Great Barford (use the bypass) and St Neots (call at Tesco/incentivise local services to fill gaps/give 905 optimum local feed markets including Longsands to serve the St Neots Rail Station as a part of its route, the walk gap, especially in winter nights, is a long way to former X5 stop and deters the linkage and reliability of a joined-up transport system to be relied on).

Other related requests are:

a. reinstate the St Peters Street Bus Stop for 905 to call at - right opposite the Eagle Bookshop, which Oxbridge Arc, should be a good excuse to break journeys and explore what Bedford has to offer more).

b. Install a stop for X5 by the Biddenham/Bypass Roundabout to help people access going out of Bedford/coming in without recourse to have to go into Bus Station, change and out again. This would save time and boost patronage.

c. I note Eaton Socon Church Bus stop has been cut, please work to reinstate it as local, accessible and not-so-far-to-walk stops makes accessing local buses easier.

2. Make Grant Palmer normal services serve the Bedford Midland Railway and Bus Station as a part of their routes. Likewise the No. 7 should after Bus Station go via Midland Road, Ashburnham Road, Bromham Road (new stop for Wyvern House area) and along Bromham Road (reinstate Guild Hall Bus Stop) and via St Peter's to Kimbolton Road. Decluttering St Paul's waiting x more footfall and spend northern half of High Street is a beneficiary and time saving. Putnoe to Bedford Midland seems useful and marketable. Well done the No. 6 does Bedford Midland as a part of its route now, this should be trumpeted more to make people aware of the Bus-Rail Station links more. No. 3 could turn from River Street to Midland Road, Ashburnham Road, Bromham Road, Hassett Street to Bus Station and out via St Paul's for looping from the Fenlake, likewise No. 74 Grant Palmer Biggleswade-Bedford bus - could do more/needs marketing.

3. Someone said that you can get to the Essex Border, but places like Saffron Walden, Buntingford and Stevenage to Bedford are patchy except via Hitchin. Could more links out of Biggleswade to these places be looked at for more cross-country-travel options, avoiding main urban centres like congested Cambridge or expensive rail? Likewise, does it make sense for Sandy-Bedford-St Neots when a direct bus link could feed both town centres and plug a gap maybe giving Blunham, Tempsford and Roxton/Little Barford better links?

4. Bedford-Northampton No. 41: This takes 1.5 hours each way between two principal towns. It is too long in the saddle for disabled people and commuter potential. We need to separate out a local all stopper service round Will's Mother's and a semi fast regional Cambridge-Bedford-Northampton A428 corridor fast service, bringing end to end times down to 45 minutes and linking again, with Northampton Rail Station and Bus Station. It feeds back to Bedford, gives job-seekers more scope vice versa and is healthy for both towns economies.

5. Every day the buses bring hundreds  of people to Bedford Town Centre. We need to better value bus users and their weight in gold. Encouraging town centre quality shops like an M&S Food Hall and a Morrisons Metro style, would be for the good. 

6. Better public toilets, we have lost 3 in the town centre - former Debenhams, M&S and Beales and need kore. Likewise, near the Butterfly Bridge a toilet block could be very useful. We rightly market the town and riverside ambience, but between Town Bridge and Longholme Bridge, no toilets, which is a consideration for many including people with certain propensities, disabilities and mothers with children for example. Cambridge has blocks near both River Cam and Jesus Common.

7. Time keeping on No. 81 and 44 via Wixams needs checking up. Sometimes 2 buses come along together on a regular basis - then leave 1 hour gap for the next.

8. The Kempston Bus Stop in St Paul's Square currently has no flag, no published timetable and no Real Time Information (RTI) working. Can it be fixed or is it now closed? Many buses serve it and many people go there for all call there, whereas bus station they leave at different times from different stops scattered about and if slow moving, by the time you get from one to another, miss all.

Hope this feedback is helpful and welcome an officer for liaison to work with us on improving and shoring up to be the best it can be going forward. Government money must go into appropriate projects and schemes to enhance bus usage. One idea is to give lifestyle flexibility to choose bus over car more. There must be a cost-saving incentive and be able to do more with one card. Making criterions for more Under 65's to obtain Concessionary Bus Passes should be looked at, ability to buy one anyway akin to a Season Ticket and for it to be a Government 'greening' goal for bus-rail concessionary travel nationwide for a nominal sum with free for those with low incomes/disabilities/on benefits built in for all to enjoy and benefit from better, cleaner mobility than locked-in to car reliance and cost or stuck in a geographical location denied reasonable cost-ratio to income mobility. 

