Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy Draft for Consultation  Foreword

I am delighted to present the Great Western growth specifically predicted at Paddington Route Utilisation Strategy (RUS) Draft for and in the area. Consultation. This sets out a detailed strategy The key themes that have emerged through for a specific part of the rail network over the the RUS are the need for additional capacity next decade, with an indicative strategy to 2030. to handle increasing demand from both As well as the itself, passengers and freight users; the need to the document covers the network north to address performance issues on key parts of the Norton Junction and Town and south route and local connectivity for improvements in to Basingstoke, Salisbury and Dorchester. The journeys into or between key cities and regional Great Western RUS borders the areas of the centres, including to and from those outside the network covered by the South West Main Line RUS area such as and Portsmouth. and RUSs, both of which have already A number of options were identified for been published, and has a significant interface development and appraisal to address with the and Chilterns RUS, these gaps. Options to increase the length which is currently being developed. of trains, improve service patterns or to The process that has been followed is provide additional infrastructure are proposed well-established. Essentially, this involves solutions. The recommendations from this developing a detailed understanding of the process form the basis of the strategy. current situation, incorporating the implications Three gaps will be addressed further during of committed schemes and forecasts of the consultation period, including connectivity future demand for both passenger and freight and capacity between the West Midlands and services. In this way, “Gaps” are identified, the South West and the South Coast, as well and proposed “Options” are then reviewed and as the implications of seasonal fluctuations at assessed to address these gaps. Paignton. We will continue to work with key The area within the Great Western RUS is stakeholders on developing options to address about to undergo a period of immense change these gaps with the results presented in the with a significant number of large, high-profile Final RUS document. investment schemes planned or proposed As with previous RUSs, this has been over the next five to ten years, including the developed with the full input of the rest of the Intercity Express Programme, and industry including train and freight operators. I the redevelopment of Reading station. All thank them for their contribution to date. This is these schemes have therefore been taken into a Draft for Consultation so we are now seeking account. In addition, the RUS has developed a feedback and comments to support and inform scenario that reviews the railway in light of the our further analysis. Comments are invited recent decision to electrify the Great Western before a deadline of 27 November 2009 and Main Line. we are working towards publication of the Final Despite the current economic conditions, RUS for the Great Western route in early 2010. overall passenger demand is expected to increase across the RUS area, with high Iain Coucher Chief Executive

 Executive summary

Introduction The scope area adjoins the routes of the Route Utilisation Strategies (RUSs) seek South West Main Line; Wessex; South and to establish the strategic direction of the Central ; the from a systematic analysis of future Valleys; Chilterns and the West Midlands. requirements of the network. They seek to The RUS area plays a crucial role in the core balance capacity, passenger and freight cross country network, linking the South demand, operational performance and cost Coast, , West Country, South whilst addressing the requirements of funders Wales and South Midlands with the Midlands, and stakeholders. Greater Manchester, Yorkshire, the North East and Scotland. is developing a programme of RUSs, in conjunction with rail industry partners Timeframe and wider stakeholders, which when complete, The Great Western RUS primarily focuses will cover the entire rail network in Great on the next 10 years to 2019 but has also Britain. This programme of RUSs includes a considered the implications of growth in Network RUS which reviews national issues demand over the next 30 years in the context such as stations, depots, rolling stock and of the Government’s 2007 White Paper electrification as well as presenting scenarios “Delivering a Sustainable Railway”. and forecasts for long distance passenger and The period from 1 April 2009 to 31 March freight markets and the established Freight 2014 is Network Rail’s current Control Period RUS providing a strategy to meet anticipated 4 (CP4). Any known commitments to 2014 freight demand to 2014. that have either formed the recent High This Great Western RUS Draft for Consultation Level Output Specification (HLOS) or have provides a further step towards achieving committed funding through other funding national coverage and has followed the now streams have been included as part of the well-established process. Great Western RUS base. Such capacity schemes and other enhancements are Scope described further in Chapter 4. The Great Western RUS sets out the strategic vision for a particular part of the rail network. CP4 marks a start of a new era for rail in The scope of the RUS is extensive and Britain as this is the first review since the diverse; the focal element being the Great passing of the Railways Act 2005, and Western Main Line (GWML) which operates introduces a new process whereby the over 320 miles and creates main line links Secretary of State issues a High Level Output from to the West of and Specification and a Statement of Funds South Wales. Extending from this are radial Available which sets the scene for the next five routes to , Birmingham, the South Coast years. From this, Network Rail has embarked and South West. Branch lines into the London on a national programme of expenditure suburbs, to the and Cornish coast and targeted at building a bigger and better railway dedicated freight only lines complete the mix of through over 500 schemes and projects aimed routes considered. at providing extra capacity or capability for

