Minutes of a meeting of the Scrutiny Review Panel on Line Speed Improvements. held at County Hall, Glenfield and the Harborough District Council Offices, Market Harborough, on Friday 18 March 2016.

PRESENT

Mr. D. Jennings CC (in the Chair)

Mr. Max Hunt CC Mr. W. Liquorish JP CC Mr. J. Kaufman CC Mrs. C. M. Radford CC

7. Minutes of the previous meeting.

The minutes of the meeting held on Monday 7 March 2016 were taken as read, confirmed and signed.

8. Declarations of interest in respect of items on the agenda.

Members were invited to declare any interests in respect of items on the agenda.

Mr. W. Liquorish CC declared a personal interest in all substantive items as a member of Harborough District Council.

Mr. J. Kaufman CC and Mrs. C. Radford CC each declared a personal interest in all substantive items as members of the and Rail Action Committee.

9. Opening comments from the Leader of Harborough District Council.

The Leader of Harborough District Council, Mr. B. Pain CC, opened the Panel meeting by expressing his gratitude to the County Council for arranging the Scrutiny Review Panel. In his opening remarks Mr Pain made the following points:-

(i). The announcement by the Chancellor that £1 million would be available to improve the car park at Market Harborough Station was welcomed. At present there were a number of issues raised by residents regarding residential streets being used by commuters for parking and this situation was known to be getting worse. It was queried whether, as part of the proposals, East Trains could install a sign indicating when a car park was full;

(ii). Although there would be some disruption to the highways whilst the work was undertaken, the end result would bring significant benefits to the local area, as well as providing greater economic benefits from the increased speed of the Midland Mainline;

(iii). Mr Pain encouraged the Panel to investigate the £9 million shortfall in funding for the proposals and to look into where this money could be sourced from;

2

(iv). Mr Pain was looking forward to seeing what was being proposed for the station including the lengthening of the platform and the creation of more accessible facilities.

RESOLVED:

That the comments of the Leader of Harborough District Council be noted.

10. Presentation by Kevin Newman from Network Rail.

The Panel received a presentation from Network Rail outlining the context to the proposals as well as the proposals themselves. A copy of the presentation is filed with these minutes.

In delivering the presentation, officers from Network Rail and Trains made the following points:-

The Line Speed Improvements and Electrification

(i). The proposals for the line speed improvement at Market Harborough formed a part of the wider works across the Midland Mainline to improve line speeds which would contribute to faster trains between Sheffield and London St. Pancras. The proposals at present were only provisional and the full details had not yet been finalised;

(ii). Improving the line speed would contribute to economic growth across the country, increase line capacity and allow for additional freight services. The changes made to the line through Market Harborough were the driving force behind providing improved facilities at the station;

(iii). The current speed for trains going through Market Harborough was approximately 60mph in some areas, which was one of the lowest line speeds in the UK. The proposed works would allow trains to travel at 90mph through the area;

(iv). The first stage of the Midland Mainline improvements, including the work at Market Harborough, was intended to be completed by December 2019. The second stage which would include electrification of the line to would be completed by December 2023;

(v). Network Rail would be significantly investing in electrification in order to modernise its infrastructure. It was hoped that East Midlands Trains would in the future have a completely electric fleet. This would contribute to faster speeds on the line due to electric trains being able to accelerate much quicker than diesel engines;

(vi). There would be a brand new line built across Harborough in addition to the line straightening at the station to improve line speeds. It was anticipated that as it was a new line, disruption to passengers would be minimal as the only track work would take place when the new line was being connected. However there would be some disruption to highways and rights of way as the electrification work would involve the complete rebuilding of some bridges;

(vii). There were no plans for any of the remaining line following completion of the works. As the line through Harborough was in a valley, it would not be appropriate

3

to use the old line as a freight loop owing to the difficulty for a freight train to stop and start on a hill;

The Station and wider area

(viii). The station building would remain unchanged other than potential internal improvements. The Panel was advised that there was high community spirit around the station building which officers would be taking into account should they decide to make any internal improvements.

(ix). There would be a number of new facilities introduced across the station, including a shelter and ticket machines on the other side of the platform.