Transport Chaos predicted by lay people for next 5 years! Is Government listening or caring?

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

FYI We have roads coming out of our ears! What we need is a rail alternative for people and goods. It needs a Government 'project nightingale' to speed up delivery of a full Oxford-Bedford-Cambridge rail link and more. Alas, like the tide out to sea, no passive accommodation for the rail link in Black Cat Roundabout scheme, no forwarding of a Retail Station at Kempston on the Bedford-Bletchley line (allowing park and ride/rail and ride from south of the River Great Ouse enabling avoiding the 20 minute crawl across the Prebend Street bridge to the Bedford Midland Station). Our regional body the English Economic Heartlands (EEH) seem to be working to a rail delivery of 2050 whereas the Climate Emergency gives us 10 years to have alternatives to guzzling emissions pandering infrastructure in place. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48964736 is a good summary of where we are at. 

These patterns are apparent across the English Regions. We can't export best practice if we ourselves are not prepared to make the changes to lead by example. No-one here is saying road improvements are not needed, indeed the conundrum should have been foreseen when the Great Barford Bypass was built. But roads alone cannot cope, they deliver to growing urban areas and they lack the land, capacity and ability to cope/provide parking and avoid congestion/frustration and please multiple access users beit drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, bus users, rail users and motor scooters. Witness no contraflow lane for cycling and motor scooters along the new High Street in Bedford and what is happening is encroachment upon the pavement spaces. The conflict and inherent risk is palpable. Sandy needs a better deal, but alas, after campaigning since 1987 for Bedford - Sandy 'in good faith', it is lost and a new route is required. But unless the Government acts to protect and formalise a rail route, then it too will be parked up in a file 'as closed'! 

The buzz word is 'Research and Develop' (R&D), but Planning surely seeks to fit the pieces of the given jigsaw or mosaic in some sort of coherence? Hence Wixams, you build your station first, then develop a mix of housing, schools, places of work, recycling and greening and much more, not station last and then stuck for somewhere to put it? I fear the same at Tempsford and that is why more housing there should be curtailed and a junction for physical rail links for a joined up rail net-work would be far better and let people from St Neots, Cambridge and East Bedfordshire travel by rail direct to Bedford and beyond, not have to change at yet another station and suffer cost, delays and probably will drive or use the existing bus/X5 for access? Grant Shapps is in Spain and then has lock-down time to do. But really we need a Transport Tsar to ensure these sorts of considerations are properly taken into account as we go 'forwards'!

Yours sincerely,

Richard Pill

ERTA Chairman

Consultation closes today on Highways England’s proposals for the A428 improvement, Black Cat (A1) to Caxton Gibbet (Bedfordshire/Cambridgeshire).

 

HE are seeking views on their plans to “improve” journeys between Milton Keynes & Cambridge. They are proposing a new 10-mile dual carriageway (part of the Oxbridge Expressway?) between Black Cat and Caxton Gibbet roundabouts with new and improved junctions along the route.

 

Go to www.highwaysengland.co.uk/a428 if you wish to comment.

 

Also info@highwaysengland.co.uk

 

Tel 0300 123 5000

 

It is not clear whether their latest proposals take account of EWR (east of Bedford), because it is evident from EWR’s latest route preference that the rail route is intended to serve Bedford Midland (via the MVL) and then head eastwards towards Tempsford/Little Barford, the ECML & Cambourne. Black Cat roundabout is slightly to the west of the ECML & Tempsford/Little Barford. It is presumed therefore that the “new” dual carriageway will cross the ECML in this vicinity. Is it the intention that HE and EWR share a broadly similar, parallel route? One hopes EWR, Network Rail & HE are talking to one another!

 

Battle to get Bedford Midland Station and St John's Box Right

https://www.bedfordtoday.co.uk/news/people/have-your-say-new-developments-bedford-2548903?fbclid=IwAR1HAgXiMLLdpgwIKQtYPmuemGcnhr7GXtiVqYYQ8Q9x-IHOpGDB58fMGL8 

1. The lands of the former engine shed (Ford End Road) should be used as a second booking hall with extra parking and a bus turn around and walkway to Platform 4 of Bedford Midland. Hurst Grove should be made one way going north to Winifred Road.

2. The old St John's Station site should be kept clear from development and a new cycle cum walkway from existing St John's Halt to Cardington Road should be implemented as a green corridor.

