APPENDIX B

SOUTH EAST LOCAL ENTERPRISE PARTNERSHIP’S

RESPONSE TO THE

DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT’S

COMBINED FRANCHISE CONSULTATION

17 August 2012

Prepared by County Council

on behalf of the South East Local Enterprise Partnership

INTRODUCTION

1 The South East Local Enterprise Partnership (SELEP) welcomes the opportunity to provide a comprehensive response to the Department for Transport’s (DfT) Combined franchise consultation.

2 In devising this response, the SELEP has drawn substantially on the evidence base provided in Kent County Council’s (KCC) Rail Action Plan for Kent : https://shareweb.kent.gov.uk/Documents/council-and- democracy/have%20your%20say/rail-action-plan-for-kent.pdf The Rail Action Plan encapsulates all the consultation responses received by KCC from their stakeholders at every level of governance in Kent, including Rail User Groups and interested individuals, and through the KCC Rail Summits held annually with key stakeholders and rail users.

3 This document also incorporates responses from East County Council (ESCC) and Medway Council, which are referenced in the text. The other authorities within SELEP, Essex County Council, Southend Council and Thurrock Council, were content with KCC’s initial draft response and had no further observations to make.

4 The vision supporting KCC’s Rail Action Plan for Kent is encapsulated in Chapter 5 – Towards the New Franchise: 2014+:

“This Rail Action Plan for Kent (RAPK) therefore sets out the objectives that KCC wishes to see incorporated in the new franchise. In doing so KCC does not profess to be expert in the operation of the rail network, nor proficient in the most economic allocation of rolling-stock and crew resources. Rather we seek to represent the aspirations of the people of Kent for a new rail service which reflects the needs of our county, drives economic growth, meets the targets of our Growth Areas at Ashford and Thames Gateway (Kent) and of our Growth Points at Dover and Maidstone, and ensures the provision of a reliable, useful, safe, clean and punctual railway which meets the current and future business, education, employment and leisure needs of the people of Kent.”

Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, paragraph 5.2

5 The Rail Action Plan for Kent has been adopted by KCC as a key part of their broader transport policy, and builds on KCC’s transport delivery plan Growth without Gridlock, Kent County Council, December 2010: http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/priorities,_policies_and_plans/pri orities_and_plans/growth_without_gridlock.aspx

SOUTH EAST LOCAL ENTERPRISE PARTNERSHIP CONTACT OFFICER

David Freestone Transportation Manager Planning & Transportation Thurrock Council Civic Offices New Road Grays Essex RM17 6SL

T: 01375 652091 E: [email protected] W: www.thurrock.gov.uk

RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION QUESTIONS

The Department for Transport (DfT) consultation questions are shown in bold throughout

The South East Local Enterprise Partnership (SELEP) responses are shown in normal font throughout

The Rail Action Plan for Kent quotations are shown in italics throughout

Q1 What improvements do stakeholders believe could be made on the Combined franchise through partnership working between and the new operator?

The new operator of the Combined franchise will need to develop a high degree of partnership working with Network Rail. The new franchisee will operate rail services over several designated Network Rail route areas, only one of which will be the Kent area. Closer partnership working is necessary to deliver a more reliable, co- ordinated rail network, especially given the constraints that will be imposed by the re-building of Bridge station between 2015 and 2018 and by the operation of 24tph through the central core from 2018 onwards.

Q2 Do consultees have any specific aspirations for the new franchise that they wish to bring to the Department’s attention?

KCC’s Rail Action Plan for Kent proposes 15 key recommendations (paragraph 5.4) for the new franchises in Kent. These recommendations are included specifically in our responses to Q4 (Community Rail Partnership routes), Q7 (Mainline Services), Q10 (Jointly Operated Services) and Q16 (Airport Services).

Q3 Are consultees aware of any other rail or non-rail development schemes that might affect the new franchise?

SELEP is aware of the aspiration of Transport for London (TfL) and the Mayor of London to transfer the existing Metro services (which form part of the South Eastern franchise) to their London Overground franchise. These services operate either wholly within or as cross-boundary services (e.g. to Dartford and to Sevenoaks) between Greater London and Kent.

While the TfL Metro proposals do not have any direct bearing on the planned Combined franchise operation, it would be important for any expansion of the Combined franchise (by taking over some of the existing South Eastern franchise services) to take account of the TfL Metro proposals in any final decision.

ESCC has made the following observations:

There are concerns that the Mayor of London / Transport for London (TfL) proposal to take control of other suburban services coming into London from north Kent and north would have a detrimental impact on rail services coming into London, The County Council would not wish for additional stopping services in the London area to be made on services from East Sussex (namely the line and -Tonbridge line) as this will increase journey times and exacerbate existing congestion on these services.

Medway Council will be mentioning the existing Rochester to Bedford service in their individual response as the service crosses several franchise areas.

Q4 What increments or decrements to the specification would stakeholders wish to see and how would these be funded?

“KCC also calls on the DfT to require the new franchisees for the Southeastern and Southern operating areas to be required as part of the new franchise agreements to work with their respective CRPs, in order to ensure the development of these rural lines in Kent and their continued increase in patronage.”

Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, paragraph 2.11

SELEP supports the Rail Action Plan for Kent’s specific recommendations for increments to the specification for two of its Community Rail Partnership (CRP) lines which would be operated by the Combined franchise from 2015. The delivery of these increments would be dependent either on their inclusion in the new Combined franchise specification, or by external funding which is not identified at present.

The Ashford-, which is part of the Sussex CRP supported by KCC, would have an increase to 2tph during peak periods between these towns if some of the smaller stations were removed from peak services and if there were further easement of some speed restrictions.

The reason for these proposed increases in service is that there has been a significant rise in travel during the peaks on the Ashford – Hastings line, largely driven by further education travel between colleges in Ashford, Ore and Hastings. This line is used extensively by school and college pupils resident in Kent, and by commuters and leisure travellers needing to reach Ashford for access to employment or onward travel via High Speed services to London.

The Tonbridge-Redhill line, which is also part of the Sussex CRP, would have an increase to 2tph in the off-peak periods, in addition to the proposed hourly Gatwick service.

The proposed increase on this service between Tonbridge and Redhill is made in response to the request from Rail User Groups and local authorities for an improvement in this off-peak service, which is currently only hourly, so as to improve east-west connectivity between West Kent and Surrey for all travellers during the off-peak periods.

The tables below, extracted from the Rail Action Plan, set out the proposed increments to the service specifications for these two CRP lines serving south-east and west Kent.