(x). The £1 million announced for improving the car park would allow Network Rail to increase car parking capacity to around 500 spaces. East Midlands Trains would also consider the suggestion by Mr Pain to have the facilities in place to communicate when the car park was full. Members were advised that the car park would have to be split between both sides of the railway line thus requiring two separate entrances;

(xi). Any changes to the station facilities would involve making the station much more accessible to those with disabilities. It was not felt that maintaining footpaths over the railway was feasible as the line speed would become faster;

(xii). East Midlands Trains provided a breakdown of those who used the station and how passengers commuted to the station, noting particularly that it was originally thought most passengers would be going to London but further analysis suggested it was a 50/50 split between those travelling to the north and the south;

(xiii). Members expressed concern over the lack data around those who cycled to the station, and requested that Network Rail ensure that cycle facilities were included in the proposals for the station;

(xiv). There would be some interference with rights of ways as a result of the proposals. Network Rail would be working with local authorities as quickly as possible to ensure that any disruption or closures were minimised;

The Budget

(xv). At present there was a £9.3 million gap in funding, which if not filled, meant that continuation of the project would be difficult. Members were advised that if the funding gap was not filled, it would still be possible to make the changes to the station platform and the car park, but these would not be the long-term changes needed for the line;

(xvi). Members suggested that Network Rail look into any European Union funding which was available for projects such as this;

(xvii). Network Rail would be holding a number of meetings in the next few months with other relevant organisations to find a way to fill the funding gap.

RESOLVED:

4

That the contents of the presentation including the provisional proposals be noted.

(At this point, the meeting was adjourned to enable members to attend a site visit at Market Harborough Station. The meeting reconvened at 1.30pm at Harborough District Council offices.)

11. Representations from Christopher Groome of Leicestershire and Northamptonshire Rail Action Committee.

The Panel considered evidence presented by Chris Groome of Leicestershire and Northamptonshire Rail Action Committee (LANRAC). A copy of Mr. Groome’s written comments were tabled for members and are filed with these minutes, marked “Agenda Item 6”.

Mr. Groom read out his written comments to the Panel.

Arising from a discussion of the comments made, the following points were noted:

 A view was expressed that improvements to the line would be more beneficial than electrification. Better signalling was also requested;

 It would be a matter for the Panel whether, in light of evidence heard, it would lobby Network Rail for additional features as part of the works, such as freight loops and sidings;

 The works would increase capacity and improve train times.

RESOLVED:

(a) That the comments of LANRAC be noted;

(b) That Mr. Groome be thanked for his attendance at the Panel’s meeting.

12. Representations from Steve Jones of the Harborough Rail Users Group.

The Panel considered evidence presented by Steve Jones of the Harborough Rail Users Group (HRUG). A copy of Mr. Jones written comments are filed with these minutes, marked “Agenda Item 7”.

In his comments, Mr. Jones outlined the following points:

 Market Harborough was regarded as one of the best areas in the country in which to live and work. The area’s Station was considered to be a big factor in this, but it was not considered currently to be fit for purpose;

 Access at the Station for disabled people was notably poor and there was a lack of shelter for waiting passengers to use in inclement weather;

 Car parking capacity was currently poor;

 The planned Station improvements were considered to be a big opportunity to make the Station fit for the future, though it was recognised that there was

5

currently a £9 million funding gap and that, if not filled, this could curtail the standard of the works;

 It was felt that Leicestershire County Council had a role to play outside of the funding process to ensure that consents and permissions for the works were granted swiftly to ensure the project ran to time;

Arising from Mr. Jones’ presentation, the following points were noted:

 As part of Network Rail’s consultation process, local residents had placed significant importance on the retention of the current Station building which was noted as being a very attractive listed building;

 There was currently no access at . It was felt that this would represent a “nice to have” feature of the works;

 There was currently limited cycling access at the Station. It was felt that more could be done as part of the project to increase cycling access and provision;

 Bus access at the Station was similarly poor, though it was known that 11% of passengers arrived at the Station by bus. A view was expressed that there was scope to improve access by creating bus laybys on Rockingham Road;

RESOLVED:

a) That the comments of HRUG be noted;

b) That Mr. Jones be thanked for his attendance at the Panel’s meeting.