3. Lands are needed to straighten tracks between Danfoss and Bedford Midland for east-west rail access and ease pressure on Platform 1.

4. Better buses needed for Bedford Midland linking with Bus Station.

This plan could have waited until lock down if lifted. We have one chance to get on/off rail capacity right for the Bedford Midland area.

More thoughts - please respond to the plans and support our calls:

re: https://www.bedfordtoday.co.uk/news/people/have-your-say-new-developments-bedford-2548903?fbclid=IwAR1HAgXiMLLdpgwIKQtYPmuemGcnhr7GXtiVqYYQ8Q9x-IHOpGDB58fMGL8

Somehow I feel that this type of thing could have waited until lock-down is over to let more people be included in the decision making process. I am not a NIMBY nor opposed to social housing per se or one of those people who think status quo or a bygone age needs harking back to. On the otherhand the ravages of destruction of heritage especially in the 1960's of which the original closures of local radial rail links was a contextual landscape part and not without impacts. Seeming piecemeal gains and developments must be put in a context. Yes, we need social housing and understandable rare urban landscape brown field does not come lightly and is opportune to help people in need and tick box stats.

However, I feel the following:

1. Bedford Midland and surrounds. With East-West Rail and surrounding areas, we are likely to see increasing numbers wanting to visit our town and centre and accessibility on and off the rails is a key aspect to consider. We need more capacity on numerous fronts:

a. Better Buses: Contracted services like all Grant Palmer Buses should be mandated to serve both the rail and bus station as an overall part of their routes. This would feed into and out of Bedford Midland Station hub and could also have a more orbital distributor network window of opportunity, meeting people with frequency from the station and delivering dollops of footfall and spend around the road system of the town centre ending up at the Bus Station or enabling people to ride on from the Bus Station on one ticket to wherever. Get this sorted with GP and Stagecoach may blink also.

b. More parking. Land around the station is needed for a variety of purposes. Infilling for housing only is short sighted here. Long established Town Planning sees that you have mixed developments of all pockets and none housing with adequate facilities built into the new community including cycle network extensions off road too (see MK Redways as one example). Alas, like Biddenham, we have masses of semi and detatched upwards of £300k housing, few social housing if any and poor facilities except those around the bypass more likely than not necessitating a drive - more traffic and pollution! The former loco shed in Ford End Road should be turned into a second booking office with parking and a bus turn around/coach park down to the river. You could take Dallas Road off Kempston Road and have a southern direct one-way road feed to it with new single lane road and cycle/pedestrian access over the river cutting the loop via Prebend Street with delays aplenty. This could be for station users only and/or a through minor road one-way to Ford End Road. You could have station access walk/cycle path shared under spare railway arch to link with Platform 4. St Albans have an exit only one side - we can do more here. Hurst Grove could be made one-way towards Winifred Road (buses excepted contraflow with cycle access) to help commuters get a quick get-away to Bromham Road, west side of A4280 Bridge for bypass and diaspora. If this ideas was a success, you could expand the parking from old loco site to former Gas Works flat land site. This in turn alleviates Prebend Street/Ashburnham Road, which will be more used than ever given growth of demand and supply of more trains accessing the station interfaces?

c. Station North of Bedford. Some have mooted Lower Farm Road Bromham for development and a location for a possible station. This seems short sighted. Despite the Bypass, we in normal times, still see loads of vehicles going through the village to and from Oakley and Stevington and vice versa from (presumably) off the M1-A6 span? It would be far better to locate a station either north of Lovell Road Oakley with access off the A6 Bypass or at Sharnbrook or both. I think Bromham is big enough as a self contained unit and any expansion should consider elsewhere.

2. The old Bedford St John's Station site: Proposed for housing, but wait a minute. Whilst the new route goes north of Bedford to Tempsford and Cambridge, the corridor from St John's Station to Cardington Road should be reclaimed as a urban recreational centre for locked-in local streets and children/families to have a play area. Nearest is Jubilee Park, across busy roads. You could as a part of this conservation cum park area have a cycle cum footpath from the southern end of the current St John's Halt around the corner to this park and onwards to link with Cardington Road for Tesco and the Sustrans Route to Sandy for example as well as the wider Embankment interface. In return this 'off road' safe green corridor to the halt for trains and wider travel. If you destroy this option for a quick-gain stats and social housing agenda - laudable as intrinsic that is, we risk throwing the baby out with the bathwater and once done, cannot be undone, locking in poverty and dysfunctionality and throwing away part of our heritage/a green corridor option. Rope Walk had its cycle share sign removed a few years ago, it is a dangerous crossing at St John's Roundabout coming from/going to Ampthill Road for example and so a safer cycling option is required and we have a route for it potentially. I am sure an accommodation could be done with Stagecoach and also ground level access to the London Road shopping mall accessible only by road principally off opposite Elstow Road where B&M and Dunelm were to be found.