TRAINS PER HOUR (tph) PEAK PERIODS Ashford-Hastings line (PEAK DIRECTION)

Terminus / Via: Ashford Rye Hastings Departure Station

Ham Street 2 2 2* 1 Appledore 2 2 2* 1

* 2tph to/from Hastings would be dependent on removal of stops at some of the smaller stations and further easing of some speed restrictions

TRAINS PER HOUR (tph) OFF-PEAK PERIODS Tonbridge-Redhill line

London East Terminus / Via: Bridge Redhill Gatwick** Departure Station Ashford 1 1 Tonbridge 2 2 3 1 Leigh 2 2 2 Penshurst 2 2 2 Edenbridge 2 2 2 1

** Gatwick service is key requirement in Rail Action Plan for new franchise

Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, Appendix 2, Kent County Council

ESCC has made the following observations:

o A suggested decrement to the Hastings-London (via Tunbridge Wells) service is to omit stopping services at Orpington and Sevenoaks on one of the existing 2tph off-peak service. o Provide an additional fast train per hour on the East Coastway calling at main stations only: Brighton, , Polegate, , Bexhill, Hastings and Ashford. o These changes would be funded by the DfT and/or the TOC.

Medway Council will also ask that Medway is considered as a terminus for .

Q5 Which aspects of the specification, other than those services operating through the Thameslink core route, would stakeholders wish to see mandated and which aspects of the specification could be left to the discretion of the operator?

The service level on all the trunk Thameslink routes in Kent should be mandated for both peak and off-peak operation. The level of passenger demand, even in the off-peak periods, is now at such a level that to do otherwise would risk a serious loss of service for the off-peak passenger were any of these services to be discretionary. However, the additional services proposed above in the response to Q4 could be provided on a discretionary basis.

ESCC has made the following observations:

The DfT should specify services which the appointed TOC should operate, and these should reflect the aspirations of stakeholders and commuters. However, there should be some flexibility for the TOC to work with stakeholders to bring forward and implement rail service improvements at a later date, which may not be included in the original specification, as opportunities arise.

Medway Council has made the following observations:

Medway Council will be suggesting that greater information on passenger destination and loading should have been made available in order for a more informed comment on this question. In Medway at present Rochester and Gillingham stations are already terminus points. The Council will be suggesting that turnback facilities are considered to the east of Rainham station to help avoid blocking the mainline.

Q6 Are there other approaches to train service specification which you would prefer?

No, the distinction between mandated and discretionary services is a rational approach to the specification for the Combined franchise.

Q7 What changes to services would stakeholders propose, what is the rationale for them and would these provide economic benefit?

Economic Basis of Proposals for Enhancements to Services

SELEP is cognisant of the proposed housing growth allocations in the Local Development Frameworks (LDF) in each of the twelve district councils in Kent. These indicative allocations, together with those provided by Medway Council as the unitary authority for the Medway Towns, provide a total presumed housing growth figure of 117,903 in Kent & Medway by 2026.

The provision of an enhanced rail network in Kent & Medway will be crucial to meet the needs of this housing growth, to ensure that it is matched by economic development, together with wider education and employment opportunities, for the new population of this region by the end of the first quarter of the 21 st century.

The table below sets out details of these indicative housing allocations, all of which will be dependent on planning permissions matching planned LDF growth.

TABLE OF PLANNED HOUSING GROWTH IN KENT AND MEDWAY: 2010-2026

DISTRICT HOUSING ALLOCATION Ashford 21,970 Canterbury 7,009 Dartford 15,280 Dover 12,798 Gravesham 5,200 Maidstone 7,357 Sevenoaks 2,400 Shepway 6,695 Swale 10,800 Thanet 4,971 Tonbridge & Malling 5,919 Tunbridge Wells 4,448

Kent Total 104,847

Medway Unitary Authority 13,056

Kent & Medway Total 117,903

Source: The Local Development Frameworks of the 12 District Councils in Kent and of Medway Council

ESCC has made the following observations in support of the economic basis for the provision of services

Summary of Allocations and Distributions of Housing and Employment planned for East Sussex (at February 2012).

Detail: Eastbourne Hastings Lewes Rother Wealden Local Plan 2006 – 2027 Up to 2028 Up to 2030 (starts Up to 2028 2006 - 2030 or Core (Employment at 2010) (Housing from Strategy starts at 2008, and April 2011) period: Housing at 2011)

Plan length: 21 Years 17 Years 20 Years 17 Years 24 Years Stage of Regulation 27 Regulation 27 Regulation 27 Regulation 27 EiP ran from 17 Plan Publication: 16 Publication: May Publication: July / Publication 19 January to 2 preparation September – 9 to July 2012. August 2012, August 11 February 2012. December. Document will be Submission November 2011. Inspector’s Document now going to Hastings November 2012. Awaiting final link report expected submitted to SoS. Cabinet in March The EiP is expected road decision Spring. EiP expected in 2012. Awaiting to take place in before submitting Spring 2012. final link road February 2012, with to SoS. If positive Adoption is decision until adoption June decision, expected at the proposing final 2013. submission will be end of 2012. regulation 27 end of April / May. dates.

General Information General Information Reference: Pages 75, 76 and Pages 34 and 37 Page 38 of the Pages 30 and 31 Pages 26 and 28 83 of the of the Hastings Lewes Core of the Rother Core of the Wealden Eastbourne Plan / Spatial Strategy. Strategy. Strategy. Core Strategy. Core Strategy. Table 5 page 42 for housing sites. Number of 222 200 208 218 – 241 400 new dwellings to be delivered annually : Total 5,022 3,400 4,150 3,700 – 4,100 9574 number of new dwellings to be delivered over the

Housing Allocation and Housing Allocation and Distribution plan period: Amount of 55,430 m2 of 70,000m2 of Between 2010 - 100,000m2 Net Square new extra employment employment 2026, 50,000 to business metres employment space to be floorspace will be 64,000 m2 of floorspace is an (B1/B2/B8) space / delivered. 4 sites developed employment appropriate target. 38,190 (A1) retail for densification between 2008 and floorspace (b1, B2 Retail = 16,937 Total = allocation to and 1 site new. 2028 (Start date is and B8) will be 9,150sqm. 55,127

be delivered Totalling 63,600 = subject to provided in the plan over Plan 8,170 over supply. change). Target area. Between period: primarily relates to 30,000 and NO RETAIL B1, B2 and B8 40,000m2 of this PROVISION uses). floorspace will be

Employment / Retail Allocation and Distribution AVAILABLE AT as industrial space THIS TIME! 20,500m2 (B1c, B2 and B8), additional and between comparison goods 20,000 and 24,000 floorspace m2 will be as office between 2014 - space (B1a). 2028 – primarily within Hastings Town Centre.

2,800m2 of retail warehousing needed between 2014 - 2028.

General Principle of Access to London Termini

KCC’s Rail Action Plan for Kent establishes an important principle at the start of its list of key requirements for the new franchise:

“There should be a regular peak-period Mainline service to designated West End and City stations on each principal rail route in Kent. By West End is meant Charing Cross or Victoria; by City is meant Blackfriars or Cannon Street;”

Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, paragraph 5.4 (i)

The changes proposed by KCC to the Thameslink service specification are set out below. These are in response to the many demands from our stakeholders at every level of governance on the affected rail routes in Kent, as well as from Rail User Groups and interested and informed individuals.