13. Representations from Stephen Pointer of Harborough District Council.

The Panel considered evidence presented by Stephen Pointer, Strategic Planning Manager at Harborough District Council.

In his comments, Mr. Pointer outlined the following points:

 The Council welcomed the proposals for improvements at the Station. The line speed improvements were viewed as a consequential prerequisite for the electrification;

 The population of Market Harborough had increased by 11.5% from 2001 to 2011. A further 3,500 dwellings had been committed in the Town’s local plan;

 The quality of rail links (particularly to London) had assisted the area’s growth, though its rural nature meant that many relied on cars for transport as bus provision was poor;

 The Station was felt to currently be letting the local population down. Accordingly, the District Council (as the local planning authority) welcomed provision in the Chancellor’s budget statement for enhanced car parking and significant improvements at the station;

6

 Parking at the station was inadequate and had led to increased parking on residential streets nearby. It was felt that further parking restrictions would be needed on these roads in the light of any increased capacity at the station;

 There should be consideration given to better cycle access along Rockingham Road;

 The District Council welcomed further dialogue with Network Rail, East Midlands Trains and Leicestershire County Council to link future development to the planned works.

Arising from Mr. Pointer’s presentation, the following points were noted:

 The planning authority had always tried to maintain a good level of retail development within the Town and this had led to a thriving local economy. It was felt that moving the Station outside of the Town should not be considered;

 Consideration could be given to improving the industrial area adjacent to the Station as part of the works, which was currently a “low level” industrial site;

 There was an opportunity as part of the works to have the main bus services in the Town terminate at the Station.

RESOLVED:

(a) That the comments of Harborough District Council be noted;

(b) That Mr. Pointer be thanked for his attendance at the Panel’s meeting.

14. Representations from Andy Rose of the LLEP.

The Panel considered evidence presented by Andy Rose, Economic Growth and Development Manager at the Leicester and Leicestershire Economic Partnership (LLEP).

In his comments, Mr. Rose outlined the following points:

 Vibrant market towns, such as Market Harborough, were felt to be critical to Leicestershire’s economic performance;

 The LLEP welcomed the Chancellor’s budget announcement;

 Line speed improvements such as this project were felt to be critical to the local economy. They would improve train times beyond Market Harborough and therefore make Leicester City a more attractive proposition for businesses. Being able to “sell” Leicester City as being commutable to London “within an hour” was expected to be a big draw for businesses and a boost for tourism. As well as improved journey times, better resilience in the service and increased frequency were felt to be equally important;

 The three LEPs involved had already committed £13 million of local growth funding to the project (£3million LLEP, £5m D2N2, £5m Sheffield City Region). It

7

was considered by the body as a priority.

Arising from Mr. Rose’s presentation, the following points were noted:

 In addition to receiving the support of the LLEP, LEPs north of Leicester were also known to be supportive. The LLEP had other financial pressures which made increasing its funding contribution difficult to justify, though further discussions with the Government on the project would be needed;

 The works were expected to improve the area’s economy by in the region of £133 million for each minute of improvement made to the journey time;

 Beyond the transport benefits, it was felt that there were clearly wider benefits to ensuring the project went ahead as planned, though these would perhaps most immediately be felt in the Harborough area.

RESOLVED:

(c) That the comments of the Leicester and Leicestershire Economic Partnership be noted;

(d) That Mr. Rose be thanked for his attendance at the Panel’s meeting.

15. Comments and representations from Dr. Sarah Hill CC, local County Councillor for Market Harborough East.

The Panel considered the oral representations of Dr. Sarah Hill CC, local County Councillor for Market Harborough East.

Dr. Hill made the following points:

 Disabled access at the station was very poor;

 The Station was a good means of diverting cars off the road and adding to the vitality of the town;

 Parking at the station was of primary concern, particularly around cost, availability and the knock-on effects on street parking on local residential roads. It was hoped that the cost of parking would decrease as part of any works to increase capacity.