If you feel I am making any sense, please intervene and give support. We need to see tracks between St John's/Danfoss and Bedford Midland straightened and capacity of double track fostered to alleviate more trains than can be accommodated at Bedford Midland Platform interfaces. Yes, remodel the station by all means. Could we learn from Northampton where they have a corner entrance and booking hall off street level with links to over the rails footbridges/lifts (and possible escalators?) to platforms or could do in our case? Such a booking hall could be close to Ford End Road Bridge, looking down Midland Road to and from the Town Centre. Think if you will, someone disabled, elderly, frail or unfamiliar - presented currently with just 2 buses and hour (NO. 41) and/or a 10 minute walk to the Bus Station (all weathers and time of year) and to get to Nat West/High Street a 15+ each way walk. It is not encouraging, it is unacceptable and we need also to see Midland Road as a East-West High Street/Gateway/Showpiece 'welcome to Bedford' luring to wider town proliferation, discovery and search. I suggest we make it pedestrianised more with wider pavements and cycle lanes with buses only and deliveries confined to certain times with trees and benches to brighten it up. Footfall and spend can sustain businesses and they in turn can forge their own investment plans/make a wider contribution.

Finally, could we think about the former iron railings of former Allens Ford End Road Bridge-Hurst Grove area. They need ivy and trees pruned back, a wire brush, under coat and painting to look smart. Our industrial heritage, we have a wealth of iron railing styles around the town and could inform an information board as well as a town centre industrial landscape walk possibly. Another attraction with associated footfall, spend and visitorship/learning curves and greater appreciation of our industrial past. Not a big spend, but a quick gain, with links from both the bus and rail station. Thank you.

planningpolicy@bedford.gov.uk on the plans and richard.erta@gmail.com ERTA related.

The old St John's site and corridor needs to be protected to keep options open, not built on with housing estates. Please support this if you wish. 

If we lose the access and the northern route from Bedford-Tempsford proves too expensive or problematic for other reasons, with the traditional route, apart from 2 level crossings and a raising of the bypass (A421) from whence slightly to the left going east, crossing the river twice, following Great Ouse corridor north of Blunham Grange to Tempsford, you could have the junction arrangement not another station for reasons already given.

After that fine whatever but we do need to evaluate the southern route above as a fall-back, not scupper it like at Sandy has been done, a folly!

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 5^th and 6^th 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

https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/S6HXFLR

South of the River

 https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/RQ9LD6K

If you have any further comments relating to the project, please email

 planningpolicy@bedford.gov.uk or use the contact form on the website.

Carolyn Barnes

Senior Planner

Planning Policy

Bedford Borough Council

Borough Hall

Cauldwell Street

Bedford Borough Council

MK42 9AP

Tel 01234 718568

Ext 47568

Carolyn.Barnes@bedford.gov.uk

Dear Carolyn Barnes,

Thank you for your email dated 7th May with its connections and details. I deeply regret that the old St John's area is under threat of development whilst I have sympathy that the Borough is under pressure to provide social housing and use any available brown field sites for redevelopment where lands are scarce in an urban context.

I believe that whilst I empathise with the demand for using brown field sites for infill social housing, I suggest that these railways lands should be better deployed for rail purposes and thus protected from encroaching development. As per my original emails:

1. Land North of Bedford River Ouse/West of Bedford Midland should be a second booking hall and parking with walk-way cum cycle way to access the main station via Platform 4. 

2. St John's Station site and down to Cardington Road, should be turned into a rail 12 coach siding maybe with a washer facility as current only caters for 8 coaches contrast 12 formations now in operation. Tailor development and keep the eastern rail corridor approach open as a fall-back in case the northern east-west rail route does stall for whatever reason and indeed will have new objections and obstacles to over come which with gradients may be as costly than origional route with deviation east of A421 Bypass around Willington and to the north of Blunham to Tempsford on the flat on raised embankment. 

Folly to build housing at Tempsford on a flood plain around a station blocking the land which could be used for physical junctioning informing a Peterborough/Stevenage/Cambridge through route to Bedford and the whole Oxfordbridge Arc.

