Dear Sir or Madam

Network Rail Long Term Planning Process: & South East Market Study

This letter forms Eastleigh Borough Council’s response to your consultation document “Long Term Planning Process: London & South East Market Study- Draft for Consultation” published on your website on 24 th April 2013. In this document you have invited responses from various stakeholders, including Local Authorities.

We recognise that this document primarily sets out the methodology and drivers that have been identified as feeding into a new series of Route Studies, which we take as being successors to the Route Utilisation Strategies (RUS), eg the current London and South East RUS. We have provided comments regarding the content and methodology of the Market Study, and our response also refreshes previous correspondence from us regarding our priorities for rail development in and around the Borough - which we would like to see considered in a future Route Study document.

General Comments on the Market Study Document

We are in general agreement with the strategic goals for rail that are set out in Chapter 5. These broadly compliment our three corporate priorities- which are to promote a greener and more sustainable Borough, to develop and strengthen our communities (both socially and in terms of connectivity), and to create an environment where business can flourish.

Like most Authorities, we view continued improvement in rail services as a major component of supporting sustainable long term economic and residential development. Our Draft Local Plan ( note 1 ) sets out our long term land use and development planning. This plan includes proposals to deliver the following development by 2029:

• 9,400 new residential units- primarily focused in and around Eastleigh itself and in the Hedge End area • At least 86,000M 2 of new employment floorspace, including a major regeneration and new development to the east of the railway at Eastleigh Riverside

A commitment has been made to undertake this development as sustainably as possible, in line with Eastleigh Borough Council’s long standing policies and actions on carbon reduction and energy efficiency.

This planned development will result in an increased number of trips on the transport networks serving the Borough. A high proportion (around 85% to 90% [ note 2 ]) of the current and future trips on the transport networks in the South will be contained within the sub-region.

Many critical parts of the Borough’s road network (which includes much of the M27 & part of the M3) have little or no spare capacity in the peak hour at present, yet are key corridors for the whole sub-region. The Local Transport Authority (Hampshire County Council) and their current Local Transport Plan (LTP3) South Hampshire Joint Strategy and later studies by Transport for South Hampshire (TfSH) have identified that because of limits to what can be done to boost road capacity, the optimum method of catering for future volumes of travel demand (and hence enabling economic development) will be by encouraging shift from single occupancy car to more sustainable modes. We are supportive of this approach.

Therefore development of a more competitive offer on the south Hampshire rail network, aimed at attracting/facilitating these more local trips is of high importance to us.

Whilst we appreciate that maintaining and improving links to London will continue to be of high importance to our residents and businesses, and we do appreciate London being the driving force behind the rail market in the region, it is our view that this market study does not go as far as it could in looking at the potential for rail to play a greater role in the South Hampshire local transport market.

In particular we note that the study anticipates passenger growth rates of 1 to 2% per annum, largely due to central London employment growth, on corridors not seeing major service changes (section 6.5.2). It is not made clear if these rates are anticipated for the market outside of London. Also you note that projected demand growth on the SWML is unexpectedly low. This is done whilst citing historical passenger growth rates of 1 to 2% per year. However rail patronage at stations in the Borough of Eastleigh has been growing at a considerably higher rate. Between 1997/98 and 2011/12, annual passenger figures at stations in the Borough have grown from 1.92 million per year to 3.8 million per year ( note 3 ). This is a compound growth rate of about 5.1% per year over 14 years, admittedly from a low base, but against a background of relatively low frequency and less attractive rail services compared to the London norm.

We would suggest that with appropriate service patterns, pricing, etc, an annual patronage growth rate of considerably more than 1 to 2% is possible on rail services serving Eastleigh Borough, particularly if services are developed to provide a more competitive alternative to driving.

Also, peak hour overcrowding has become an issue at peak hours on certain key commuter routes (-Eastleigh-Chandlers Ford and Hedge End- Eastleigh-Winchester) serving the Borough. This crowding may not be on the same scale as that on services nearer London, but it is likely to result in lost patronage for the railway if it is not addressed.

Whilst we know there are plans to provide some additional capacity, it is our view that the rail industry has generally failed to provide additional capacity to meet demand in a timely manner. It is important that this lag between demand and capacity is addressed- but unfortunately current delays to the franchising process (and provision of new capacity) suggest that this is not being achieved at present.