RESOLVED:

That Dr. Hill be thanked for her attendance at the Panel’s meeting.

16. Comments from the public.

The Panel were informed that a press release had been published prior to commencing the Review to enable members of the public to make any comments on the proposals. No comments had been received.

17. Q and A with Network Rail and East Midlands Trains to discuss the evidence arising from the day.

8

Arising from the evidence heard the Panel held a brief open forum session with the representatives of Network Rail and East Midlands Trains.

The following comments were noted:

 There was recognition around the table for the unanimous support for the project. Arising from the comments made, further consideration would be given to extending the cycling offer as part of the project. There was acknowledgement that there was a piece of work for the County Council, the district council and Network Rail to do on cycling provision at the site.

 Arising from concerns expressed around the safety of the junction at Rockingham Road, it was noted that this junction had been surveyed and been assessed as being “safe” for the additional 400 car parking spaces that would be installed nearby;

 The funding gap would be discussed further between Network Rail and LEPs with a view to hopefully addressing it;

 The relatively small improvements to journey times were only a very marginal outcome from the work. There was recognition for the wider economic benefits that the work would bring to the city and County and there was agreement amongst members that the project needed to succeed;

 The cost of reinstating the PROW A46 was in the order of £1millon and it was questioned if this was values for money due to the limited use or if the County Council would support the closure of this to help reduce the funding gap.

RESOLVED:

That the representatives of Network Rail and East Midlands Trains be thanked for their attendance at the Panel’s meeting.

18. Date of next meeting.

It was NOTED that the next meeting of the Panel would be held on Friday 22 April at 10.00am.

9.30 am - 3.20 pm CHAIRMAN 18 March 2016

Market Harborough Station

Linespeed and Station Improvements 9

Kevin Newman – Senior Commercial Scheme Sponsor – Network Rail Lisa Angus – Head of Estates & Major Projects – East Midlands Trains

18-Mar-16 / Agenda

1. Introductions 2. Midland Mainline Programme 3. The Project 10 4. Timeline 5. EMT view 6. Cost & Funding 7. Next steps

18-Mar-16 / 2. The Midland Mainline Programme 11 The context for the project

18-Mar-16 / MML Programme – Key Benefits MML Programme

Key Output 1 Key Output 2 December 2019 Timetable December 2023 Timetable  Electrify to Kettering / Corby  Electrify to Leicester, ,  Faster Journey Times (Nottingham and Sheffield Sheffield – London)  Full Electric Fleet for London 12  Capacity for 6th train – (Kettering Trains to London) and additional freight  Completion of Journey time services. works  Timetable Restructured  Stabling/Servicing for new electric stock at Kettering*

Fast Line OLE south of Bedford – 125mph Gauge Clearance of the route to W12/W7/W6a

/ MML Programme – Key Outputs

Key Key Output 1 Output 2 OLE to OLE to Sheffield Thameslink Corby & Nottingham (Sept 19) (Sept 23) Key Outputs

May 18 Dec 18 Dec 19 Dec 23 WTT WTT

WTT WTT 13

GTR 20tph GTR 24tph Market • 6tph Harborough • Journey Project times • Derby EM - New remodelled EM - New Rolling Rolling Stock Stock for for Sheffield GTR –New Corby &Nottingham Rolling services services Stock

/ 5 MML Programme : Major projects

Derby North PJIF Electrification Bedford – Sheffield journey time and performance capacity, journey time and performance improvements improvements Derby Recontrol • Corby: December 2019 • Sheffield: December 2023

Derby Station remodelling journey time and performance Longer trains (route) improvements Capacity improvement, enabling longer trains 14

Leicester South Kettering to Corby freight and passenger capacity journey time and performance improvements

Market Harborough Kettering Stabling Facility journey time, station and performance improvements

Electrification South of Bedford Bedford to Kettering (incl. in MMLe) capacity, journey time and reduced operating Adjustment of OLE costs 3. The Project 15 line speed and station improvements What is the project? . Two Main Areas of work Station Area Old Junction (North) Area 16

