New Vision for North London and East-West Hertfordshire Connectivity

During these turbulent times of Covid19 we reflect that the wheels of Government do not stop turning. Also that the recovery and what platform we base the call to 'build, build, build' on as to whether it is a sustainable platform or laissez-faire ribbon development creep which is lacking in a balance, facilities, strategic public transport infrastructure and critically whether for the sake of the environment, let alone people and communities. Moreover, that we are sending more freight by rail and adding less tonnes to our road networks which backs up adding to congestion and maintenance costs?

The English Regional Transport Association (ERTA) is of the view that re-railing Hertfordshire is in the wider national interest. The geographical layout of the county lends to an east-west be-straddling of the area but most existing rail links are radial of London, meaning a drive or bus. Given growth and other developments including Government Reforms of Planning and Development gambits which could lead to sprawl around greenbelt areas but lacking the critical choice of transport infrastructure, so essential to balance things out. This article sums up the conflicts some face: 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/04/boris-johnson-nimbyism-planning-changes-disastrous-england- 

These issues are not only intrinsic to Hertfordshire, but across the English Regions and our call is for investment in better public transport and roads only solutions should not be the automatic solution. Sadly funding slants towards roads more than rail, whereby the new roads budget this year is 

£27 billion contrasting the Rail Reopenings Fund of a mere £500 million out of which some is allocated for new stations. They should be balanced equitably, let alone the argument that a Climate Emergency could mean an absolute need to slant more back to favour rail links over road. Land is a precious commodity, once gone, hard if ever to recover and so how we steward it matters. 

This is why we turn our attention to Napsbury. We note the following:

1. The old link from St Albans Abbey Station to St Albans City is built on, ditto the old trackbed at St Albans to Hatfield. 

2. St Albans Abbey-Watford is to have a new loop at Bricket Wood for capacity creation.

3. There is a proposal for a new road to rail freight depot nearby which presumably will require a new rail duck-under off the slow lines to serve it off the Midland Main Line?

Our view is that if a new Parkway Station at Napsbury were built, it could serve as an interchange and junction station linking the Watford-St Albans Abbey Branch with the Thameslink services by building a new link from the Abbey Branch to link it. That could enable a London urban - suburban link of Thameslink to Bricket Wood and Watford respectively, currently it goes only to Luton to terminate on through tracks.

In addition, from Napsbury you could consider and study whether the Underground from Barnet could be extended to also link with Napsbury serving London Colney enroute and terminating at either St Albans Abbey (reinstate the second bay platform) and/or Watford. 

For the latter to happen, fields east and south of Napsbury need protecting and access over or under the M25 considered. At this stage, with careful engineering, design and craft it could be done, but if we build on those fields, it could be lost.

England's Economic Heartlands (EEH) was in discussions with Network Rail on a southern east-west rail route. Is it beyond wit to rebuild/new-build a conventional rail link from Napsbury to Potters Bar linking the East Coast Main Line with the Midland Main Line? All sorts of possibilities could arise including better passenger and freight access and new opportunities for travel in normal times by public transport. It could speed end to end times up for people and goods and give more choices. It needs studying and careful stewardship to ensure corridors exist to enable these rail links. How far can we go, balanced with incrementalism. 

This document may be of interest: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Englands-Economic-Heartland-Rail-Study-Phase-1.pdf

We are putting forward ideas, which need studying further by professionals if so inclined. The evidence shows that if you support them, you work to build coalitions, bring councils, agencies and other funders together, establish the business and engineering considerations amongst others and set to progress it to a successful conclusion. 

If you support our suggestion, please advocate it. More of the same is not an option, as development of 10, 000 houses at 2.5 vehicles per household on average, means 30, 000 extra vehicles on our roads. Times that across the English Regions and walla, you can see the trend and pattern of where we are heading, chaos! We must re-rail/new-build rail links which can cream off that excess and give better options for people and goods.

I attach a rough diagram of pure illustration, but appreciate you need to bring others on board to take it forward. ERTA welcomes volunteers to join and offer time and talent to make these things work. Thank you.

Great Central Railway Reopening Project - Support it now, don't let it be thrown away when we really need it!