SELEP believes that these measures would provide economic benefit to the county - by maintaining existing or creating new links to the City to widen employment opportunity and stimulate growth; or by encouraging off-peak leisure travel and increasing opportunities for higher education and leisure travel.

Thameslink to Maidstone East; and to Sevenoaks via Swanley

“ initially there should be an hourly service all day between Maidstone East and Blackfriars (using paths currently allocated to half of the First Capital Connect service from Sevenoaks via Otford) so as to provide a direct service all day to the City; this should be replaced by an all day half-hourly Thameslink (Key Output 2) service to Blackfriars, Farringdon, St Pancras and north from 2018, with the Maidstone East line becoming the principal Kent route for the full Thameslink service south of the Thames;”

Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, paragraph 5.4 (viii)

KCC has argued in the Rail Action Plan for Kent that from the start of the new South Eastern franchise, or in practice at some point between April and December 2014, half of the present jointly operated First Capital Connect (Thameslink) / Southeastern Railway service from Blackfriars to Sevenoaks via Bat & Ball should be diverted to Maidstone East. While this would cause a reduction in frequency between Swanley and Sevenoaks, it would introduce a long awaited City service to Maidstone, West Malling, Kings Hill (via bus link) and Borough Green.

SELEP supports this aspiration to deliver this temporary change in 2014 as the stations on the Maidstone East line have suffered through their loss of direct services to the City since the December 2009 timetable change. Maidstone, the county town of Kent, West Malling, the large commercial and residential development of Kings Hill and Borough Green are all significant locations which require a direct service to City stations, and these proposals would deliver this outcome from 2014 if this requirement were to be included in the new Combined franchise specification (this outcome is also referred to in our response to the South Eastern consultation).

This service would then be replaced by the planned full Thameslink service in December 2018 and would revert to Sevenoaks. SELEP also supports the inclusion of this service via Bat & Ball as a full part of the Thameslink franchise, to be transferred from joint operation with Southeastern Railway between April and December 2014.

The rationale for serving Maidstone East by Thameslink services is that the stations on this line need to be connected again to City stations, and a through Thameslink service would link this line with Blackfriars, City Thameslink, Farringdon and St Pancras (low level) stations. It would also facilitate a natural approach to Blackfriars from the south via the Catford loop and Loughborough Junction rather than via London Bridge, which would ease the pressure on the demand for Thameslink paths via London Bridge following the re-building of this busy London station.

SELEP will also include the question of which rail services in Kent should become part of the Thameslink franchise in the Partnership’s response to the South Eastern franchise consultation.

Cannon Street to be retained for Sevenoaks via Tonbridge & Tunbridge Wells to Hastings

“The Cannon Street service from Hastings via Tunbridge Wells, Tonbridge and Sevenoaks should be retained and not replaced by new Thameslink (Key Output 2) service in 2018 which would anyway only operate as far south as Tunbridge Wells ; the planned reduction in paths to Cannon Street post-2018 from 25tph to 22tph should be met by an equitable reduction in Cannon Street services between Metro and all Mainline Kent / Hastings services;”

Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, paragraph 5.4 (x)

SELEP agrees with the strong representations that KCC has received from the MPs, Councils and Rail User Groups representing these important commuter stations in West Kent. There have also been strong representations from East Sussex County Council and from many stakeholders in Hastings. The original proposal contained in the Kent RUS, to partly replace the existing Cannon Street service with a branch of the Thameslink service as far as Tunbridge Wells, now appears to have been withdrawn.

SELEP welcomes this apparent change of heart, and recognises especially the importance of a direct link between these stations and Cannon Street near where many commuters have their offices. SELEP therefore expects the Combined franchise specification NOT to include Thameslink services via the mainline route to Sevenoaks, Tonbridge and Tunbridge Wells.

ESCC has made the following observations:

Services

As a general point for all services, there should be sufficient room for all passengers to sit or stand – this is not the case for rail services in East Sussex, most notably at peak times.

Note: The Hastings-London (via Tunbridge Wells) aspirations have not been included in this note as DfT has informed us that these form part of the South Eastern Franchise consultation. Should this change, we request the DfT take into consideration the issues raised in the County Council’s response to their current South Eastern franchise consultation.

Brighton-Ashford

• We would like to see improvements to rail services on the existing East Coastway Brighton-Ashford through route by introducing (at the very least) an additional train per hour, therefore comprising:

o A fast hourly fast service along the East Coastway route calling at main stations. o An hourly service calling at all stations (consideration should be given as to how best such a service would operate i.e. as a split service - between Brighton and Eastbourne/Hastings, and Hastings/Eastbourne and Ashford – whichever releases the most capacity to the benefit of commuters).

• The Lewes-Brighton shuttle should be extended to Eastbourne. • Current low number of rolling stock on the line needs to be addressed as this leads to overcrowding during peak times and at school arrival/departure times. For example the two-car Brighton-Ashford trains are frequently announced as ‘full and standing’. • The Brighton-Ashford line is a strategic rail route and should be a through route:

o Exploit opportunities for reducing journey times through line speed improvements being made along this route. o The service forms part of the County’s strategic transport network and the Trans European Network – Transport (TEN-T) network, which links key towns along the East Coastway including Brighton, Lewes, Eastbourne, Hastings and Ashford and beyond, i.e. London the continent, o It supports and strengthens the economic development and regeneration initiatives taking place along the East Coastway route; a split in this service in the longer term could affect this, o It is important that direct links to Ashford International are available (without having to change trains if this can be avoided) for trains to the continent, o There is potential for European funding towards dual tracking and electrification, as this line forms part of the TEN-T network, and o Passengers travelling to Brighton from stations such as Hastings, Rye and Ashford would have to change trains, and this could lengthen their journey by approximately 20 minutes. This could discourage existing and potential rail users from utilising this service.

• However, the capacity issues experienced on this line need addressing in the short term, and we recognise that this may mean a split service until the capacity issues are alleviated by either additional diesel carriages cascaded down from where a line is electrified elsewhere on the network, or electrification of the line. • With no certainty on when diesel units may be redeployed, and the need for to resolve these continuing capacity issues, the option of splitting the existing service at Hastings, or running one direct and one split service an hour in the short term, should be reconsidered. This is on the proviso that should additional diesel units become available, or the line be electrified, then the direct rail service between Brighton and Ashford be reinstated. • Trains should run an hour later on the in both directions i.e. at approximately 22.34 from Hastings-Ashford and 23.30 back from Ashford. The latter would provide a connection to the 22.42 from St Pancras. Note: currently the last connecting service from London leaves St Pancras at 21.42 (21.00 from Charing Cross via Ashford). • Services should complement timetables along other lines e.g. Ashford (High Speed line) and as well as provide timely connections to continental services.