If we throw it away, we lock out and lock in at one and the same time. Likewise the need to straighten and raise speeds of a twin track solution to approaches to Bedford Midland configurated station platform interfaces from the Bedford-Bletchley railway, currently 10 mph and very curvey/single track - will mean a bottleneck of about 1 mile when the wider railway and service diversity opens it up. 

We need to plan and phase redesign now going forward, not wait until 2024 and then realise retrospective issues unaddressed. Once lost, like Sandy there is no going back and if the northern route fails, then orbitals of Bedford is the only fall-back option.

Meanwhile, I would ask the Borough to re-study the Retail Park, Kempston for a new station to put Kempston Town on the Bedford-Oxford line reach and range as well as linking it and the town centre by rail. Studies 20 years ago suggested such a station could generate an extra 100 off-peak users per day to the local rail service, when it runs and that I would have thought would be a gain? Likewise, if people spend time of some 20 minutes queueing to get across Prebend Street to pay to park to then await a train to Cambridge, might they not be tempted to drive direct via the bypass and other upgraded roads the Borough has also campaigned for? A Retail Park Station could have some expanded parking and a footbridge off of Southfields Road Kempston and that would reduce congestion into Bedford in all cases. The new station would also allow visitorship and employment vacancies to be filled more in the Kempston and surrounds areas as well as part of a leisure package centred on the local rail link and services.

If you want any more information, engagement or exploration with me please do contact me. 

Yours sincerely,

Richard Pill

ERTA Chairman

https://www.ertarail.com/publicity-page

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

May be of interest to some of you (photo of site attached) and for more on it please click this link and scroll down to 

'Battle to get Bedford Midland Station and St John's Box Right' 

https://ertarailvolunteer.blogspot.com/ 

for more details including objections where to send, developers and council planning officer details. You can object, you can comment, you can take the surveys and give us and the site support to be kept and explored for use as and for a railway purpose not built on and lost forever!

Even with a new rail link to Tempsford and Cambridge north of Bedford, is still a long way off, will face it's own blockages and oppositions and is not plain sailing by any means. We therefore think we need to keep options open and look at contingency here.

The old St John’s Station site in Bedford, taken amazingly from a moving train in the 1980’s.

It is even more amazing (and sad) that the site was not considered for other railway purposes before demise in 1984 when Bedford-Bletchley services moved into Bedford Midland or in the 36 years interim, even with an east-west consortium!

Now we have 12 coach Thameslink trains and an 8-coach length washer siding, could a 12-coach washer facility be put on the old site down to Cardington Road? Off through tracks, plenty of space and by default keeps this eastern access corridor open. Given the old route was double track, could a fenced off second half be used as a pedestrian cum cycle way from the 1984 St John’s Halt to Cardington Road to join the Sustrans old trackbed route to/from Sandy? Indeed, given 2024 we have Oxford-Bedford rails restored with services, could you not reinstate the old triangle using auto points and have a run-around for steam and other ‘specials’ south of Leicester or east from Didcot or Quainton Road for example based on Bedford as ‘leisure line’?

Alas, none of these possibilities have been realised or flagged up or considered. Rail industry shows no leadership or vision, council wants every bit of urban brown field for development and that it seems is the way this rail corridor and piece of land will go – lost forever to rail purposes, more cars on the road and a very poor deal for cyclists trying to get from the cycle path in Ampthill/Victoria Road to the Embankment via Ampthill Road Bridge and Rope Walk for example. It is a nightmare with busy roads and plenty of pollution. No green spaces. Could the St John’s site have been a conservation cum parkland with the cycle-walk way facility integrated? Alas, none of this seems in the minds of our industry, developers or leaders and we are poorer for it as development without sustainable infrastructure and green spaces is a recipe for locked-in dysfunctionality.

Please get engaged and write, email and take a look-in, as this could be our last chance here and need to keep options open. 

Yours sincerely,

Richard Pill

ERTA Chairman

https://www.ertarail.com/become-a-member  

Below, some diagrams to assist with what we would welcome as a Plan B/contingency to keep 'open' if other options fall down or prove too costly or protracted.