Notes from ERTA Great Central Meeting Friday 13^th November. Disclaimer: Please note, these are notes taken during the meeting and whilst seeking to be accurate, are a guide and not formal per se. I have had to use a new sequestration of numbering to that of the agenda in some cases.

 

Present: Richard Pill (Chairman), Owen O’Neill (Zoom Facilitator), Simon Barber, Colin Crawford, Cllr Richard Auger, John Harrison, Harry Burr, Peter McBeath and Cllr Rupert Frost and Kathy Keeley.

 

1. Convenors Welcome and any preliminaries: Richard welcomed people to the meeting.

2. Apologies for absence: Sam Peach, Mike Reed, Cllr Mike Cockerill, Cllr Mark Graves, Cllr Philip King, Cllr Peter James, Cllr Tim Douglas, Cllr Martin Tett.

3. Report from Mr Sam Peach on progress so far followed by discussion: Report from Mr Sam Peach was read by Simon Barber.  Since last meeting Sam has met with Anthony Swift of England’s Economic Heartlands (EEH), Their focus is on east-west transport links. Sam has been doing research on transport along the Great Central Route. Northants County Council produced 2 documents Page 30-33 Rail Strategy Doc ‘Fit for purpose’ (?) 2013 circa. It has a bit on north-south links. Cost in 2013 but under considerations given we are nearly 10 years on from the assumptions of these old docs. North Northants Planning Unit has also been engaged with. There will be a general review of policy to bring things up to date. Anthony Swift advised Sam to look at South Midlands Multi Modal Study which is about 15 years old. Next steps are to build the economic and social case. A discussion then followed: Sam’s study to include:

a. assessment of households along the route

b. economic benefit of re-railing

c. re-railing costs

d. freight/new to rail benefits and capacity creation for more by rail elsewhere too

e. Sam will seek MP and Council interest

f. will also read transport docs released by councils.

4. Discussion was had on Mr Chris Heaton-Harris MP, MP Daventry area and Rail Minister.  Remembering that MP’s and getting them on board (Andrea Leadsom, South Northants, Chris Heaton-Harris, Daventry, Mark Pawsey, Rugby, Alberto Costa, Lutterworth, Narborough).

Harry Burr, a resident from Towcester has run a campaign for a station on the existing West Coast Main Line (WCML) at Weedon near Daventry as a Parkway Station for the town. It had courted media and widespread coverage and popular support. We congratulated him on his sterling efforts and wished him well. He is just 13 years old, but given Daventry is one of the largest towns without a station, is a much deserving candidate to be taken seriously for better rail connectivity.

5. A discussion was then had around Northampton-Market Harborough:

Pros for the rail link were things like:

a. Brixworth – 10, 000 new houses to be built, and with an average of 2.5 cars per household, that traffic along the A508 will end up being congested at Northampton or elsewhere adding to a problem.

b. The rail link would enable East Midlands-DIRFT freight and beyond access

c. Would link as part of a through link between Oxford-Milton Keynes-Northampton-Leicester/East Midlands and vice versa, shaving time, opening more by rail journey opportunities

d. Would take on M1 (Northampton-Leicester) giving rail choice currently not available.

Against it was felt:

a. Local People don’t want it / object

b. Chris Heaton-Harris (who may have been written to) is against it

c. A cycle track occupies much of the route/now used for non-rail purposes

Owen O’Neill said that for that, GC and other projects, there needs to be Assessment of Benefits including Economic. Discussion was had with Cllr Rupert Frost.

It was mooted that in rail choice terms, GC approaches Leicester from the western flank of M1, Northampton-Market Harborough on the eastern flank.

Richard Auger said some have ‘silo views. There’s a need to link to 1. Local Strategic Plans – rail links and connectivity and 2. Government – where it wants to go on it. A discussion was had. On the one hand that is fine, but if Government sits on fence in policy/action terms like the disparity of funding for new roads v rail reopenings they go against the environment whereas the whole issue we want is more environmentally-friendly transport able to carry bulk people and goods and save land for other things. Some people call Northampton-Market Harborough Railway as ‘Brampton Valley Railway’.

It was felt Climate Change/Climate Change Emergency was an important aspect for these rail links.