Uckfield line

• There is a need for improved early morning commuter services into London. • We request that later trains from London to Uckfield be introduced. • There should be a fuller service (early and late) at weekends, including earlier trains on Sunday morning. • There is a need to address overcrowding on peak hour services to/from London:

o Short term - additional carriages (ideally deployed from lines which have been or will soon become electrified; we are aware no new diesel rolling stock will be manufactured). o Medium to longer term – dual tracking and electrification between Uckfield-Hurst Green. o Medium to longer term – additional services during peak hours, which becomes possible further to dual tracking.

• We support a franchise commitment towards the longer term aspiration to reinstate the Lewes-Uckfield and Eridge-Tunbridge Wells lines (the latter for a commuter service, as we are aware of the heritage line operating, which is supported). • We support continued partnership working with the rail industry and other councils towards a car park on the old station site – however, we would hope this would have been introduced by the time the South Central franchise is encapsulated within the Thameslink franchise. • Bus/rail integration at Uckfield Station needs improving e.g. signage to the bus station. • Existing service levels to London Bridge should be retained

East Coastway-Victoria

• Early morning commuter services into London, later trains from London, and a fuller service (early and late) at weekends need to be improved. • Reconsideration should be given to ending the splitting/joining of trains at Haywards Heath, reducing journey times for passengers, whilst retaining existing service levels. • Consideration needs to be given to reducing journey times on the East Coastway services to London, for example, Eastbourne to Victoria, by other means, e.g. signalling improvements, faster line speeds etc. • Thameslink trains should run to Eastbourne as originally planned.

Smaller stations

• Monday-Saturday alternate hourly stopping services at smaller stations e.g. , Three Oaks and Doleham should be retained. • Until a twice hourly service is available on the Marshlink, the present service to Three Oaks and Winchelsea should be maintained, and consideration given to introducing a Sunday service when improved line speeds allow. • Consideration should be given to an hourly service (notably during peak hours) which caters for work, educational and other needs. Any proposals for change should be discussed with the County, District/Borough/Parish Councils and local commuter groups ahead of any changes being made. • Retaining services to smaller stations is important – e.g. for access to the National Park (SDNP) from stations such as Southease, Glynde and Plumpton. • Regular Saturday and Sunday services should be provided to cater for commuters, for local social and educational journeys, and for the tourist trade.

Rolling stock

• As highlighted earlier in this note, there is a general need for additional rolling stock on the East Coastway route and the Uckfield line either by providing new carriages or deploying rolling stock from elsewhere, i.e. where other train lines have (or will become) electrified. • Additional rolling stock should have a standard of comfort with facilities currently enjoyed on the majority of services – toilet facilities, air conditioning etc. • Replace outdated ‘313’ train units currently used on the Seaford – Brighton line.

Journey times

• All train services should be punctual and reliable. A reduction in journey time can be achieved in a number of ways:

o Providing an additional hourly service calling at main stations only. o Improving signalling works on the line and removing obstructions which contribute towards delays. o Removing splitting/joining of trains at Haywards Heath, and provide separate half hourly services to the east and west Coastway should be provided to deliver a 75 minute journey time. o Increasing line speed capabilities through other mechanisms. o Identify more innovative approaches to reducing journey times, such as through identifying alternative routes.

Branding

• Minimise costs for rebranding existing services/stations, as a significant amount of money has been spent by the existing operating company (Southern) on cleaning/painting/branding stations and train units. This will ensure all available funding is attributed to improving the service and the station environment for passengers.

Meeting future growth

• Plans should be considered to cater for capacity pressures, during and beyond the Thameslink programme’s completion, particularly on the Uckfield line and . • Plans should be considered to provide capacity to accommodate the demand generated by future development and economic growth coming forward over the next 15 – 20 years through the Local Development Frameworks/Local Plans on routes away from the central London core e.g. Hastings, Bexhill, Uckfield, Polegate. This can be achieved through the upcoming review by Network Rail of their Route Utilisation Strategies (Long term planning process) which will require a more robust evidence base.

Later evening / early morning, and Sunday services

• Enhance Sunday services for tourism and leisure, including to the South Downs National Park, on all lines.

Managing franchise disruption

• There is a need to plan for improvements to unscheduled disruption and to make improvements to ensure reliability. • There is a need to identify a clear approach to managing the Thameslink programme, e.g. impact on the Uckfield line (effects on services to London Bridge). • There is a need to identify a suitable approach to combining Thameslink / South Central / Southeastern franchise services. • Appropriate liaison with stakeholders and communities will be paramount during disruptive times, with clear and available information on replacement services etc provided.

Q8 How might better use be made of the capacity currently available?

There is going to be excess demand for the available supply of train paths for Thameslink services operating via London Bridge before entering / leaving the central core via Blackfriars and City Thameslink to Farringdon. KCC accepts that the most logical route for Thameslink services via Swanley, whether emanating from Maidstone, Medway or Sevenoaks, would be via the Catford Loop and Loughborough Junction so that they approach the central core via Elephant & Castle station rather than via , especially while major construction works take place.

ESCC has made the following observations:

• The franchisee should be aware of, support in terms of provision of information/data, progress where possible, and be involved in discussions with the local transport authority, on our key rail infrastructure aspirations. These are:

o Rail capacity improvements, including raising the line speed and dual tracking of parts of, the Ashford-Hastings railway line. o Electrification of the Marshlink line and Lewes to line. o Redoubling the track and improving signalling on the Uckfield to . o Reinstatement of the Lewes-Uckfield railway line and the Eridge- Tunbridge Wells line (the latter for a commercial passenger service). o Reinstatement of the Willingdon Chord north of Eastbourne. o Proposed new station at Glyne Gap. o Proposed new station in the Polegate / Stone Cross locality. o Longer platforms where required to enable longer trains to operate without the need for SDO.

Consideration should be given to deploying additional diesel rolling stock onto the Uckfield line and East Coastway (Hastings-Ashford) line.

Line speed improvements may enable a more frequent service to operate. However, this suggestion would need assessing in greater detail to identify whether or not this is a feasible solution.

Q9 What steps might bidders be expected to take to meet passenger demand and what might be the most appropriate mechanisms for managing demand?

SELEP would expect bidders for the Combined franchise to employ demand forecasting models used elsewhere in the rail industry, and to specify their intended level of service to meet future growth.

One of the most effective mechanisms for managing growth in demand would be the use of shoulder-peak pricing. This would require the delivery of a new fares structure, which divided the operating day on Monday to Friday into three periods: high-peak, shoulder-peak, and off-peak. Such a fares policy should encourage a shift in travel patterns from high-peak (arriving in London City stations before 1000) to shoulder-peak (arriving in London between 1000 and 1100) for those commuters who can vary their start and finish times at work.

It should also encourage a shift in off-peak leisure and shopping travel from the current earliest off-peak journeys (arriving in London just after 1000) to a new later off-peak arrival of after 1100. In other words, passengers would pay not according to their income but according to their chosen time of travel, and the new fares structure would redistribute travel so that the demand for peak travel was more accurately matched by the supply of peak train capacity.