Other comments we have regarding the study methodology include:

- We generally feel that the mix of macro- and micro-economic factors, demographics etc being considered in your long term demand scenarios (chapter 6) is thorough and the four scenarios developed appear to cover the range of likely long term outcomes;

- The “Longer Distance Journeys to Central London” conditional output (7.4.4) covers journeys from our Borough to Central London. We feel that the general summary of this market and the conditional outputs presented are accurate;

- We also are generally in agreement with the content of 7.4.6, “Longer distance journeys within the South East”, which covers journeys from our Borough to other locations outside south Hampshire. However as well as providing sufficient capacity, we would like to see more focus on providing more direct connectivity between centres outside London.

- However we feel that the section “Shorter distance journeys within the south east” (7.4.5) and the attached to Southampton case study fails to fully understand the nature of the travel market in Eastleigh Borough or South Hampshire in general. The content of this section and the case study primarily talks about the market being composed of trips between large regional centres (eg Portsmouth to Southampton). However a significant proportion of travel demand in the Borough of Eastleigh (as with south Hampshire in general) is in fact generated by commuting from suburbs to centres, and by business trips from non-central locations (eg business parks) towards a variety of destinations. In the peak hours, commuting trips from the suburbs to town and city centres are a major cause of traffic congestion in the area.

- According to the South Hampshire Strategic Traffic Model (SHSTM), about 36% of road traffic across the area is travelling 5km or less. In urban areas this figure rises to 56%. This manifests itself in many short distance trips on the strategic road network- for example, about 57% of all traffic on the M27 is travelling only 4 junctions or less. Indeed 15.5% of all traffic uses the M27 for only a single junction ( note 4). These statistics reflect the importance of the short distance travel market in Eastleigh Borough and across South Hampshire as a whole. The picture is believed to be similar on the local rail network: Southern Railway have informed us that 90% of trips on the nearby West Coastway line are of under 30 minutes.

- It should be noted that the significant levels of peak hour congestion (for road traffic, about 25% of peak period journey time in the area is spent in traffic queues rather than moving [ note 5 ]) should make rail travel naturally competitive in terms of journey time, especially if train frequency to suburban stations can be increased.

- To this end, we feel that the definition of this market needs to be revisited, with more of a focus put on rail increasing its share of suburb to centre trips, eg Hedge End, Chandlers Ford or to Southampton/Eastleigh/Portsmouth. We would propose that improvements to suburb to centre connectivity over distances of under 15km should included as a conditional output for “Shorter distance journeys within the south east” on at least an equal level of importance to centre to centre connectivity.

- Section 7.7.1, regarding access to Airports, appears to be written mostly from the perspective of connectivity to London airports rather than regional airports outside London, such as Southampton. Southampton is arguably the only significant airport in the study area which does not primarily cater to the London market- we feel that this unique position needs to be recognised as part of ’s Long Term Planning process. Better rail access to Southampton Airport is one of our highest priorities.

Finally, we would also note that as Eastleigh has traditionally been (and continues to be) an important centre for the rail industry (train depots, rolling stock maintenance and refurbishment, and rail freight), we are supportive of future development of the rail network which is likely to provide new employment opportunities for our residents and opportunities for growth of businesses in the Borough.

Comments regarding content of future Route Studies

This section identifies service changes and improvements- most of which have been previously planned or proposed- which we wish to see evaluated in a future Route Study.

1. Access from Southampton Airport to the East

Southampton Airport has been proactive in developing its Surface Access Strategy with the aim of providing travel choices to and from the airport for its passengers and staff, while encouraging modal shift from single occupancy car to more sustainable modes such as rail, bus, cycling, taxi and car sharing travel. Indeed, the targets established in the 2006 Airport Surface Access Strategy have been exceeded and publication of the revised Strategy to cover 2012 – 2016 now seeks to achieve a 20% modal share of access to and from the airport by public transport alone ( note 6 ).

Key to achieving this target will be to attract more passengers to access the airport by train. From surveys of home postcode areas it has been identified that 21% of passengers access the airport from the east; namely the Fareham, Portsmouth, , Chichester, Worthing and areas. Currently, the majority of these passengers and staff travel by car along the often-congested M27, as there is a paucity of direct rail links from this area to the airport.