It was said there is a need to break a project down to chunks. Segment Leicester to Rugby/Rugby-Leicester/Narborough – Owen O’Neil showed slides of the lie of the land and his proposal of a new-build rail serving Magna Park and Lutterworth and as an option was broadly welcomed to be shored up and promoted. If someone comes up with a Plan B, providing the demand and market can sustain it, we have no real problem with such.

6. Peter McBeath interjected on demand aspects by warning that ports are being dredged for larger container carrying ships for 23, 000 container carriage docking and want to use rail majoritively to serve their land carriage. That sends ripples of demand-supply of capacity and pinch points will need sorting, new rails and links will be given impetus and this is happening now and going forward, not some longevity luxury of decades. So, it raises questions of rail capacity and readiness. We will need lines like Great Central to help cater for it all sustainably.

7. Richard Pill, Chairing the meeting laid the cards of ERTA on the table: we can facilitate meetings, bring people together, campaign within resources and nurture volunteers to inform a team who in turn can take and do what is necessary as per Sam Peach to take projects on to a next stage. However, we do not have the resources to commission £100, 000+ studies to tick all boxes. It is for professionals to conjoin and invest in their (private) and nations (Government tiers) interests. It is not about our Executive Committee taking on more work, rather realising new volunteers and them in turn expanding our ideas and working them to fruition/variables on themes included.

8. Key benefits: It was felt environmental land use, route protection to keep options open amidst development bombardments not made to take rail intent into consideration per se and winning over the national political biases. Mr Simon Barber has a Westminster Team and volunteers are welcome to sign up and collaborate with him.

9. Peter McBeath made the point that ports expansion and more trains demand scale.  We need more capacity and alternative routes. Richard said that the scope we felt for the Great Central re-railing (see map) was Southampton/Bristol-Leicester/East Midlands and all in between. With M40 on the west, M1 on the east, it is a critical corridor to re-rail giving capacity elsewhere. Southampton trains have hot spots at Reading and the Reading/Didcot-Leamington Lines were heavily used, getting to East Midlands direct and from it without recourse to Birmingham or London would be a boost for rail and more by rail potentially. ERTA had been seeking discussions with a number of operators and developers into distribution. Convergys, Gazeleys and it was recommended we seek to get ASDA Board on board. Could it be that Owen’s Rugby-Leicester section is the appetiser which brings buy-in for more south of Rugby beit Banbury and/or Calvert for access to wider links to/from?

10. Segmental Status’ – as well as the big picture of what we are trying to achieve with variations on a theme.

a. John Harrison pointed to freight proposal for rail freight terminal near Hinkley off the Leicester-Nuneaton Line, which could potentially benefit from the GC link or variations on a theme from the south.

b. Calvert-Woodford Halse. It was suggested that getting a domestic line alongside the HS2 corridor to serve Brackley area with bus links to Silverstone was a project in itself with options to Aylesbury, OOC and Oxford for 2-way commuting for example. Woodford Halse is next up and as a nodal point of area reference, the connectivity and mutual feed of any Banbury-Daventry-Northampton arcing rail link would intercept GC corridor and interlinking should be considered. One suggestion was for Banbury-Rugby (Rugby is a sectional study issue of access) as a shorter link to achieve than going Oxford-Calvert etc. ERTA is open-minded, but the Brackley issue, with A43 and expansion remains to be addressed. Simon said he wanted a meeting with Colin and Brackley Town Council to try and establish common ground. Woodford does have some blockages which various opponents have flagged up. Land and growth – we need route protection and Plan B to be adopted with a conversion from opposition or neutrality to pro-affirma support for the rail. Discussions with Parishes was to be welcomed to foster good relations and appreciation of what a railway could offer and Simon to seek a meeting with Woodford Halse P.C. too.

c. Woodford-Willoughby. Re-railing Great Central has the issue of Catesby Tunnel and the wind tunnel use of it. Parish Clerk against re-railing options.

d. Getting into Rugby required yes, Rugby to be on board but also, studies on best options. ERTA has a view.