ESCC has made the following observations:

The bidders should consider how capacity constraints on the network arising from a lack of diesel rolling stock can be addressed. This could be through securing additional diesel units to increase carriage length, or supporting/progressing proposals for infill electrification of the Uckfield-Hurst Green and/or the Ashford-Hastings routes.

If one of these routes becomes fully electrified, the diesel rolling stock arising could be redeployed on the non-electrified route, thus one electrification project would address capacity issues on both lines. In the longer term we would want to see the electrification of the other route so that all of the East Sussex rail routes are electrified.

Medway Council has made the following observations:

Medway will be suggesting that if a shoulder peak is considered this should finish at 10.00am with the peak time to stay at 9.30am. The Council would also support a requirement for SMART ticketing in the franchise specification.

Q10 What destinations on the current Southeastern network do respondents think should be served by the Combined franchise’s services and what is the rationale for such proposals?

Maidstone East is the most important destination for Thameslink in Kent, but operationally it may be deemed appropriate to transfer the whole of the Maidstone East line service to the new Thameslink franchise from December 2018.

The rationale for this proposal would be that all the services from Swanley via Otford, either to Maidstone East and Ashford, or to Sevenoaks via Bat & Ball, would be operated by the same franchisee. Such a transfer of services would assist operational viability and would offer a combined regular service all day to the City stations on the Thameslink core.

However, the retention of part of this service to Victoria would still be essential, as this is still the preferred London terminal for the majority of the Maidstone East line’s passengers. There is no reason why a part of the Maidstone East line service, operated by the Thameslink franchise, could not operate to and from Victoria via Bromley South, using the same paths as those which would be allocated to the new South Eastern franchise.

ESCC has made the following observations:

As at present, St Leonard’s Warrior Square and Hastings should be served by combined franchise services. This will continue to provide the linkages to the south coast between Brighton, Eastbourne, Bexhill, Hastings and Ashford. The link to Hastings will also provide connections to the Hastings-London (via Tunbridge Wells) line service which falls within the South Eastern franchise. However, we would like to take this opportunity to highlight our wish for the continuation of a direct service from Hastings to Cannon Street. We objected to the proposed cutting of this service as part of the Thameslink project, as initially highlighted in the Kent RUS, for the following reasons:

• Prospective employers will be reluctant to locate businesses in the Hastings/Bexhill area. • East Sussex residents who currently commute to London may choose to relocate away from rural locations in East Sussex (such as , Etchingham and Stonegate) to locations which will have a better service into London. • Journey times would be less frequent, and passengers may be unable to find a seat, or, at worst, be able to get on a train at all thereby, adversely affecting rail passengers travelling between East Sussex and London via Tunbridge Wells. The scale of development proposed at / around stations along this route will increase demand for services, and further exacerbate existing capacity problems on this line (see Appendix 2 for further details). • Commuters may choose to ‘rail head’ by driving to stations further away from where they live, thereby increasing the number of car journeys on our roads, increasing road congestion and carbon emissions.

All these issues would have a negative impact on our economy, as well as affect the viability of our communities and the wider social infrastructure.

Medway Council will be indicating that the London stations of Victoria and Cannon Street are major commuter destinations.

Q11 How might better use be made of the capacity available on the Brighton Main Line?

SELEP strongly supports the aspiration of KCC, set out in their Rail Action Plan, for a through Kent – Gatwick rail service. This service would require at least one train path each hour in each direction between Redhill and Gatwick, and provision should be made for this service within the planned timetable changes for the Brighton Main Line (BML) in the new Combined franchise service specification.

The additional capacity now approved for Network Rail’s Control Period 5 (CP5) at Redhill station through the delivery of an additional platform on the west side of that station will facilitate the reversing movement required for this service, as well as enabling a doubling of the Reading- Gatwick service which makes a similar movement. Also, Gatwick Airport station now has an additional platform 7, which should also provide the additional capacity required for an hourly service from Kent.

(See response to Q16 below re Ashford-Gatwick service proposal)

ESCC has made the following observations:

The allocation of 4 BML train paths an hour in each direction impacts on potential improvements to Coastway-Victoria services. Consideration, therefore, should be given to how these paths should be allocated to the greatest benefit to passengers. Services from coastal destinations to Gatwick Airport should be improved. Further detail is provided on page 3 of Appendix 1 of this consultation response. Medway council has made the following observations:

Medway supports the redevelopment of Redhill so that Medway / Gatwick links can be established via Tonbridge. These links would need to cross the Brighton Mainline at a different level. Redevelopment of Redhill is already identified in the area RUS document.

Q12 What steps should bidders be expected to take to improve performance on this route?

The new Combined franchisee should work in close partnership with Network Rail to ensure the most efficient utilisation of train paths by all train operators using the BML. Priority would need to be given to the dedicated Victoria-, which would form the principal rail link to the airport, but all other operators should be treated equitably in respect of their access rights to the BML.

The inclusion of the proposed Ashford - Gatwick service should not be regarded as an inconvenient addition to the main BML service, but rather as an integral part of the Gatwick Airport Surface Access Strategy which fully supports its inclusion in the Combined franchise specification.

ESCC has made the following observations:

The bidders should ensure units are adequately maintained and repaired to maximise performance.

There should be incentives for the appointed operator to maximise performance, e.g. financial penalties incurred for not meeting targets such as journey times etc. Operators must not add unnecessary time to journeys to ensure they do not incur penalties; there should be appropriate measures in place to prohibit this from taking place.

Medway Council has made the following observations:

Medway Council will be suggesting as discussed at the DfT meeting at Passenger Focus offices on 25/7/12 that lateness times should be reduced from 5 mins to 3 mins with further consideration to real time at some point in the future.

Q13 What destinations on the do respondents consider would be appropriate to become destinations for trains which serve the core Thameslink route?

The introduction of Great Northern destinations to Thameslink services from south of the Thames will be a great addition to the range of single journey or one change travel options once the full Thameslink service is delivered in December 2018. For Thameslink services from Kent, SELEP would support the indicative allocation for the Maidstone East service to operate north of St Pancras (low level) via the refurbished tunnels to the (ECML), and then north to Welwyn Garden City.

This is a significant town in the centre of Hertfordshire, a similar distance from Central London as Maidstone, and could generate sufficient passenger journeys to support a regular stopping service to and from Maidstone East all day.

The other stations on the Great Northern route which are proposed as termini for the Thameslink service are Peterborough and Cambridge, but these would most logically be served by the proposed semi-fast Thameslink services from Three Bridges and Horsham respectively.

The important point here is that passengers from Kent would be able to make one simple change at Blackfriars on to the following service of their choice, without the need either to transfer to the Underground or to change platforms. SELEP therefore supports the proposed pattern of Thameslink operation, as it would deliver a far better connected railway network for Kent’s residents and visitors alike.

Medway Council will mention the Bedford / Rochester link in their response.

Q14 Do respondents believe Great Northern trains which do not serve the Thameslink core route should remain as part of this franchise or be transferred to the new Inter City East Coast franchise?