 passengers and freight customers – this is the mismatched now, and where it is expected biggest expansion of Britain’s railways since to be mismatched in the future. the 1840s. The identified gaps have been analysed Within the Great Western RUS scope area to understand how best to address them, there are a significant number of major, taking into account any schemes already high-profile, high-investment enhancement proposed. In the course of this work, options schemes planned or proposed during both have been developed on an interactive basis CP4 and which continue into the next control until feasible solutions have been identified period (Control Period 5 (CP5)) from 2014 to with acceptable operational performance 2019. These major enhancement schemes that meets whole-industry value-for-money include the electrification of the Great Western criteria. In some cases there may be further Main Line; the Intercity Express Programme work required to identify additional benefits (IEP); European Rail Traffic Management in order to demonstrate a sufficiently strong System (ERTMS); the Reading Station Area economic return. Redevelopment and Crossrail. Although The Great Western RUS Draft for Consultation predominantly within the Thames Valley has been developed as a result of area, these schemes will resolve a number of considerable analysis and close collaboration current and future issues across the whole of between Network Rail, the Department the RUS area. The implementation of these for Transport, the passenger and freight interventions will significantly change the operators, , the Office of capacity and capability of the network. Rail Regulation, Welsh Assembly Government, Through the inclusion of these improvements Passenger Focus and London Travelwatch. in the base, the RUS has been able to identify further prospective gaps. The focus of these being to input recommendations for the longer-term strategy intended to inform the ’s (DfT) next HLOS for CP5. Process The starting point for the Great Western RUS has been to analyse the current base position of the network, combined with any committed schemes and known interventions. Demand analysis has been undertaken to ascertain the expected level of growth over the next 10 years taking into account the anticipated drivers of change. The combined analysis identifies where supply and demand is

 Gaps The key themes that have emerged from the analysis of the current railway and what is required of it in the future is capacity (at stations, on trains and of the network), performance pinch-points and local connectivity. The following table presents the gaps identified and taken forward for further analysis under the Great Western RUS process.