11. MP’s et al. See elsewhere.

12. Overall it was felt:

a. Getting ASDA on board and similar was worth pursuing:

- ASDA Executive – can they input strategically

- insights

- how to take things forward

- Invest in studies

Be a conjoiner to projects

b. demand and assessment led not just of today, but future forecasting with a 10-year scope. What will it be without the railway, what contribution could a railway make positively?

c. Putting together a business case, getting professional support – City of London and then Westminster. KPMG was mentioned. But we have to have a good business case first to interest them as investors.

d. Get Amazon on board – they need to start using rail. Warehouses the size of football pitches springing up everywhere. Simon/Colin to approach these bodies for preliminary sounding out.

e. Look at Local Distribution Networks and Karl Watts – get him on board as focuses on Parcels by Rail Services.

13. Owen O’Neil happy to assist with Rugby-Leicester focus after February and collaborate with Sam Peach.

14. No other business.

15. Date of next Zoom Meeting 29^th January 2021 15.00 hours.

Meeting finished 15.40 Richard thanked all for attending.

Note: Clearly a need for focuses respectively. ERTA has a view, a wish, a plan but can only interject ideas, it is for professionals and those so orientated to take on board, work up and court wider support. We support Great Central corridor re-railing with variations on a theme and rebuilding a new Northampton-Market Harborough rail link and will table meetings and direct activists and would-be campaigners to those ends as our contribution. People are welcome to join ERTA as members and offer to volunteer to help us. To register for the next Great Central Zoom Meeting, please contact Mr Simon Barber Mr Simon Barber: T. 0208 940 4399, E. simon4barber@gmail.com. Please encourage others to get involved and liaise with us. My loop via richard.erta@gmail.com is ‘open to all’.

ERTA can:

1. Facilitate Zoom Meetings

2. Plant Ideas

3. Bring people together

4. Make suggestions

5. Input to consultations

6. Network

7. Head hunt professionals elected or in business who can take an interest and move the propositions on to the next stage.

 

Interim we do need:

1. Local and Government (all tier) support for route protection and realignment/deviation spaces

2. People to join ERTA as Members - helping us

3. Offer time and talent as volunteers - things like website maintenance skills, designing maps and diagrams for general use and helping inform a team more to take on stewardship and growing support for the bigger picture of re-railing, with local chunks acting as patchwork places for growing and nurturing collaboration.

The issues are massive, but what if we do not re-rail? More development means more traffic and congestion with pollution and then what? So, now and going forward, in all interests to cooperate and take heads out of the sand.

Please note, all discussions on Northampton-Market Harborough rail link are held on the Northampton Meetings. If you wish to also register for that meeting contact Mr Simon Barber respectively.

ERTA Update November 2020

Good news, that despite lock-down we continue to work around positively with Zoom and Skype Meetings. Indeed, we are drawing in more people via this new-to-us technology than physical meetings tend to do and are saving on cost and time in venue fixtures and associated publicity. 

Highlights include a successful conference on-line with 17 delegates and excellent speakers covering a span of rail user and infrastructure enhancement subjects. Our next conference on 'Route Protection and Rail Reopenings' will be Saturday 24th April 2021, fine details being worked out. 

We welcome Mr Sam Peach as our lead volunteer for heading up our Great Central re-rail corridor endeavour and he hopes to grow a team to cover various aspects over a period of time and is beavering away. 

We also welcome Ms Sara Homer, CEO of the Brackmills Industrial Estate who has agreed to head up the Re-Rail Brackmills Branch Project. Sara is very well connected and seeks to grow a coalition for joint working and getting delivery underway. Again another positive step forward which our endeavours over the years has produced some fruit.

There's always more, including our campaign for Guildford-Horsham rail link and we are now seeking to grow support for Northampton-Market Harborough and soon hope to launch our Retail Park Station Kempston Report and are collaborating with Mr Stephen Sleight of the MVR Community Rail Partnership to a step by step approach to gather support with delivery again, being the goal not waffle!

The endeavour continues and ERTA is working to bring about real improvements so that as and when we do emerge from this terrible virus, we have stepping stones to recovery economically with the environment built-in, not a rear mirror view as we join endless queues of congestion.

So despite the gloom, much to celebrate. Please join with us and keep in touch.