The Great Northern trains which would remain outside the Thameslink core route are those which currently operate from Peterborough, Stevenage and Hertford, and also from Kings Lynn and Cambridge, and which would continue to serve either Kings Cross or Moorgate.

While the decision as to whether or not these services were transferred to the new Inter City East Coast franchise would not have any bearing on the Thameslink services to and from Kent, the most logical decision would be to retain these services as part of the Thameslink network. The rationale is that these services are quite separate from the Inter City services on the ECML, and would be better placed as part of the wider Combined Thameslink franchise.

Q15 What improvements would respondents like to see made to Great Northern services as part of the Combined franchise and what is the rationale for this?

The provision of a regular interval service on each branch of the existing Great Northern network, with good interworking between trains destined for the Thameslink core and those destined for Kings Cross or Moorgate. Q16 What services would be appropriate to serve the Airport market?

Ashford via Tonbridge and Edenbridge to Gatwick Airport

“Through Gatwick – Tonbridge – Ashford hourly all day service in partnership with Gatwick Airport Ltd and operator of new franchise for Southern operating area could commence in 2015 – not part of IKF but would affect route between Tonbridge and Ashford; KCC will continue to work with Gatwick Airport Ltd, Network Rail and existing franchisee to deliver this objective;”

Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, paragraph 5.4 (xi)

SELEP strongly supports the delivery of a through rail service between Kent and Gatwick Airport. The Partnership believes that this is an essential requirement of the new Kent rail map from 2015 onwards. It should be included as a service requirement in the new Combined franchise specification; it is also included in our response for the South Eastern franchise consultation as the service could be operated by either franchisee.

This is one of the 5 most important key recommendations in KCC’s Rail Acton Plan, as that Council regards a direct rail link to Gatwick as an essential prerequisite to stimulate their economy by improving airport access for employment and leisure.

At least initially SELEP would want to have an hourly frequency at the same minutes past each hour all week. The service would serve Ashford International (for connections with all East Kent stations and with the potential for links to Manston Airport via a future Thanet Parkway station, and also with international services to the continent); Tonbridge (for connections with all West Kent stations); Edenbridge; Redhill (utilising the new platform to be constructed on the west side of this station as part of Network Rail’s High Level Output Specification (HLOS) for Control Period 5 (CP 5) where the trains would reverse); and Gatwick Airport (which will have gained an additional platform 7 to alleviate capacity constraints).

From 2015 onwards Class 377 rolling stock, in the form of 4-car electrical multiple units (EMUs), will start to be released from service on the existing Thameslink franchise as new Siemens built Thameslink stock is brought into service. Three of these sets would be required to provide the initial service, operating an hourly frequency with a round running time of about 150 minutes and with about 30 minutes combined layover at both termini.

SELEP cannot emphasise too strongly the critical importance of this rail link, which has the full support of Gatwick Airport Ltd’s Airport Surface Access Strategy (ASAS), their consultants ARUP, the Gatwick Diamond Business Association, British Airways, and GATCOM. To connect both the key stations of Ashford in the east of the county and Tonbridge in the west of the county with Gatwick would transform Kent’s accessibility to and from London’s second airport, which has itself identified its capacity to grow its market share of the south-east’s air passenger traffic within the airport’s existing terminal and runway capacity. SELEP is determined not to lose this once in a generation opportunity. Ashford - Gatwick Airport in 2015?

Medway Council has made the following observations:

Medway Council supports KCC’s aspirations, but will also be making a case for Medway to be considered as a terminus point for a Gatwick / Medway train service. There is also a need to consider what additional services can be provided for Medway.

The Council is aware that the Government will be consulting in detail on the future aviation policy. It is essential that the changes to any rail franchises have flexibility to accommodate any changes to aviation policy. Medway Council also recommends a comment on use of 4 car units joined together for use in 8 or 12 car formation with a driving cab at both ends to assist in case of train failure. From other experience SET formations were tried and failed in the 1980’s with class 421 CIGs / 4VEPs used on the Brighton mainline and South West. If a door or unit failed it would then mean you only loose the 4 car unit. This issue was discussed / raised with DfT at the Passenger Focus meeting on 25/7/12.

ESCC has made the following observations:

Gatwick Airport / Gatwick Express

o The existing Gatwick Express service is expensive, and as a result passengers are displaced onto Coastway services resulting in overcrowding. o The allocation of 4 Brighton Main Line (BML) paths an hour in each direction impacts on potential improvements to Coastway-Victoria services. Consideration should be given to how these paths should be allocated, to the greatest benefit to passengers. o Service access to Gatwick airport should be improved including services to coastal destinations. o The Gatwick Express is appropriate to serve the airport market, however, this is expensive in comparison to parallel FCC and Southern services and is comparable in journey length. As a result passengers are displaced onto Coastway services resulting in overcrowding on these services. o Services to Gatwick from coastal destinations need improving, and consideration should be given to how the BML paths can best be allocated to provide the greatest benefit for passengers, not only for those travelling from and north of Brighton, but also for from the coastal towns.

Q17 What improvements could be made without adversely affecting the service provision on the remainder of the franchise?

Please see responses to Q4 above.

Q18 What services that run via Elephant & Castle do respondents think should run via the Thameslink core route?

SELEP believes that all the Thameslink services from Kent which will operate via Elephant & Castle should run north of Blackfriars via the core route. The trains which serve the Wimbledon Loop and also operate via Elephant & Castle should terminate in the bay platforms on the west side of the newly re-built Blackfriars station, as this would avoid conflicting movements on the four-track approach to Blackfriars between these services and the through trains from Kent. These though trains would continue via the core route to St Pancras (low level) and beyond, and this arrangement would also make the core service of 24tph more operationally robust, assisting reliability of the Thameslink network.

Medway Council has made the following observations:

Bedford / Rochester train service to be retained and become part of the core Thameslink north / south service. The intention to relocate Rochester station to Corporation Street area should also be noted. This will retain an additional platform to maintain existing storage of trains.

Q19 Recognising that not all of these services can run via the Thameslink core route, what would be the most satisfactory way of managing the interchange at Blackfriars?

Clear signage and electronic destination displays would be essential, assisted by a significant staff presence on the platforms. There would also need to be access for all, with lifts for transfers between the bay platforms and the down through platform. The new Blackfriars station meets all these requirements and interchange between services here should be accessible and easy to understand.

Q20 What improvements would respondents like to see made to Coastway East and West services, the rationale for such proposals and the economic benefit expected to be delivered from these changes?

Please see response to Q4 above in respect of the Ashford – Hastings section of the Coastway East service, and response to Q7 in respect of aspirations of ESCC for other sections of Coastway routes.

Q21 What improvements would respondents like to see made to other Southern services as part of the Combined franchise from 2015, what is the rationale for such proposals and the economic benefit expected to be delivered from these changes?

Please see response to Q4 above in respect of the Tonbridge – Redhill service in the current Southern franchise, and response to Q7 in respect of aspirations of ESCC for other routes in the present Southern network.