1. Paddington peak capacity

2. Inner suburban service pattern

3. Paddington to Reading all day capacity

4. Paddington to Reading performance

5.  to Windsor all day capacity

6. Freight capacity and capability: in and around London and north-south

7. Reading peak capacity

8.  to Wolvercot Jn performance

9. West Midlands to South Coast connectivity and all day capacity

10. to Gloucester performance

11. South Wales to South Coast all day capacity

12. West Midlands to South West connectivity and all day capacity

13. Bristol peak capacity

14. Bristol performance

15. Westbury area performance

16. and area service pattern

17. Interurban journey times

18. Early morning arrivals at key regional centres

19. Station crowding

20. Seasonal fluctuations

21. Impact of expansion and western access

 A number of strategic gaps were also identified RUS are summarised below with a more which relate to the overall rail network. These detailed account, along with a description include the Intercity Express Programme (IEP), and quantification of the gaps and option freight train length and network capability, evaluation, provided in Chapter 6. depot capacity and the Seven Day Railway Gaps 1 to 4 together with gap 21 and part initiative (to improve network availability). of gap 6, freight capacity and capability in These strategic issues are being managed the London area, were combined to form through other industry processes and as one option reviewing the corridor between such are not intended to be duplicated by this London Paddington and Reading. A scenario RUS. However, elements of these gaps have matrix was developed to manage the known been included, where necessary, within the proposals for IEP, electrification and Crossrail appropriate gaps and options analysis of the pre- and post-implementation. Great Western RUS. Further details on each of the generic gaps are provided in Chapter 4 Capacity analysis to 2019 showed sufficient and Chapter 6. supply to cater for forecasted growth on the current Long Distance High Speed (LDHS) In developing the RUS, there were a number services with IEP (either diesel or electric) of uncertainties. This is especially apparent on the LDHS services and outer suburban with regards to the timetables for IEP and services after the implementation of Crossrail. Crossrail services. Draft service specifications The provision of freight paths in the latest have been used as a basis for the RUS Crossrail timetable proves sufficient to analysis; however these continue to be accommodate predicted freight growth as per developed and are yet to be finalised and the SFN forecasts to at least 2030. confirmed. As such, the additional quantum of services expected from these interventions The RUS Draft for Consultation describes the and their proposed calling patterns has not demand forecasting and operational modelling been explicitly modelled. Further timetable work completed under the scenario matrix work is scheduled to combine and commit the and references the ongoing work taking place service specifications, along with the predicted to deliver electrification, IEP and Crossrail freight growth and pathing requirements, to projects. Chapter 8 provides greater detail on ensure compatibility and accommodation these schemes with regards to scope and the on the network, and as a result, further effect their implementation will have on the infrastructure enhancements may be RUS area. necessary. The recent commitment to the electrification The GWML is currently the second busiest of the GWML, provides the opportunity for freight corridor into London. This is expected the extension of Crossrail services west of to increase substantially with the levels of which would bring significant predicted growth, particularly for aggregates benefits, by giving the wider Thames Valley traffic, required for the construction of the direct rail access to central London and Olympic infrastructure and Crossrail. Analysis the City while also creating extra capacity has included the current forecasts for freight at London Paddington for longer distance growth from the Strategic Freight Network services. The DfT and Crossrail are reviewing (SFN) for various route sections within the this option. RUS area to ensure sufficient network capacity Electrification will also enable the current and capability to accommodate growth in Thames Valley suburban services into London passenger and freight markets. Paddington to be operated by electric trains The gaps and options identified and instead of the existing diesel trains. appraised as part of the Great Western

 It is proposed that the existing four- address perceived crowding at . car electric trains will be transferred onto the The analysis confirms the recommendation GWML, replacing the current two and three-car to lengthen four peak services (two in each diesel trains, when the new Thameslink fleet direction) by two cars to address these is introduced. It is proposed that suburban overcrowding issues. This enhancement services between Oxford, Reading and London includes the HLOS proposal to lengthen the Paddington will be operated with these vehicles Reading to services to three by the end of 2016. cars (as this forms part of the RUS base as a committed scheme). However, all proposals to All day capacity between Slough and Windsor lengthen vehicles are subject to the provision of and Eton Central station was assessed in rolling stock being available. The delivery plan line with the December 2008 timetable which for the extra vehicles is still to be determined increased passenger services on the branch with an announcement expected in the autumn. from two trains per hour to three trains per The RUS will take cognisance of the proposed hour Monday to Friday. This proved sufficient Rolling Stock Plan when released by the DfT supply to cater for current and predicted and undertake any further rework that may be demand to 2019. First Great Western have necessary as a result of this. recently introduced an additional unit on a Saturday to extend the current two-car train to Five infrastructure enhancements were three-cars to assist with on-train crowding and proposed to address capacity and are presently evaluating the business case for performance issues between Didcot and increasing the service provision on a Saturday Wolvercot Jn specifically at Didcot East Jn, to three trains per hour. Didcot North Jn and Oxford. A capacity study assessed the predicted growth in passenger Capacity analysis on all services into and out and freight services, using the draft IEP of Reading during the peak periods identified service specification and forecasts of freight that on-train crowding would exist by 2019 on growth from the SFN, and the impact this the Reading to Gatwick Airport corridor. This would have on the current infrastructure. supports, and is consistent with, the analysis From this, the RUS recommends evaluating undertaken as part of the Sussex RUS which the options for enhancing Didcot North Jn reviewed the service from Gatwick Airport to provide the additional capacity necessary to Redhill. During the consultation period of to accommodate such growth. Further the Sussex RUS further analysis is being enhancement to Oxford station and the areas undertaken to review the extension of services into and out of the station area as assessed by from Redhill to Gatwick Airport. There is a the RUS are also recommended as part of the requirement of the Greater Western Franchise, Oxford Area Redevelopment scheme. to provide two trains per hour on a standard pattern between Reading and Gatwick Airport To improve capacity and performance on the and the potential remodelling at Redhill in CP5 Swindon to Gloucester route the RUS supports would facilitate this, enabling through services the development of the Swindon to Kemble to operate to Gatwick Airport on a more redoubling scheme with the incremental ordered pattern of service. A positive business enhancement of two additional signals case to extend these services would improve between Kemble and Standish Jn (subject to the service frequency on the route between business case evaluation) to improve capacity Reading and Gatwick Airport. for normal service provision as well as for diversionary working as recognised under the Further analysis was undertaken by the Great Seven Day Railway initiative. Western RUS on the route to review on-train crowding, specifically to