E. richard.erta@gmail.com for a copy pdf of our newsletter. Thanks.

ERTA Guildford Meeting 16-10-20 and follow-on notes

The English Regional Transport Association (ERTA) is a voluntary association seeking the re-railing of select closed lines for the betterment of people, places and society. The closures of the 1960's were short sighted, ill-conceived and the legacy is locked-in dependency on roads, vehicles and fossil fuel with congestion, land use parking and emissions a side effect detrimental to public health and generating synthetic demand for more roads and strings of bypasses which free up brownfield land for ever more development then requiring more road capacity. Ancient towns and beauty spots cannot cope with it in normal times and the emergent society from Covid 19 needs to build a better reach and range of options which conserve land and gives transport choice. Guildford-Cranleigh-Horsham is one such strategic missing rail link.

We recognise that the interim 50+ years have happened, but believe with realignments around Cranleigh and select places, the recovery of a rail link can be done and should be sought. Studies are needed alongside a will-way attitude to progress, with others, the rail interest in the name of public choice and new options like our attached pamphlet alludes.

The Government has the Rail Study Fund to match fund pots which councils along the line, Local Enterprise Partnerships and other organisations can contribute to with Network Rail and select other agencies. The rail link had a local and regional appeal with links orbiting London via Reading-Brighton/Gatwick respectively and East Croydon-Shalford (new curve) and direct running to loop Gatwick from the south and back, relieving the Brighton Main Line and roads around these parts. It would also free up platform capacity at Guildford for more trains generally.

It should be remembered that waterways and cycle paths can go anywhere. They can exist, but railways need formations, alignments and engineering which cannot share with waterways or cyclepaths unless the trackbed is widened and a suitable perimeter fence with greening is installed. This may be possible in some places, but possibly not all. Given growth of development, we need to consider the rail link and it's fit now and protect options, study options with a view to overcome problems and deliver better public transport, not throw it away locking in roads only options. The best way to save the countryside is to strike a balance of modest growth, rail choices and less road reliance. Leisure craft and cycles can fit into that plan too, it just needs a horses for courses approach with the trackbed route of the railway for the railway as a priority in the interest of greater volumes it would handle, including commuting options for work further afield and incoming sustainable footfall and spend, bolstering a recovery after Covid and helping businesses in their viability all year round.

I would welcome your kind support and hope that we can see the idea of reopening the railway protected and ideally taken forward with a robust feasibility study which can answer many questions which arise in the course of pursuing re-railing. Ideally the Government would give its support, realising that any 'Reverse Beeching' must go hand in hand with route protection incentives/sanctions to ensure options are retained objectively. We continue to bring this principle to the attention of Grant Shapps and Chris Heaton-Harris. Thank you.

Disclaimer please note: These are notes taken during the meeting for a rough guide only. I took them down alongside the meeting. They are intended to help bring out what was discussed generally and direct our thoughts to next steps ideally of what we can all respectively do. Again, apologies in advance if I’ve missed any name off or got them mixed up. If you wish for amendment, please email specifics to richard.erta@gmail.com

 

Present: Richard Pill (Chairman of ERTA), Colin Crawford, Simon Barber, H. Trevor Jones, Rob Cooke, George Potter, Ramsey Nagaty, Kathy Keeley, Zoe Franklin, Cllr Alison Griffiths, David Daniels and others.

 

1. The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.

2. Apologies for absence: Transport for the South East, Russell Spink, Lucy Dixon-Thompson, Richard Moore.

3. Guildford-Cranleigh-Horsham Rail Reopening.

a. H. Trevor Jones of the Guildford Rail Users Group had objected to the canal threat with others. The rail link has strategic value. There is a port at Shoreham and potential for freight is another aspect. The benefit of access via Guildford and Reading avoiding London is another plus point. This would free up capacity. New spur would be needed at west of Horsham. Cycle and canal lobbies want the sole use of the old trackbed with walkway retained. Whether in some cases the old route can be widened out and/or waterways and cycle paths slewed around the railway requirement, remains to be seen.

b. Getting around Cranleigh: A major issue. On the one hand Cranleigh could gain by a rail link for things like ease of commuting, on the other, subsequent development now and on-going, means the old route is blocked and realignment is an issue. If you go west from the north, how easy is it to re-join the old route south? Cranleigh is due for expansion as per Dunsfold.