East-West Rail - getting the Bedford, Blunham, Sandy and Cambridge right

The Trajectory of old railway can be ascertained and Steer Davis Gleave 1997 went north of this 2004 data and was an 'S' on it's sides looping round to south Blunham. If since 2004 data more encroachment has occurred - depending on what it is, whether the feasibility of curves has been compromised is debatable at this stage. Thus the option of Tempsford to Thurleigh/Milton Ernest and through Bedford Midland (serving Bedford) and out via St John's 1984 makes some sense, even though more expensive and not a panacea for avoiding the need to compulsory purchase, deviate and realign and of course the cost. Options which avoid Bedford Midland altogether or involve slewing the Bedford-Bletchley line to Wixams alias Bedford South must be opposed rigorously, it is sheer fantasy to think that Midland Main Line which already has trains waiting south of Kempston Road Bridge for a path into Bedford Midland would welcome more trains, slower trains and varied configured trains adding to the problem of capacity into and out of Bedford Midland Station. Therefore coming into Bedford from the west via St John's 1984 Halt makes sense to keep capacity options open for passenger and freight hopefully. Getting through Bedford Midland will be a challenge on current twin track for everything capacity and remodelling the tracks, platforms and so forth should be looked at, not just a relocated train shed and mere aesthetics which hide a multitude of sins very often! Who will give thought to this, who will take up the baton? We at very least should be loathed to give up railway lands to road development before these matters of layout and access are settled. The consultation earlier this year on routes should have included the old route - to gauge public opinion objectively not sway it to false premises of 'new dawns' which are yet to be worked up to a real route and list of what compulsory purchases and compensation will be required to contrast with the issues of the old route - to make an objective comparison. Yes, Cardington Road, Priory Marina entrance, Willington, Blunham and north of Sandy curvatures need a new assessment, but to discard it currently before the alternative and there can be only one if we are to serve Bedford Midland, must be looked at. ERTA will continue to call for these things to be considered and highlight sailent points. Thanks. Sandy-Bassingbourn-Shepreth hangs on whether you intrude on Wimpole Hall lands and can access the Hitchin-Royston line at Shepreth. Again segregation until Cambridge has benefits in able to take and do more passenger and freight by rail. But principal issues are a need to bypass Potton and Gamlingay to the south perimeter, realign using adjacent lands, raise M11 with under bridge, bridge River Cam and tunnel under Trumpington Meadows/Park and Ride and getting rid of single line on old trackbed Guided Busway. Linking passenger-wise with the new Cambridge South for Addenbrooke's and direct running into Stansted on the one hand, restoring the old Trumpington Junction for access to Cambridge, before or after Long Road Bridges, needs examination. Overloading Shepreth Junction, triple railways on a flat level junction and just 3 tracks is a recipe for chaos, so Mayors of Bedford and Cambridge need to compare notes and help each other get a better deal. It needs over-arcing leadership and debate. Sadly we have bubbles of parochial interest and scoping and media reflects the reporting of that rather than regional and inter-regional aspects and the pros and cons x whosoever is purporting whatever including professionals and Government.

Yours sincerely,

Richard Pill

ERTA Officer.

Bedford Borough Plan - where's the rail infrastructure?

There is a consultation in the Harpur Centre on the Bedford Local Plan 2035. See www.bedford.gov.uk/localplan2035. Email: planningforthefuture@bedford.gov.uk 
Check those houses at Bromham and relation to a clear access for Cobbler Line trajectory. 
Closing date is 9th June.
Questions via 01234 718300. Things we want is as follows:
a. Station at Oakley north of Lower Farm Road.
b. Retail Park Station on the MVR not MML!
c. East-West Rail sooner than later with Bedford-Sandy being delivered same time as Oxford-Bedford ideally - what are we getting for £10 million allocated?
d. All build results in road saturation and progressive gridlock. Same style houses being rolled out Bedford, Northampton, Milton Keynes, Cambridge... this results in ever more cloning of towns/residential estate areas.
e. Unless there's a more focused and coherent plan for the rail projects a-c by 2035 not after 2035, we will have a short fall of footfall and spend, informing closed shop syndrome and spiraling diminishment of traditional town centres, more out of town pressure to pander to the car. Empty properties abound domestic and commercial and more directives to fill and amend those first before green field expansion should be looked at.
f. Bedford-Northampton should be progressed with East-West not addendum to it/afterthought.
g. Network Rail must be flexible on level crossing and bridge adaptations, Cardington Road Bedford and Bridge Street Northampton need rail accessibility to be retained.
h. Wixams and/or Ampthill should be pursued together or incrementally, both serve differential markets - Wixams declutters commuting into Bedford for rail, Ampthill declutters Flitwick off the M1/A507 and all south of Wixams e.g. Marston Moretaine/A421 development corridor.