 Capacity analysis with predicted growth to recommends four tracking between Bristol 2019 for the services between South Wales Temple Meads and Parson Street through the and the South Coast (specifically the Cardiff to extension and conversion to passenger use of Portsmouth and Bristol to Weymouth services) the carriage line from Bristol Temple Meads to identified on-train crowding issues for which Bedminster rejoining the main line just beyond the RUS recommends the lengthening of five Parson Street. peak services (by either one or two vehicles) The development of the business case for the on the Cardiff to Portsmouth route and two option of a three or four track section between peak services (by one vehicle) on the Bristol to Dr Days Jn and Filton Abbey Wood will also Weymouth route. This enhancement includes be recommended for completion during the the HLOS proposal for 12 additional vehicles to consultation period of the Great Western lengthen services in the West of England. RUS to enable a complete business case to In addition, a review of the service proposition be provided in the Final RUS incorporating on the Cardiff to Portsmouth route results capacity, journey times, performance and in the recommendation of one morning and Seven Day Railway initiatives. one evening peak service becoming a faster It is recommended that capacity and service through the removal of a number of performance at Westbury station is improved intermediate station calls between Westbury through the provision of an additional platform and Bristol Temple Meads. A separate stopping face at Westbury by creating an island platform service would be introduced between Westbury from the existing Platform 1. and Bristol to cater for passengers at these stations. This option provides additional To improve connectivity between Exeter and capacity as well as a significant improvement Plymouth, various options were reviewed to to journey times. extend current long distance services beyond Bristol Temple Meads to Exeter and Plymouth To address current and predicted capacity along with amendments to the current local issues to 2019 at Bristol Temple Meads the service proposition. The RUS recommends RUS recommends procuring an additional the introduction of a half hourly Paignton to nine vehicles to lengthen 11 morning and Exmouth service and an hourly evening peak hour trains. An enhanced cross to St James Park service commencing 2018 Bristol service will also be recommended in extending cross Exeter journey opportunities. the RUS as a longer-term option to provide an The current IEP proposal could potentially hourly Bristol Temple Meads to Yate service introduce a standard pattern throughout (subject to third party funding); an hourly Bath the day from Bristol to Exeter, Plymouth to Bristol shuttle (calling all stations) with the and Penzance. This will address the longer possible extension to Clifton Down and the distance connectivity gap whilst introducing a potential of an hourly service from Westbury to standard pattern timetable. either or Swindon. The RUS will recommend the further development of these To address interurban journey times, the schemes by the scheme promoters. development of a linespeed increase to 125mph between Bristol Temple Meads and To improve capacity and performance into Bridgwater is recommended. The opportunity Bristol Temple Meads from the north, east and for raising the Permanent Speed Restrictions south west approaches, the RUS reviewed on the route between Gloucester and Severn four infrastructure enhancements taking into Tunnel Jn will also be further reviewed during cognisance the proposed IEP service pattern the consultation period. and potential freight growth to 2019. The RUS