It was suggested we need definitive list of what, where to consider. ERTA would work on this, but it was suggested that we are not resourced to do much of it as we live away from the area, lack means-ways and would need more volunteers on the ground knowing what to put in the inventory for example. Gardens backing onto old trackbed do not of themselves block reopening, but may be objectors and/or to canals and other uses, but also could deter widening in those places. Cllr Griffiths said also we need a series of questions and list and GIS Mapping could include this scheme.

LRT another option, unsure of compatibility with freight, but also cost comparatives and examples elsewhere of suitability over conventional rail options. But could enable inclusion of Dunsfold development expansion:

Cllr George Potter of Guildford Borough Council we need a specific idea of what a study should look at, a list. Guildford, Horsham, Surrey, Crawley, Cranleigh, Waverley etc.

c. MP’s and other organisations:

Russell Spink of Transport for the South East: russellspink69@hotmail.com

MP’s for Guild are Ms Angela Richardson, Waverley (covers canal application) Jeremy Hunt, Horsham is Jeremy Quinn, Mark Griffiths Arundel Curve.

Concern of air quality and public transport joined up with trains and buses at Shalford was mentioned.

Suggestion of a standard letter to MP’s was touted.

e. Volunteers: Kathy Keeley and others would liaise together as and when and where appropriate.

Matt Furniss was Surrey CC for Shalford.

4. Heathrow Southern Rail Link:

Some were not keen on Wisley having a station on the Heathrow link as impractical, despite the HRA getting about 1 million visitors per year. They could do better to court the LRT from Staines-Windsor-Byfleet or more buses. General agreement in sense for the Southern Heathrow Link to go on to Old Oak Common interchange and – if ERTA had its way – onwards spur to link onto the Chiltern Main Line. Gives London orbital Banbury/Aylesbury-OOC-Guildford span of reach and range via the airport, which could be 24 x 7 with capacity for freight in quieter times away from residential areas.

5. North Downs Line Link: People unsure of whether electrification was best idea, good standard trains of whatever power is what matters surely? Likewise changing at Redhill some felt, not a problem. ERTA had thought electrification and Thameslink reaching Guildford may be worth looking at, but no clear view. Mr David Daniels of North Downs Line CRP said bi-mode trains for the line were being looked at. It is an important link off the Brighton Line and maybe if we got Guildford-Horsham reopened, a direct curve from Shalford to Cranleigh and looping round Gatwick from the south could boost all concerned as well as offering more capacity elsewhere.

6. Tonbridge – Gatwick Curve. Mooted originally as a HS4 notion with a new route linking Gatwick and Heathrow, ERTA had floated the idea before as a conventional condiment to our Guildford-Horsham-Gatwick from the south idea, going on to Tonbridge and Channel Tunnel/Ashford for example as an extreme reach and range. Not much enthusiasm at the meeting. HS4 was thrown out by DfT, but cost is an issue in context of current situations with record debt, HS2 and balancing the books at the Treasury.

7. Guildford Current Rail and Bus: Ramsey Nagaty – frequency of buses and trains at Shalford demand better connections and tying up of linking services.

Rob Cooke raised the point of platforms and capacity at Guildford and impact issues of redevelopment, more trains and through onwards running rather than terminating at Guildford if reopening were to occur? Generally, a concern was a. would there be more capacity at Guildford rail-wise and b. impact of redevelopment whether better interchange or less convenient or congestion? Kathy and Simon raised that we need to put pedestrians and disabled people at the heart of planning and a bus station near a railway station is better than segregation? It was noted the debate about Guildford on these matters had rumbled on a long time. H. Trevor Jones said they could put in more platforms at Guildford. George Potter said more platforms and parking are a future contingency and may need to use current sidings land. Meeting finished approximately 15.11 and date of next meeting will be Friday 5 February 2021 14.00 hrs. Register via Mr Simon Barber:

T. 0208 940 4399, E. simon4barber@gmail.com

Time to invest in the Bedford-Bletchley Railway!

 Time to invest in the Bedford-Bletchley Railway!