Help save Bedford's Buses

Our approach is the more the merrier and a growing membership helps to underscore our representative baseline - that we are not just a bunch of amateurs or enthusiasts but are doing 'good work' advocating and championing better public transport. 

Professionalisation: Some professionals get insider information, the briefings and so know what's going or not going on. Outsiders like us do not get such direct sourced information and so are often left to second guess, using our experiences as public transport users, our ears, eyes and general consensus and observations. Some times we get it right, other times we meet a wall of silence or denial.

Cllr Notebook: 

Bedford Town Centre: Like many towns across the English Regions, Bedford has more than its fair share of closed shops. The pattern has been that where buses, which drop off dollops of people (footfall and potential spend) have been withdrawn over the years traffic congestion has grown to fill the capacity available and patterns of footfall have changed to where the buses still go. Thus we have no less than 4-5 different and regular buses along Union Street per hour and nothing along the Tavistock Street, Harpur Street North, High Street, Prebend Street and scant still linking the railway station with the bus station, which is a good 10 minute walk through un-desirable area with uneven footpaths, useless for bags on wheels for example, wheelchairs and buggies, let alone cycling with parked cars, free-for-all junctions and hazardous corners and layouts. In short Alexandra place and Woburn Road should both be made one-way, Alexandra Road an Conduit Road, made one-way towards Bromham Road. Contra flow cycle lane bi-directional should be installed and drive-ways made congruent to the main pavement/pathway to and from town centre and railway station from Greyfriars. Too many cars turning too many directions makes for hazardous negotiations. Not all is daylight and politeness, cold, wet, moody and miserable exists on any menu as well.

Restoring buses: The No. 7 has competition coming into Bedford along Kimbolton Road with Grant Palmer buses heading for another part of the exact same bus station. Now rather than go St Peter's - Dame Alice Street-Hassett Street, the distributor role given No. 7's are small buses could be to turn into High Street, stops either side of the Mill Street lights (make Mill Street one way towards High Street and no left turn from High Street but contra cycle lane for bi-directional use - currently it is chaos and hazardous for pedestrians and a free-for-all car/direction 'me first' sort of atmosphere and attitude drive-wise, especially now we have taxi/car hire vehicles swarming the area. No.7 could wrap around at St Paul's Square - Horne Lane and on-to Bus Station and back out again as now. Grant Palmer Buses need to have timetable and numbers which stop (officially?) outside Pizzaland in St Peter's Street so passengers can deduce what stops there and ideally the X5 would still stop there as it does across the road albeit dropping off only. Someone said like Park and Ride, differential rules/laws governing the number of stops these services can make vary and that prohibits the placing of them. Given it is a mile from Bus Station to the Polhill X5 stop, surely the stop adjacent to the Quarry Theatre would be desirable? Yet this bus shelter which has a contract to clean and maintain it, still sports the Bedfordshire bus stop sign and has no timetables published in it. It never gets vandalised but why waste money on a bus shelter if no passengers are to be permitted to access buses or coaches from it = daft and a missed opportunity. Yes, No. 7's would use more derve and take a little longer, but given so many get off at St Peter's and walk to High Street, quite a few with this distributor role would get off around the town, bringing the vital feed of footfall and spend, small, regular dollops of people. Likewise No. 7 bus users have suffered since the cutting back to half hourly with standing room only coming out of the town whilst Grant Palmer equivalent Kimbolton Road destination buses including the No. 28, have half dozen users at most from a separate loading at the Bus Station. 

So people come into Bus Station by whatever, but only determined and specific Grant Palmer users are loading to go northwards, the No. 7 for local access is taking the brunt on probably increases in usage. On a Sunday it is hourly and has a larger bus - so it can do the roads it uses - so we either need a bigger bus like No. 5's or restored 3 per hour (20 minute) frequency to ease over crowding. Again weekdays it runs up to 9.30pm ish at night and that last bus is scantily used as most shops and the town centre is all done by 6pm with just commuters and so on left. Surely outward No. 7's like No. 6's could run out via the railway station and do back along Bromham Road, Harpur Street North and call at Pizzaland Bus Stop instead? Any St Paul's late stragglers could walk to St Peter's or catch a No. 5 which links at Church Lane with No. 7's anyway and work back from there or have uniform cut off let's say 9pm and run No. 10's onwards and outwards via St Paul's wrap around, Horne Lane, River Street-Midland Road, Railway Station and home via Bromham Road and Union Street. All commuters pay the same tickets, so should have buses at peak times to all parts of Bedford and more wrapping around during the day like UNO buses would be useful especially if a new bus stop to serve the shops and offices around Wyvern House in Bromham Road had a new bus stop inserted. It is only a flag, but gives more options. If no.7 buses go Church Lane-Elliott Crescent (new stop by Spinney)-Putnoe Street returning to the town, they don't need to double back on themselves which would save derve for the distributor role via High Street and St Paul's Square/Horne Lane and Bus Station.