 With electrification and the current IEP business case to be able to recommend it. proposals, journey time improvements could There are three remaining gaps which will be also be achieved between South Wales and addressed during the consultation period of London Paddington through the reduction of the Great Western RUS. These are: station calls and the increased acceleration and braking capability of the new trains. West Midlands to South Coast connectivity Proposals for changing the calling patterns in and all day capacity the West of England have formed First Great West Midlands to South West connectivity Western’s timetable offer in May 2009 with and all day capacity further changes proposed for December 2009. Seasonal fluctuations: Paignton branch. Earlier arrivals from London Paddington to Plymouth were reviewed. Following a For the West Midlands to South West/South high-level appraisal of introducing an earlier Coast capacity gaps, the Great Western RUS service, the gap was discounted due to the will assess any existing and/or predicted weak business case. on-train crowding and review any train lengthening opportunities. For the connectivity The RUS reviewed the proposed station gaps from the North to the West Midlands and enhancement schemes for London on to the South Coast, the RUS will review Paddington, Broadway, Reading, Oxford the current service provision from Newcastle and Bristol Temple Meads and concluded that to Reading for extensions to the South Coast. the redevelopments would address current The review of extending the long distance congestion issues and provided sufficient services to the South West from Bristol to capacity to cater for predicted growth. Options Plymouth has been completed as part of gap for improving Windsor and Eton Central station 16 Exeter and Plymouth area service pattern included provision of ticket gates and the and is included within this RUS. widening of the current platform, but these failed to achieve the necessary Benefit Cost Capacity on the Paignton branch will be Ratios and are therefore not recommended. assessed for any existing and/or predicted on-train crowding to 2019 following the The RUS reviewed the Devon and Cornwall completion of passenger counts by the branch lines where the service offered through train operators over summer 2009. The the summer differed to that provided through results of this analysis and any subsequent the winter, in particular assessing those recommendations will be provided in the branch lines where Long Distance High Speed Final Great Western RUS. (LDHS) services also operated, namely to Newquay and Paignton. For Newquay, the From the above, it is clear that the outcomes capacity analysis showed that there was of the option appraisal stage provide a mix of sufficient capacity on the LDHS services on a recommendations for further analysis and an summer Saturday to 2019 whilst being able to emerging strategy. accomodate an estimated 35 percent growth. The most acute issue evident is On summer Saturdays, there is no local accommodating the growth in commuter and service provision at the intermediate stations leisure journeys at various points across on the line from Par to Newquay as the current the Great Western RUS area. These are LDHS service operates non-stop from Par to predominantly into London Paddington, Newquay. The RUS analysed the operational Reading and Bristol Temple Meads as the key requirements to provide both a LDHS service stations on the route and additionally to, from and a local stopping service, however, the and within Devon and Cornwall with regards to capital and operational investment required to seasonality. accommodate this resulted in an insufficient

10 Options were developed as potential interventions to bridge the identified gaps with the emerging strategy primarily seeking to address the growth in passenger and freight demand progressively over time, identifying changes to service provision and the infrastructure required to meet such growth whilst maintaining performance.

The emerging strategy can therefore be summarised with the following principal recommendations:

Recommendations to 2019

 Implement committed schemes as planned: - HLOS capacity and performance metrics - HLOS capacity programme (Twyford and Maidenhead platform lengthening; the redoubling and Westerleigh Jn to Barnt Green linespeed improvements) - Electrification - Intercity Express Programme - European Rail Traffic Management System - Reading Station Area Redevelopment - Southampton to West Coast Gauge enhancement and diversionary route via Andover and Laverstock - Crossrail - Up and down goods loops and the south facing bay platform at Oxford station - Bath Spa Capacity upgrade

 Train lengthening to provide additional capacity on the following corridors: Reading to Gatwick Airport, Cardiff to Portsmouth, Cardiff to and Gloucester to Weymouth

 Improve connectivity through service changes and enhancements for cross Bristol and cross Exeter services

 Improve capacity and performance through infrastructure schemes at Oxford, Swindon to Gloucester, Westbury and from Bristol Temple Meads to Parson Street

 Reduce journey times between Bristol Temple Meads and Bridgwater through linespeed improvements and between Bristol Temple Meads and Westbury through changes to the service provision

11 Consultation Our initial conclusions resulting from the RUS analysis are presented in this Draft for Consultation. Appraisal work will continue throughout and beyond the consultation period, taking account of stakeholder opinion where possible. We are now seeking stakeholders’ views, particularly on the gaps, options and emerging conclusions presented, before finalising the strategy which will be published in early 2010. Chapter 9 provides the necessary contact details and timescales for the consultation period.