The current Southern franchise included the commitment to divert the existing hourly Brighton to Southampton service via Eastleigh and Southampton Airport in one direction only, thus providing new connectivity between the Airport and the east. This alteration to the service was recommended for implementation at the earliest opportunity by Network Rail in their London & South East RUS (July 2011). However Southern have been unable to deliver this franchise commitment due to implementation of additional Cross Country services using the same paths. This is despite a very strong financial case and Benefit - Cost Ratio having been established for this service change through previous modelling work.

The Council continues to view this service change as highly desirable although only as an interim measure until such time as an hourly service in both directions is established. Such a service would provide major access benefits for airport users and surrounding areas without the requirement for significant infrastructure costs.

We also would seek that this Brighton-Eastleigh-Southampton service was scheduled to call at Hedge End station (see below), providing a new direct link between this significant and growing residential area (current population 21,000) , Southampton Airport and Southampton City Centre. Hedge End calls would also provide additional capacity between Hedge End and Eastleigh and Eastleigh to Southampton. It would also restore well-used links from Eastleigh to Havant, Chichester and the Sussex coast that were withdrawn in 2007. We are confident that such a link if provided at a regular frequency would generate new patronage, particularly in the peak hours.

To support the development of services from the east to Eastleigh and Southampton Airport Parkway we also are supportive of an earlier Network Rail proposal to increase capacity on the Fareham to Eastleigh line in the longer term through selected redoubling, linespeed improvements, and potentially an additional platform at Eastleigh station. This would increase capacity for additional services, improve reliability of operations and help cater for and link to new developments along the rail corridor as outlined in the Eastleigh Draft Local Plan 2011 - 2029.

2. Netley Line service improvements

The 2011 London and South East RUS explored options for enhancements to services between Portsmouth and Southampton. Aims of these enhancements included better city centre to city centre journey time, and also improved train frequency at intermediate suburban stations en route. We note that the current Market Study has featured this connection as a case study (7.4.5).

An option which was examined and recommended for further development was replacement of the current hourly stopping service (which is slow and uncompetitive with driving) with two or more hourly semi-fast services on a “skip stop” timetable, whereby whilst all stations still received at least an hourly service, not every station was called at by every train. The study indicated that if a 3tph Southampton- Portsmouth frequency could be established, most intermediate stations could enjoy both faster journey times to key destinations, and a doubling in service frequency.

We would be supportive of continued development and implementation of these or similar proposals. In particular we feel that additional frequency at Netley and Hamble stations could result in increased patronage from commuters between these areas and Southampton, Fareham and other employment destinations, in particular if linked to provision of new drop-off facilities & car parking capacity at Hamble (where such facilities are currently lacking). Resulting modal shift would help relieve congestion and air quality problems on the M27 and approach roads, as well as on the approaches to Southampton.

Furthermore, if our above requests regarding diversion of the Brighton to Southampton service via Southampton Airport and Eastleigh were achieved, in order to preserve current frequency levels on the Solent Line, some form of replacement service on this route would likely be required.

We believe an approach to addressing this gap may through diversion of the current (inefficiently-timetabled) Waterloo to Poole stopping service, by running it semi-fast from Southampton to Portsmouth via the Solent Line.

Currently, this service is so unattractively timetabled that it is overtaken at Southampton Central by faster trains in both directions-meaning that passengers from stations west of Southampton and travelling to Winchester and points north are advised that they should change trains rather than remain on the direct service. Therefore if this service were to be diverted along the Solent coast, it could be replaced by a Poole-Southampton stopping service with no loss of passenger connectivity.

By diversion to Portsmouth, in addition to extra Portsmouth-Southampton frequency, this service change would generate new direct rail connectivity from Swanwick, Hamble, Netley and the eastern part of Southampton, to Southampton Airport, Eastleigh, Winchester and London- mirroring new connectivity provided by the proposed diverted Southern service. It would also provide a new direct link between Portsmouth and Southampton Airport.

3. Eastleigh-Fareham line evening service

Currently there is a substantial gap (more than 1 hour 20 minutes) between services in each direction on the Eastleigh-Hedge End-Fareham line in the later evening. In future timetables, we would like to see this gap removed and at least an hourly evening service provided on this line during the mid to late evening. To the best of our knowledge, Hedge End and Botley are the only stations in Hampshire (except the remote Beaulieu Road) which do not have at least an hourly service through to the later evening.