Milton Keynes creep: Bedford is growing, it is sprawling. We have the town centre, parts not served by buses. Railway Station-Bus Station-Nat West/High Street is a good 20 minute walk and no direct bus link. Retail Park Kempston does have buses but vastly more vehicles than space for parking and like with Lidls in Lurke Street, queues trail back to junctions blocking other road users and making hazardous conditions for pedestrians.

Castle Road cluster of shops and the Goldington - the spread is not geared to pedestrian, marginally cycling and mainly built design-wise around the accessibility, ease and convenience of car use. Bushmead - Howbury Street should be made one way except for buses and cyclists and ideally pavements widened with trees and benches to inform a kind of 'square' at the centre of the village feel of small shops and coffee outlets. It has been said "you can buy a skinny latte from Castle Road, but thanks to closure of the Post Office, no longer send a parcel and stamp access is patchy." 

Council must get real with people about these trends and seek rectifying and encourage people out of cars and onto public transport, cycling and walking at every turn and Milton Keynes like-wise if they have any sense and know what's good for the environment, let alone care.

These patterns are across other towns also. Bicester is compensated by being adjacent to the M40 and having 2 main-line railways, pity Witney where new development like the Bedford North River Development was juxtaposed with a cinema but what happened was early shift to the new venue was at expense of shops located in High Street and elsewhere and so not only did the new development have vacant properties, so did the High Street (traditional areas) too. In short it did not generate sufficient new to make real robust growth. Bicester has empty shops because the new development from bus station to High Street attracts the lion's share whereas south behind Sainsbury's to the Market Square has insufficient footfall and spend and many empty spaces. Road-side footpath from Bicester Village Station to town centre via Market Square is rough, poor quality and no dedicated cycle lanes last time I looked. It is key to sort out to optimise new flows of customers. Northampton has the A43, A45 and M1 in the urban cordon but lacks places for parking, is full of congestion and unless the conundrum of getting over London Road/Bridge Street can be resolved by a pro-action consortium, has it's traffic issues locked in with growth and a dying town centre with empty shops and lowering footfalls and spend. Rail delivers bulk. That is why the Retail Park Rail Station on the Bedford-Bletchley railway is so crucial to sort as it would bridge between Retail Park and Town Centre, arcingly and inform new flows off road of footfall and spend, which helps to sustain businesses. 

East-West Rail will boost East Bedfordshire if delivered integratedly and in a timely manner. We want spades on the ground sooner than later and £10 million to draw a line of intent on a map to say where the railway will go gets many dismayed when the need for these links is now, we've waited 20 years. Surely the £27 million + given everyone says they are short of money, should cancel yet another road scheme and divide the money between councils who have sponsored studies galore to get it recognised by Government 'making the case' to compensate their coffers and keep front-line services going including coordinated and integrated public transport. No, we do not have all the answers, but we would be failing in our duty not to pass on some solutions! If Councils do not listen or include, we can't help that, but to the ballot box they will be judged whether post bypass they do have a more benevolent pedestrian, public transport and cycling safer accessibility strategy or are just gimmicking pandering ever more to popularism and that symbolized in locked-in car dependency and exhaust pollution which backs us into a counsel of despair in some cases. We can be better, we achieve more when we work together. Thank you.

Finally, if anyone is prepared to be-friend our association and help us get a noticeboard access at Bedford and/or Richmond or Northampton or whatever like other rail user groups, please let us know. We don't seek special favours, just equality. We feel somewhat ostracised currently and that goes against the public interest surely?

If you agree, please write to: Bedford Borough Council, Cauldwell Street, Bedford, MK42 9AP and Mr Richard Fuller MP for Bedford and Kempston, c/o House of Commons, Westminster, London, SW1A 0AA. You can also join ERTA and help us help you and others together: https://ertarail.com/membership/

Yours sincerely,

Richard Pill

ERTA Principal Transport Officer.