ERTA lauds the collective combination of paid professional and voluntary inputs to making the railway as pleasant as it can be and fostering good will. However, ERTA believes that more needs to be done to make the line even better. Attracting passengers is a good thing, but can be a swing door if we lose them in equal measure. To stem the drain and ease off the constant pressure means people want the following:

Ø    Reliability! People want to be able to rely on the trains service to take people from where they wish to go and arrive safely at the destination of their choice. This means trains fit for purpose and which work, happy staffing relations, a healthy timetable and calling at places they wish to get to. Bank Holiday and Sunday services and later evening trains have long been called for here!

Ø    Buses are no substitute for railway services! Since the 1960’s it has been proven time and again that bus substitutes for rail services are unable to keep to the timetable and are laden with all sorts of bedevilments as a result. Every effort must be to make the trains work and keep them working. Studies should be conducted to assess whether half hourly at peak time would be used.

Ø    ERTA believes that a new station serving and giving access to the Retail Park at Kempston, Bedford would be of benefit to attract more rail users for shopping, wider area access and employment opportunities more. It is disgraceful the station was not opened in the early 1980’s when the Retail Park opened and even worse that rail users have been denied access ever since.

Wider vision to better integrate opportunities the railway offers:

Ø    ERTA applauds the on-coming of the long-awaited East-West Rail between Oxford-Bletchley and Bedford and very much hopes in some shape or form it continued to Cambridge!

Ø    However, it will need to be more than 1 train per hour, more like 2 per hour and 4 coach trains will soon need doubling to 8 coach capacity, given the bid for more users and modal shift back from road to rail.

Ø    This means a redesign of Bedford Midland with more baying facilities for more trains off the Bedford-Bletchley railway with some track alignment to make the link between St John’s and the Bedford Midland faster and more robust.

Ø    ERTA believes the best future for the railway would be an infill electrification scheme and lengthening of halts to 4 coach capacity to enable more diverse services, perhaps exploiting the end to end aspect of the commute value the line offers. So, a Watford-Bletchley-Bedford-Corby service should also be looked at.

Ø    The line needs a freight plan. Laudable that talks are about a rail link to serve new developments in some quarters, but the reopening of an investment in Forders Sidings for things like a depot for recycling by rail from glass to fridge’s, from old cars to paper, materials could be collected and sent for processing by rail more serving a wide area. Think environment, think rail!

Ø    ERTA believes that the old St John’s site should not be sold off and redeveloped for housing, rather retained and used for rail related purposes. Bedford has a chronic lack of capacity for more trains, stabling and parking for rail users. Congestion across Prebend Street Bridge is rife and a 2-track solution for more trains between Bedford St John’s and Cardington Road could help. Also, the possible use of Ford End Road old loco shed site for more parking and a second booking office could help. If they are lost to other development, it locks in problems, not solutions! Join our free email loop richard.erta@gmail.com

Check this link out! It is not just about roads only but the fact is the land is locked-in by the A421 Bedford Bypass, so growth and expansion is locked-in and congestion compounded - success of oversubscription. The railway station offers a way to bring more people in (growth) and keep traffic levels checked (modal equalibrium). If you see the sense in what we are saying, please join us and offer support: https://www.bedfordindependent.co.uk/gridlock-at-interchange-retail-park-as-b530-roadworks-cause-traffic-chaos/

ERTA News and Views October 2020

The ERTA successful events programme continues and I attach 2 meetings one for the Guildford area and associated South East transport matters and one for Northampton and associated rail related matters. 

Please do feel free to share/pass on. More the merrier and as always, registration for the Zoom Meetings is via Mr Simon Barber whose email is cc'd in this email.

Other dates for your diary are:

• London Forum (on Zoom) - this has now been agreed for Saturday, 28 November 2020 from 2-4pm
• Conference (on Zoom) - this has now been agreed for Saturday, 24 April 2021 from 2-5pm (1.30pm start)

Newsletter will be out 1st November. Our Brackmills and Bedford old St John's Pamphlets are available via email request to richard.erta@gmail.com. It is never too late to send emails or support or objection until it is! So, please pile in, likewise saving the Guildford-Horsham trackbed for rail purposes, not a canal or exclusive non-rail usership. There is the cycle lobby, the canal lobby and the rail lobby and unless a shared co-existence with respective recognition of needs-must be found, the only winner is a congested road lobby! Pathetic to talk about cutting emissions on dustbin trucks as tinkering at the edges, when we're pouring £millions into new and widened roads to be filled with ever more traffic 'buying time' making the situation ultimately worse and more congested/polluted. 