4. Additional capacity

We and the Three Rivers Rail Partnership have identified that overcrowding has become a problem on peak hour services on the Salisbury-Southampton-Eastleigh- Chandlers Ford- Romsey service. In the short term we would wish to see at least peak time services on this route being increased to three carriages. We believe this could be achieved through relatively simple diagramming changes on certain Waterloo-Salisbury-Exeter services, to substitute one or two three-car class 159 diesel multiple units for one or two of the two car 158s used currently on the “Salisbury 6” route.

We also have concerns regarding crowding on peak hour trains north of Hedge End/Southampton Airport Parkway to/from London- some trains are standing room only to/from these destinations at present. It is our understanding that additional capacity on some of these services will be provided by from 2014.

Also, although not directly in the remit of this Market Study, we also wish to see persistent overcrowding problems on Cross Country services (due to use of unsuitable rolling stock for what is a major intercity route) addressed.

5. Electric spine proposals and High Speed 2

Although we understand that Network Rail are at an early stage of development of this project, we have identified several opportunities that may be possible as a result of development of the Electric Freight Spine project and its attendant conversion of the to 25kv overhead electrification between Southampton and Basingstoke by the early 2020s. These opportunities are:

- Potential to operate current class 444/450 rolling stock at a higher speed of 110mph, compared to the current 100mph, and improved acceleration performance- as has been achieved with similar London Midland rolling stock on the - thus reducing journey times between this area and London; - Possibility of carrying out improvement works on several key bridges in the Borough to enhance cycle/pedestrian facilities at the same time as bridge works linked to electrification take place, thus addressing bottlenecks on the highway network; - Possibility of wiring of diversionary routes (Basingstoke-Salisbury-Southampton and possibly Eastleigh-Chandlers Ford-Romsey) which could enable the current Salisbury-Romsey service to operate using electric rather than diesel traction. This could perhaps be linked to infrastructure improvements that would allow a more frequent service to run on this line.

Further to the final point above, we feel that operating as much freight as possible via the Romsey-Laverstock-Andover diversionary route should be considered, as this would reduce competition for valuable passenger service paths on the South West Mainline between Basingstoke and Southampton.

Finally, although somewhat outside the remit of the London and South East market study, we would like to see consideration of feasibility of linking cross-country rail services from the South Coast services into High Speed 2, in order to considerably reduce journey times from the South Coast to the North. This may be achievable through a connection from the East-West line (Oxford to Milton Keynes) currently under development to HS2.

Whilst these developments are some way in the future, we feel it would be relevant for Network Rail to consider these benefits early as part of the Long Term Planning process.

In conclusion, Eastleigh Borough Council are keen to be involved in further consultation as Network Rail’s Long Term Planning Process progresses and would be happy to provide whatever information and support we can to Network Rail as part of this process.

Signed by relevant Member (Cllr Airey)

Notes

1: Link to Eastleigh Borough Pre-Submission Local Plan: http://www.eastleigh.gov.uk/planning--building-control/planning-policy--design/draft- local-plan.aspx

2/4/5: Figures in these paragraphs were published in the Transport For South Hampshire Delivery Plan ( http://documents.hants.gov.uk/transport-for-south- hampshire/TransportDeliveryPlan.pdf ) and are based on outputs from the South Hampshire Strategic Traffic Model.

3. Stations serving the Borough are:

• Botley; • Bursledon; • Chandler’s Ford; • Eastleigh; • Hamble; • Hedge End; • Netley; and • Southampton Airport Parkway.

The passenger growth figures exclude numbers at Chandlers Ford station (which opened in 2003), but may include some trips from stations which were open in 1997 to Chandlers Ford following its opening in 2003. Total passenger numbers including Chandlers Ford rose from 1.92 million to 4.13 million over the same time period- a compound growth rate of 5.6%.

6: Southampton Airport Surface Access Strategy 2012 to 2016 available online: http://www.southamptonairport.com/static/Southampton/Downloads/PDF/Southampton%20A irport%20Surface%20Access%20Strategy%202012.pdf