North

8 22-Mar-16 1. Station Area

Creating… Works Outlined… 17 • New track through Platform 1 • Improved linespeed and part of existing car park • New car park facility on the East • removal of existing platform & side of the station, remodelled facilities West side • Removal of sidings • New station facilities • New longer platforms • platforms long enough for 240m • Greater Access for all facilities trains created • increased station use by all • new signalling groups 2. Old Junction (North) Area 18

Works Outlined… • Works to: Station road bridge, Footbridge & Main Street bridge • lineside vegetation clearance • new track Creating… • new signalling • Improved linespeed • new points • ready for electrification area • some Rights of Way works Station Area - aerial photo 19 Line Speed Profile Comparisons

Up Fast (to London) 120 110 100 90 80

Velocity (mph) 70 60 50 81.98 82.48 82.98 83.48 83.98 84.48 84.98 Mileage (Decimal) 20 Existing (Sectional Appendix LN3201 Seq. 027 - 20/02/2016) Proposed

1 2 Line Speed Profile Comparisons

Down Fast (to Leicester i.e. North)

120 110

100 90 80

Velocity (mph) 70 60 50 81.98 82.48 82.98 83.48 83.98 84.48 84.98 Mileage (Decimal) Existing (Sectional Appendix LN3201 Seq. 027 - 20/02/2016) Proposed 21

1 3 3. The Project Timeline 22 latest update Projected Project Timelines

• Progress to date has been funded by Network Rail (see next slide) • Further progress will require additional funding from other parties. • Linear Programme displayed but will be more flexible • Project nearing Option Selection milestone (July 2016)

2016 2017 2018 2019

Option Funding Detailed Design Construction In service Selection Approval Design 23

Planning Process Possible Advanced Phased delivery of commences Construction works scheme benefits

Asset Surveys & Consultation

Sidings removed – New car Park – build new track & platforms – join old and new track

18-Mar-16 / East Midlands Trains View

Key Facts about our Station

• Station Footfall - 862,000 PA, with a 50/50 split on North and Southbound Journeys

• Average Ticket Price - £17.30

• Number of season ticket journeys – 312,000 PA

• Sales are made predominantly via the Booking Office – 70%

• The Car Park is full most days, especially the beginning and end of the week 24

/ East Midlands Trains View

The Benefits of the Project

• An Enhanced Customer Experience for our customers

Improved step free access Improved Stepping Distance between Platform Edge and the Train Improved Car Parking Facilities

- Reduce on-street parking in nearby residential roads 25 Station Building Refurbishment Reduction to the overall journey time (the door-to-door travel time) The 'gateway effect’

/ Cost and funding

Funding Source Committed So far Future Funding Total Comments Network Rail - Discretionary Fund 0.1 0.0 0.1 Project start costs Network Rail - Journey Improvement Fund 6.2 12.8 19.0 Network Rail - Access For All Fund 0.0 2.4 2.4 Improved access for all Network Rail - Train Lengthening (LDHSS) 0.0 2.3 2.3 Longer platforms Network Rail - Total 6.3 17.5 23.8 LEP funding - Total 0.0 13.0 13.0 assumed

Total Funding Committed 6.3 30.5 36.8 26 Current Project AFC 46.1 GRIP2 estimate Funding Shortfall -9.3

• Current Committed Funding completes GRIP3 – design approvals • Any further works will require funding confirmed and agreed • Funding shortfall identified for 12 months+ • LEPs (LLEP, D2N2, SCR) made aware of the issue and have been asked to seek additional funding.

18-Mar-16 / Next Steps

Network Rail will develop a communications plan in close consultation with East Midlands Trains and the LCC/MHDC communications teams that utilises a variety of channels to keep stakeholders and residents informed - including:

• Further public information/drop–in events (the next of which will take place this Autumn)

• A dedicated page for the project on networkrail.co.uk explaining its key elements and containing up to date information/timings concerning events and work delivery 27

• We will also use social media and letter drops to nearby residents most affected by works to advise people of planned work and any disruptive/ noisy works

• Press notices/news releases will also be distributed to the local media promoting public events, giving advice (e.g. changes affecting station users during work) & marking milestones (start of work, completion of key elements)

/ 19 Thank you for your attention 28

18-Mar-16 / 29 Minute Item 11

Market Harborough Line Speed Improvements Scrutiny Panel

LANRAC Evidence presented by Christopher Groome

1. LANRAC stands for Leicester and Northamptonshire Rail Action Committee. It was formed some 20 years ago by local parish, district and county councils interested in promoting investment in the . The objective was to provide new stations and new services. Nowadays its membership covers also , and .