Medway Council supports a Medway – Gatwick link.

Q22 What are respondents’ views on the practice of splitting trains at stations such as Haywards Heath?

While this practice has no bearing on the Combined franchise’s services operating in Kent, the county does have experience of the splitting and joining of trains at Ashford and Faversham. Once passengers are used to the concept, it has the benefit of delivering a more frequent service on each of the branches served, as it utilises the available paths between Ashford or Faversham and London more effectively than would be the case if each train had to operate without splitting or joining.

Provided that clear and concise announcements and information were available for passengers, it is a practice that SELEP would continue to support, both in Kent and elsewhere on the network.

ESCC has made the following observations:

The County Council would support any proposals to remove the practice of splitting and joining trains at Haywards Heath which would reduce journey times for passengers. We would not wish for there to be any reduction in existing services to the East Coastway should this proposal be taken forward.

Separate half hourly services to the east and west Coastway should be provided to deliver a 75 minute journey time.

Q23 Do respondents feel that the Newhaven Marine branch line and station should be kept open and maintained or should the rail industry deploy the relevant funding elsewhere on the rail network?

If the use of Newhaven Marine branch line and station is as nominal as was the Harbour branch and station before the VSOE services were withdrawn, SELEP would agree with any proposal to close the branch and station and have Network Rail use the funding elsewhere on the network.

ESCC has made the following observations:

There are currently three railway stations in Newhaven: Newhaven Town, Newhaven Harbour, and Newhaven Marine stations, albeit passenger services only serve the Town and Harbour stations. It is not considered that there is a need for another passenger station in Newhaven, however, Newhaven Marine has potential rail freight benefits in respect of its location next to Newhaven port, and therefore this should be looked at in greater detail prior to consideration of full closure of this station.

Q24 How would you like to see performance information published?

SELEP would expect performance information to be provided separately for each sector of the new franchise operation, i.e. Thameslink core route services, ex-Great Northern to London services, Gatwick Express service, ex-Southern to London services, Coastway services, CRP services and Metro services.

The information should show train service punctuality and train service reliability separately for each of these sectors, and measure performance in each category against agreed targets for the period reported.

ESCC agrees that information should be easy to understand and easily accessible.

Medway Council will be requesting existing arrangements continue 4 weekly x 13 but include mainline stations.

Q25 How frequent should its publication be?

The quarterly reporting of performance information is appropriate and meets the needs of stakeholders. It is also a reasonable reflection of varying performance according to seasons.

ESCC agrees that information should be made available on a monthly or quarterly basis.

Q26 What level of disaggregation of performance do you believe is reasonable?

Please see response to question 24 above.

Medway Council will mention better communication with Network Rail and the along with the Local Authority. This is covered in the Rail Devolution consultation.

Q27 What are the priorities that respondents consider should be taken into account to improve the passenger experience of using these services?

Passenger feedback has consistently raised the need for improvement to customer information and customer service at stations. These issues must be priorities for the new franchisee, offering a better customer experience of train departure information and delays, and also offering reassurance through the presence of uniformed station staff.

The new franchisee must also focus on the equally important issues of reliability, frequency, cleanliness of trains and stations, value for money off-peak fares and security. Passengers should feel safe and informed, and all these priorities should contribute positively to the overall customer experience of travel by train. Improved communication is especially required in periods of disruption, such as those caused by bad weather.

ESCC has made the following observations:

o A priority is passengers being able to get a seat. This is a significant issue on the Uckfield line and the East Coastway line where overcrowding is a regular occurrence. Service reliability is also an issue, as well as the insufficient provision of information when trains are delayed. o Toilets on trains should be provided (these are not featured on the Seaford line) and air conditioning wherever possible. o At stations cycle parking facilities should be provided, and the presence of staff which gives passengers a sense of safety and security, especially at night or after sundown. o Tickets options should be clear, and staff should have good understanding, and be able to advise on, the best value ticket for passengers journeys.

Q28 What do stakeholders see as the most important factors in improving security (actual or perceived) and addressing any gap between the two?

The presence of CCTV cameras that work is one of the most effective deterrents to crime. Equally important is the presence of staff on board trains, both to check tickets and to reassure passengers with a uniformed presence. The new franchise operator would be expected to enhance the provision of CCTV on all trains operating on the Combined franchise, and to increase the level of on-board ticket checking and revenue protection officers to combat fraudulent travel.

ESCC has made the following observations:

Perception of an acceptable level of security and safety is most commonly achieved by the presence of railway staff at stations. However, CCTV at stations, including covering cycle storage, also contributes to improving security.

It is recognised that the rail industry are seeking to save costs by reducing staff presence at stations. Due consideration should be given to assessing whether this is the most appropriate course of action to take, as passengers perceived sense of safety and security is an important issue that should not be detrimentally affected.

Medway Council supports these objectives, which are also supported by recent results from Passenger Focus surveys indicating passengers’ views.

Q29 What is important to stakeholders in the future use and improvements in stations?

“The County Council would also expect to see ongoing improvements to the station environment (cleanliness, comfort, security, information, customer service etc) and to integration with other modes of transport (i.e. the whole journey experience);”

Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, paragraph 5.4 (xiii)

SELEP supports the expectations of the whole station environment which KCC has set out in their Rail Action Plan. The important point here is that the station environment should contribute positively to the whole journey experience. Stations should be clean, comfortable and secure, with good public transport and other local information and with timetables available for local connecting bus services.

ESCC has made the following observations:

• Improved accessibility to the station – by walking, cycling, bus and car. • Continued support by the franchisee for station adoption and station partnerships. • Supporting (including financially) community rail partnerships who undertake an important role in raising local awareness, increasing local passenger use of, and improvements to, stations. • Greater liaison with stakeholders in relation to Station Travel Plans (STP) – including updated on actions, and partnership working to prevent duplication of efforts in respect of schemes in and around stations. • Introduce STPs at other key stations in East Sussex, including at Bexhill, Uckfield, Newhaven Town, Crowborough, Seaford, Rye and Eridge. • Make funding available to deliver station improvements, including:

o Improved accessibility to the station – by walking, cycling, bus and car. o Cycle and moped parking facilities. o Waiting area improvements, including seating, toilets etc. o Sufficient and appropriate charges for car parking spaces are available to passengers to use station car parks, particularly in more rural locations. Also, to reduce the impact of on-street parking in residential areas in the vicinity of stations.

Medway Council also notes that improving staffing on the would lead to better revenue and compliance. Q30 What priorities would respondents give to car parking and cycling facilities at locations where these are fully used?

“ there is also a pressing need for increased parking capacity at many stations, coupled with on-street parking controls by local authorities on roads in immediate vicinity of stations;”

Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, paragraph 5.4 (xiii)

SELEP supports KCC’s call for increased parking capacity at stations where demand already exceeds supply, but there is often no more railway land available for additional parking at these locations. At stations where existing capacity for car parking and cycling facilities are fully utilised, SELEP would expect the franchise operator to promote access by bus and on foot, and also by better provision for ‘kiss and ride’.

