Yorkshire and Humber Route Utilisation Strategy (2009)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Yorkshire and Humber Route Utilisation Strategy July 2009 2 Foreword I am delighted to present Network Rail’s Route next decade, though initially at a slower rate. Utilisation Strategy (RUS) for the Yorkshire It showed that passengers and freight users and Humber region. This strategy considers both want the railway to be available earlier issues affecting the railway in this part of the and later; and that links between some major country over the next decade and gives a view cities – for example, from Bradford or Sheffield on longer-term issues in the years beyond. to Manchester – are slow and unattractive to passengers. It highlighted that future growth of The network across the region is extremely freight traffic may be compromised by certain diverse, with heavily used services into and pinch-points or areas where the loading gauge between the major cities; rural areas with clearance is insufficient. lightly used services; as well as heavy freight use, particularly around the major ports. In addition, a number of locations have been It does not include the East Coast Main Line, identified where the increasing number of train however, but it does include some lines in the services have highlighted the limitations of the East Midlands and west of the Pennines where infrastructure, with growing congestion and these have been identified as being relevant to occasionally significant delays occurring. the network in the Yorkshire and Humber area. The general approach in the short and Reaching this stage has involved following medium term will be to progressively provide a now well-established process. This began the infrastructure capable of taking more with a comprehensive analysis of the current and longer trains, and faster journeys where capability and capacity of the network to possible, as well as the capability for additional measure its ability to meet existing demand. freight services to meet the projected growth Subsequently, demand projections for the next in demand. decade are examined and, taking any planned This RUS was initially published as a Draft for enhancements over that period into account, Consultation in September 2008, and I would any future gaps are identified. like to thank all those who responded. Its This process showed that, despite current production has been led by Network Rail, but economic conditions, demand from it has been developed by the whole industry. passengers wishing to commute into Sheffield A large number of organisations, including and Leeds, to travel between the two, across our customers, the passenger and freight the Pennines to Manchester or to the Midlands operators, have been fully involved and I would is expected to continue to grow over the like to thank them all for their efforts. Iain Coucher Chief Executive Executive summary Introduction Skipton in the west, with the exception of the The rail network varies greatly across the East Coast Main Line (ECML). It considers Yorkshire and Humber Route Utilisation issues over a 10-year time period from 2009. Strategy (RUS) area. The largest conurbations It has had issues passed to it from the North centred around Leeds and Sheffield have West RUS, the Lancashire and Cumbria a high concentration of heavily used urban RUS, the ECML RUS and the Freight RUS. and inter-urban services, whereas the less The Network RUS, currently under populated areas to the east have a greater development, will also address some issues, proportion of lightly-used rural services. Some such as electrification, which may impact on parts of the network, such as Immingham, are the RUS area. very heavily used by freight traffic whilst others are solely passenger. Similarly, there is no one Process body responsible for transport planning such The RUS initially analyses the current as Transport for London or Transport Scotland. capability and capacity of the railway in order Whilst the interests of the principal urban areas to measure its ability to cater reliably for are represented by South Yorkshire Passenger existing demand and thereby highlight any Transport Executive (PTE) and West Yorkshire present-day ‘gaps’. Forecasts of predicted PTE (and to a lesser extent – in terms of demand over the coming 10 years are then geography rather than roles and responsibilities examined, and forecast future gaps identified. – Greater Manchester PTE), local authorities These forecasts take account of committed in the remainder of the area range from schemes which are due to be delivered in the geographically very large shire counties such next few years. as North Yorkshire to quite compact unitary A set of options is then generated which could authorities. The National Park Authorities and potentially meet the known and predicted Associated British Ports also have a role to play. gaps. These options are then analysed in Scope and background order to gain an understanding about which of The Yorkshire and Humber RUS adjoins them offer the most promising and value for the infrastructure covered by the already- money solutions. published East Coast Main Line, North West, The RUS is put out to consultation in order and Lancashire and Cumbria RUSs, and the for stakeholder responses to be sought and East Midlands RUS currently in preparation. considered and for options to be thereby Several members of the rail industry refined. The Draft for Consultation was issued Stakeholder Management Group (SMG) are in September 2008, with a formal consultation common to some or all of these RUSs. There period from September to December 2008, is a considerable interface with the North West during which 10 written responses were RUS in the corridors from South and West received. The comments were analysed and Yorkshire to Greater Manchester. taken into account in development of the The RUS covers broadly the area from finalised strategy set out in this document. Scarborough, Hull and Cleethorpes in the east The Yorkshire and Humber RUS process to Newark, Chinley, Stalybridge, Rochdale and has been overseen and directed by the SMG which comprises representatives from the demand for passenger services to operate Train Operating Companies (TOCs), Freight later on weekday evenings and to start earlier Operating Companies (FOCs), the Department on Sunday mornings; growing demand – for Transport, Network Rail, the Association especially on south Humberside – for 2- hour of Train Operating Companies (ATOC), freight access; and a strong desire that Passenger Focus, the PTEs and the Office of passenger services in key corridors should as Rail Regulation (ORR) (as observers). far as possible be free from bus substitution. Gaps Regional links: There is a perception of This RUS identified six generic gaps: poor connectivity in certain corridors. In particular, the service between Bradford Peak crowding and suppressed growth: and Manchester is slow by comparison with Demand for rail commuting into Leeds, services between other major centres, as Sheffield and Manchester has been growing a result of numerous station stops combined strongly in recent years with the result that with some low speed restrictions. The Sheffield many trains during the high peak are now close – Manchester service is considered to be to or, in a few cases, beyond their nominal unattractive at two fast trains per hour when capacity. Significant overcrowding in peak hours compared with the Leeds – Manchester via is forecast if additional capacity is not provided. Huddersfield frequency. Off-peak crowding and suppressed growth: Freight capability: Parts of the RUS area Growth in demand for TransPennine Express have restrictive loading gauge clearance when services in the core Manchester – Leeds via compared with the Freight RUS aspirations Huddersfield corridor has been exceptionally for W9, W10 and W12. Such restrictions strong in recent years and significant reduce the suitability of the lines affected for overcrowding is forecast such that demand diversionary purposes as well as hindering management measures will be required if development of the intermodal container additional capacity is not provided. market. Identified key capacity pinch-points This prediction is based on growth projections such as the Hope Valley and Hare Park Jn of an average of .6 percent per year and – South Kirkby Jn threaten to handicap future is dependent on a number of assumptions, growth in the freight business. The absence of in particular fares policy (RPI+1% is assumed, any loops of 77 metres within the RUS area although this is potentially conservative for limits the options for running the longest freight unregulated fares) and external effects such as trains in line with FOC aspirations. road congestion and motoring costs. Increased overcrowding at various times of day, including Reactionary delays: A number of key locations weekends, is expected if further capacity is have been identified where very significant not provided. delays occur, notably Whitehall Jn, Sheffield station and Swinton Jn. Congestion at these Engineering access: On certain route locations is related to the design of the rail sections, present methods of maintenance and infrastructure which has become increasingly renewal imply regular and lengthy possessions constrained as train services have grown in to keep the infrastructure fit for purpose. response to demand, whilst ‘quick win’ solutions Increasingly, these do not fit comfortably with: have almost invariably been taken up. Short-term strategy 2009 – 2014 Infrastructure enhancements (Control Period 4) The following