ERTA seeks to put the rail alternative. The existing network is inadequate to reach and range to make modal shift/choosing rail for passenger and freight a realistic proposition. Rather than HS2 whereby they are a big scheme coming at it top-down, we advocate small, incremental, local, conventional links inclusive of people, places, communities and multiplied, the model achieves at less cost a much more comprehensive rail alternative and a better Britain to face whatever the storms of life bring. The Victorians knew, to be disconnected, was to face disenfranchisement and in a largely unregulated market, went full pelt to be connected with the result of competing lines, stations and yet it settled and worked notwithstanding the dent to economy and population of 2 World Wars. In such a Post War context the closures were implemented. There may have been a 20th Century growth of trend of oil and internal combustion and more by road fuelling road demand, but the closures locked-in that trend and now we are at a point where more choice is wanted and necessary to calm traffic volumes and consider things like land use, spaces and the environment. That is why we need comprehensive reaches and ranges, not just packing the West Coast Main Line full and leaving large swathes disconnected still. Brackmills needs re-railing, a freight plan for the Marston Vale is needed and keeping options open via St John's for a role for rail makes operational sense, so why not?

We continue to wave our views before politicians and the public and hope they get it. We need a balance and are in some cases, maybe many cases still a long way from it and are poorer for it. Our next stall at St Paul's Church, Bedford is Saturday 7th November - all welcome: https://www.antiques-atlas.com/antique_fair/bedfordshires_antiques_collectors_fair_st_pauls/af2055 

Without your patronage and support, we cannot sustain the advance of the choice agenda. Even if we get it, then the impetus is to choose and vote with feet and wallets and so everyone can play a part in making a difference whatever your postcode!

ERTA Calls for the old Bedford St John's Station Site to be used for railway purposes.

With your kind indulgence, I attach our latest brochure extolling the virtues of saving the old Bedford St John's Station Site for railway purposes. It is the last stub access route for any future Bedford urban centre to Cambridge route and if we allow it to default to housing in-fill, we block it off and render the northern route or bust. A number of engineers I've spoken to have told me they are unimpressed with the northern route for east-west rail and it is time to think again. 

The issues are complex, but suffice to say, more positively our pamphlet puts forward that the old site and indeed reclaiming down to Cardington Road perimeter fence, would enable 2 good 12 coach sidings for capacity and other interim rail purposes with good and plentiful access from both a Leicester-Bedford direction and ultimately Oxford-Bedford. Ideal for waitover, freight, washer plant or a diversity of rail uses, keeping that rail corridor access 'open'. I appreciate our politicians come under a lot of pressure and the Government seems lack-lustre on fine detail predicated on more of what it says and we wish for 'Reversing Beeching'. We need to see rail land used for rail related purposes. If we get rid of adjacent lands, expanded parking for rail users will be limited and that cascades across the urban cordon.

Meanwhile south of the river, we still call for a station at the Retail Park at Kempston, currently a 20 minute drive to Bedford Midland because of the congestion and many would be tempted to hit the A421 Bypass and drive east or west accordingly. What does it cost our council to apply for the Reopenings Fund the Government has set up and look at it. 2001 Study indicated 100 extra off peak rail users should the station be built, so 20 years later, one would expect an increase, shoring up buoyant rail usership, the life-blood prelude to justify more investment surely? It's good for the Retail Park, it is good for Kempston Town, it is good for wider south-of-river audiences and it is good for the local Bedford-Bletchley services. The owners even said they would be willing to contribute to a study, it just needs leadership, direction and determination to take it on and our Mayor Dave has experience given his forthright support for the Bedford Riverside North Development, which until lock-down was a relative success and better rail links and services, passenger and freight is just the ticket for more sustainable jobs and services giving the area a competitive edge.