2. LANRAC’s mode of operation is to work alongside the train operating company and the infrastructure provider, currently East Midlands Trains and Network Rail, partly as a lobby group and partly as a facilitator. To this end we have developed good relations with MPs along the line. There was a huge investment backlog on the line, largely because no-one had succeeded in bringing the various stakeholders together to rival the lobbying power of, for example, local authorities in the North West.

3. Early in our life we confined ourselves to issues like timetabling, capacity of the trains, and condition of the stations. We then moved to promote/support the opening of new stations. East Midlands Parkway, Corby and Ilkeston were the successful ones. We did this through engagement in such activities as the RUS (Route Utilisation Study) and the franchising process, supported by networking to get other stakeholders on side.

4. The first major breakthrough was getting station and its environment upgraded. The station was unfit for purpose, with short platforms. The surrounding area, including the goods yard, was derelict. Resolving the problem depended on getting the various landowners and regulatory bodies to work together and we had access to them all. The ingredient which triggered action was the drive and enthusiasm of the new MP for Loughborough, Nicky Morgan. Now Loughborough has a station to be proud of, with full length platforms, lifts for the disabled and sensitively modernised station buildings. The surrounding area has much needed new housing with a bus interchange, car parking and better road access.

5. The next project we got involved in was Nottingham. We realised that we had a canny team of people at Network Rail who were masters at bringing together various maintenance and improvement budgets to make a scheme financially viable. Worn out track and signalling have to be replaced periodically, so that is a good time to seek extra funds to increase capacity and upgrade the line. There are other funds for station improvement and DDA (Disability Discrimination Act) compliance. So the Nottingham project was born and delivered to time and budget. The planning of the works and the replacement services was masterly and showed that the teams at Network Rail and East Midlands Trains could be trusted to handle major works. 30

6. It was obvious that all the ingredients were there to go for the ‘big one’, the upgrading and electrification of the line to cope with higher speeds and provide the capacity needed for the massive growth in passenger numbers and freight. Note that I put upgrading first because electrification without upgrading would only provide limited benefits and would make the upgrading more expensive by ‘locking in’ the present inadequate track layout and signalling. This was an issue right up to a week before the Government’s announcement that they would fund the upgrading and electrification because the Treasury wanted to save the money for the upgrading and figured that the ‘sparks effect’ was sexy enough on its own. The network of MPs along the line, headed by Nicky Morgan and including my own MP, Philip Hollobone, was crucial in making sure that the upgrading was funded to take place before the electrification. They were also crucial in getting the ‘pause’ lifted after last year’s funding crisis, so that the work is now going forward again, albeit at a slower pace.

7. I have been spelling out the history of LANRAC and Midland Main Line development to give the context of what you are considering today. Market Harborough needs to take its rightful place in the overall scheme of things. There are bigger problems to be solved at Derby and Leicester, but the track alignment and the inadequate station at Market Harborough need to be addressed before the line is electrified. The previous Managing Director of East Midlands Trains said that the 60 mile per hour speed limit through Market Harborough was the worst on any main line in the country. The station itself has all the problems which have now been fixed in Loughborough.

8. I want to conclude by highlighting how improvement of the track alignment at Market Harborough contributes to the improvement of the functioning of the line for all the communities it serves and therefore to users of Market Harborough station. Under the existing regime the ambition of Sheffield, Nottingham, Derby and Leicester to have faster services to London by taking out intermediate stops sets them at odds with the aspirations of intermediate stations like Market Harborough to have frequent stops and connectivity with other stations along the line. Increasing line speed and capacity gives us the opportunity to have both. We also get a station which is fit for purpose and a train service which is more reliable and less polluting.