Speed up delivery of local rail links not speed up speed!

Rail Magazine has both a Heathrow rail link from the south article and extension of Borders Rail to Carlisle = good = rail/less road reliance. However it seems we have a media blackout beyond local letters pages and that every rail scheme except what we want is being pursued the length of the country. I will write in to the Bedford Local Plan as an individual, the central issue is loads of houses urban and rural, throwing loads of cars onto existing roads, urban congestion/sky high parking demand/cost and trade offs and didley rail agenda - the railway needs to be done and dusted by 2035 and it will only, if done, be started by then, let me spell out:

1. Oxford-Bedford 2024, that's 40 miles ish of wire brushed relaid track on an existing rail course with stations and some form of rolling stock = 2 trains per hour hardly intensive - X5 timetable should be the normative template from day one - contrast HS2 120 OOC-B'ham 2026 - just 2 years after opens. In short Oxford-Bedford should be do-able much earlier especially now we have a bypass of Network Rail to do the works - so why the delay? Technicals and legals must be pitted with HS2 the same but more and yet it is to be done and dusted asap in relative terms. Plus we're getting a new £3.5 billion road - not needed - the aim should be to take volume-capacity via the rail corridor incrementally to X5 + x8 X5's to a train-load x 4 per hour = modal shift (passenger and freight). Something is deeply wrong I feel, but am on the outside looking in and even a planner said at the Harpur Centre "some of our questions are not being answered".

2. Bedford-Cambridge. My view is Bedford-Sandy is enough minimally and the Ickleford curve for a start to be opened same time as 2024 Oxford-Bedford for a basic through route/relieve into, across and out of London freight + passenger services:

a. Stevenage - Bedford (Thameslink integration/stock use)

b. Bedford-Cambridge (new)

c. Peterborough-Bedford (Thameslink/stock use)

Then 2024 do across to Shepreth to relieve Hitchin-Royston

Then look at options for bypassing Cambridge (freight). Having visited Trumpington Meadows and seen the curtain of housing across the trackbed going in, compulsory purchase and returning to rail looks a bridge too far!

3. Oakley and Sharnbrook and Wymington are needed MML/electrification which should also have a plan for making consistent 9'6 freight clearance for London-Bedford-Northampton-DIRFT container relief to West Coast = more trains for MK Central.

4. Ampthill and Wixams needed - they serve different catchments and demand centres. Flitwick has poor road system, overload from Olney, MK, M1 and Marston growth areas and south of Wixams infill - Ampthill with western Steppingley access could mop up these wider commuter/growth catchments. Bedford-Olney-Northampton would stem it further out.

5. Retail Interchange Kempston - 19, 000 population Kempston, 000's of cars to Retail Park/parking demand and long queues per day - the station informs more footfall and spend, alternate access and town centre may also benefit indirectly.

6. New Bedford Midland with Midland Road pedestrian isle for town gateway access 'clean and green' Bedford, not congestion, fumes, smoking on narrow pavements and high volume everything 'harmogenised' without cohesion = relative chaos in growth context.

7. Tracks into and through Bedford from St John's need sorting with 3rd under A428 Bromham Road which needs widened bridge span or third span inserting, can be done I believe.

In sum, Olney is easier than Cambridge now for recovery/reopening purposes. We do need a Cambridge rail link but ideas of going via Twinwoods, St Neots, Cambourne and new towns to Chesterton seem daft as you still need - at great cost and upheaval to get to the Newmarket lines for the East and you are entering Cambridge from the north and West?

I feel Bedford is the junior to Milton Keynes is it all, the Consortium seem MK centric than shared coexistence focus inclusive? It should all be done by 2026 if HS2 can, so should these. Otherwise it is going to be gridlock, congestion, fumes and parking issues galore. Bad for business and the environment but where does the supreme buck stop to address? Dft, Parliament, The Monarch?!

Tailbacks down St Cuthberts from Lurke Street Lidls are becoming more common-place. Could a Lidals be allocated to Goldington/Brickhill to spread the load and give more options off the radial road system and/or bypass? There is a plot of land on corner of Caxton Road/Goldington Road corner - near Hatters, likewise field off Cleat Hill/Woodlands with a through bus lane for Grant Palmer to serve? Personally I know many middle class people prefer Lidls to some other supermarket chains and as many new houses will be semi's more Lidls seems logical to avoid town centre proliferation of tailbacks? Plus safer walking and cycling options.

Finally, the path from Newnham Rail Bridge - Beach Pool-Tesco needs drop down kerbs, widening for cycle-pedestrian access share, more litter bins and cycle racks. Path to Tesco is a dumping ground for fly tipping and rats are in the bushes having regular food deposited. Is it time to ask Mr Tesco to work on a joint improvement plan?

Northampton town centre and Bedford have common issues and only the rail link can properly address them going forward.

With all the housing promoted in the new Bedford Local Plan 2035, it will all be heading to urban areas for work, education and commuting, will demand land take for more parking and put pressure on families as travelling to and from venues takes longer and commuting ever more for the £'s to make the costs-incomes meet.

We need an inquiry as to:

1. Why is East-West Rail taking so long to deliver

2. Why the defined route to Cambridge is not being done with more haste and land protected amidst development growth

3. Why Bedford-Cambridge via Shepreth is not being done at one and the same time as Oxford-Bedford so 2024 is a 'finishing date' than 'start up date'?

4. There is no excuse not to speed up as we have a mechanism from Chris Grayling, Secretary of State for bypassing Network Rail schedules.

Likewise Bedford-Northampton should be being pursued alongside East-West as integral to it and also the benefits in cutting emissions of a Luton/Airport-Coventry arc via Bedford and Northampton spinal core missing link agenda. 

Everyone is seemingly sworn to silence including local media and that is not in the public interest. The public want the railways restored and our elected representatives must put grist to the mill to find means and ways for delivery sooner than later - our town centre economies depend on such for sustainability. To just crest of the wave 'let the market decide' is akin to putting a bet on the horses - flimsy prospects - only sustained effort and push can inform delivery vehicles are found to deliver what we need in a timely manner. There seems no excuse.

Hope of interest,

Richard Pill

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.