SELEP also expects special consideration to be given to car parking arrangements at rural stations. There are several locations in Kent, of which Charing and Pluckley are but two examples, where charges are so high that the car parks are under used and the surrounding roads in the villages are full of parked cars all day. At these stations the new franchisee should reduce changes to a minimum level, reflecting the rural nature of the location and the need to bring rail passengers’ cars off the surrounding roads and into the mainly empty station car parks.

The new franchise operator should be encouraged to carry cycles on trains. This is an increasingly popular mode of travel and must be preferential in many ways to car parking at the station. However, on most trains the spaces in which cycles can be stored is very limited and often in the way of other passengers. On some trains with disabled toilets there is good space available for cycles, but otherwise they are often left by the doors and interfere with access and egress by other passengers.

While space on board trains is at a premium, ideally trains should have greater capacity to carry cycles, provided that other passengers were not inconvenienced. There is also a need for increased cycle storage capacity at stations by more intelligent storage options, such as double deck cycle racks.

ESCC has made the following observations:

Parking at Stations

• In some locations insufficient parking provision causes problems elsewhere, e.g. nearby residential streets and grass verges, and also results in inappropriate parking creating accessibility problems for other road users. • Rising car parking prices at stations has exacerbated on-street parking conditions in areas surrounding stations, with commuters trying to avoid costly car parking fees. • The whole cost price of using the rail network needs to be taken into account in assessing potential improvements and changes to services, including rail fares and car parking cost/bus travel costs. • The level of secure cycle parking should be increased where spaces are currently full. Consideration should be given to cycle hire at main stations e.g. Eastbourne.

Cycles on trains

• All off-peak services should allow for cycles to be carried on trains. For example, for those wishing to access the South Downs National Park. • Cycle parking improvements have been made at a number of East Sussex stations over the last few years. However, there is still an opportunity to further improve these parking facilities, which would need to be covered and monitored by CCTV. We would wish to see the 24 hour staff monitoring of CCTV at rail stations to be retained - as currently undertaken by Southern.

Medway Council has made the following observations:

Medway Council does not wish to increase parking at some stations due to the impact on congestion and regeneration sites. The Council would rather support more links to the bus network / Park and Ride facilities.

Q31 What sort of ticketing products and services would you expect to see delivered through ‘smart’ technology on this franchise?

“KCC intends to lobby Government to ensure that a requirement to introduce Smartcard ticketing is included in the new [franchises]. This would provide the potential for integrated bus/rail ticketing;”

Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, paragraph 5.4 (xii)

KCC’s Rail Action Plan sets out that Council’s expectations for Smartcard ticketing in both the new franchises. There should be a requirement for the new operator to develop the use of Smartcard ticketing for its own rail services, and also to ensure that Smartcard technology is used to develop inter-modal Smartcard ticketing for joint bus and rail travel within the Combined franchise area, and eventually for rail travel between franchise operators.

ESCC has made the following observations:

The following list comprises rail ticket characteristics we would wish to see integrated in requirements for bidders as part of the new combined franchise:

• Clear ticket options so passengers are fully aware of what choices are available to them, and what ticket is best value for money. • Introduce and promote Smartcard and other integrated ticketing opportunities. • Continuation and extension of ‘The Key’ system currently operating in East Sussex. • Ensure future value for money by:

o Supporting young people and access to education e.g. extend UniZone – discounted travel for students to school/college/university sites which currently operates between -Brighton-Lancing – along the East Coastway to Eastbourne, Bexhill and Hastings. o Supporting season ticket discounts for employers to encourage sustainable access to employment. o Continuing providing incentives for people to travel by rail, including 4for2 rail travel, as well as promoting such initiatives.

• Retain Delay-Repay regime. • Giving consideration for a multi-journey carnet ticket – or electronic equivalent – to keep down costs for passengers.

Q32 What local accessibility and mobility issues do stakeholders see and how they might be addressed?

SELEP would expect the new Combined franchise operator to work closely with Network Rail to ensure the delivery of a more accessible railway network on the routes it operates in Kent. This would involve continued improvement to, and greater public awareness of, the accessibility of Thameslink trains to people whose mobility is impaired.

A programme of continued improvement of on-board facilities needs to be matched by further delivery of the ‘Access for All’ programme by Network Rail, which has already seen the installation of some fully accessible station bridges in Kent, and which should be extended to other Kent stations on the Thameslink network as funding in Network Rail’s CP5 permits.

ESCC has made the following observations:

All stations should be accessible for people with mobility issues. Operators should have appropriate processes in place for stations which are not accessible by people with mobility issues. For example, Glynde station in East Sussex is not accessible for people with mobility issues, and Southern operate a service whereby the passenger is taken to the nearest accessible station (Lewes), and a taxi is provided to take them to the inaccessible station (Glynde).

Appropriate changes should be made to accommodate and improve accessibility for people with mobility issues at stations. This includes the provision of lifts, railings, surface materials changes, ramps etc. At stations where there is a gap between the train and the platform, staff should be available to assist passengers with mobility issues by providing a ramp on/off the train.

Medway Council has made the following observations:

Through our partnership working, a comment was received from the deaf community to have more visual maps on trains and displays (similar to the Underground) so when trains stop at stations deaf people have a better awareness of the station at which they have arrived.

Q33 What environmental targets would stakeholders like to see within the franchise specification?

“KCC also intends to seek assurances from the DfT and the rail industry that all available options to acquire modern rolling stock, both electric and diesel, are explored, so as to provide the new franchises serving the county with sufficient resources which will enable [them] to deliver the enhanced rail service for Kent set out in this Action Plan.”

Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, paragraph 5.4 (xv)

SELEP would expect to see a target for the reduction of energy consumption at stations and other railway buildings. KCC’s Rail Action Plan sets out that Council’s aspirations for the delivery of new rolling stock, or of newly acquired stock (e.g. class 377 from Thameslink), which should reduce the amount of electricity consumed per train mile, and so contribute to a reduction in energy used by the new franchisee.

SELEP would also welcome the electrification of the lines between Oxted and Uckfield and between Ashford and Ore, as this would remove the need for the use of a separate diesel fleet for these lines and enable them to be served by electric trains with consequent reduced CO2 emissions. While these schemes are not included in the current London and South-East RUS, they should be kept live as future options when and if funding permits their delivery. ESCC has made the following observations:

To work in partnership with stakeholders towards securing improvements on railway lines, including electrification of the Uckfield-Hurst Green line and the line between Ashford-Hastings. This will reduce carbon emissions. Also, we would want to see the use of units with regenerative braking to be introduced on these routes.

Reduce, reuse and recycle wherever possible, and to introduce new ways of working as well as giving consideration to use of appropriate materials which will enable this to take place.

Identify ways to reduce waste going to landfill in every aspect of the franchise– from office staff to services.

APPENDIX: Tables of Proposed Rail Service Specification

(Source: Rail Action Plan for Kent, Appendix 2)