This draft, together with all the other RUSs published to date, is available electronically at www.networkrail.co.uk

12 13 Contents

1. Background 16 1.1 Introduction to Route Utilisation Strategies 16 1.2 Document structure 17 2. Dimensions 20 2.1 Introduction 20 2.2 Purpose 20 2.3 Stakeholders 20 2.4 Geographic scope 21 2.5 Scope of services 23 2.6 Linkage to other RUSs 23 2.7 Linkage to other studies 23 2.8 RUS timeframe 25 3. Current demand, capacity and delivery 26 3.1 Introduction 26 3.2 Train Operating Companies 26 3.3 Current passenger market profile 27 3.4 Current passenger service provision 28 3.5 Track capacity 28 3.6 Current passenger demand 34 3.7 Freight Operating Companies 48 3.8 Current freight market profile 48 3.9 Freight capacity and capability 52 3.10 Current RUS infrastructure 55 3.11 Stations 55 3.12 Train maintenance depots and stabling 60 3.13 Engineering access 61 3.14 Seven Day Railway 64 3.15 Performance 64 3.16 Future performance targets 68 3.17 Performance and timetables 68 3.18 Summary 69 4. Planned changes to infrastructure and services 70 4.1 Introduction 70 4.2 Planned changes to infrastructure 70 4.3 Planned service changes 82 4.4 Definition of “do-minimum” case 85 4.5 Rolling stock 86 4.6 Depots and stabling 87 5. Planning context and future demand 88 5.1 Introduction 88 5.2 Regional planning documents 88 5.3 Eco-towns 92

14 5.4 Passenger demand: Drivers of change 93 5.5 Forecast passenger demand 93 5.6 Forecast freight demand 102 5.7 Summary 104 6. Gaps and options 106 6.1 Introduction 106 6.2 Gaps 106 6.3 Process 106 6.4 Identification of gaps 106 6.5 Generic gaps 108 6.6 Quantification of gaps 110 6.7 Option definition 113 6.8 Assessment of options 115 6.9 Option appraisal 115 6.10 Summary 146 7. Emerging strategy 148 7.1 Introduction 148 7.2 Strategy for Control Period 4 (2009 – 2014) 148 7.3 Strategy for Control Period 5 (2014 – 2019) 150 7.4 Future strategy 152 8. A longer-term view 156 8.1 Introduction 156 8.2 Developments up to 2019 156 8.3 Heathrow Airport 162 8.4 Gatwick Airport 164 8.5 Oxford 164 8.6 Bristol 164 8.7 Beyond 2019 165

9. Stakeholder consultation 170 9.1 Purpose 170 9.2 Process 170 9.3 How you can contribute 171 Appendices 172 Appendix A: Station facilities 172 Appendix B: Reactionary delay minutes – Top 15 locations 184 Appendix C: Oxford station – theoretical layout 186 Appendix D: Interurban route sections 187 Glossary 188

15 1. Background

1.1 Introduction to Route Utilisation network capacity and railway Strategies service performance 1.1.1 Following the Rail Review in 2004 and train and station capacity the Railways Act 2005, the Office of Rail including crowding issues Regulation (ORR) modified Network Rail’s the trade-offs between different network licence in June 2005 to require the establishment of Route Utilisation Strategies uses of the network (eg. between (RUSs) across the network. Simultaneously, different types of passenger and ORR published guidelines on RUSs. A RUS is freight services) defined in Condition 1 of the network licence rolling stock issues including as, in respect of the network or a part of the deployment, train capacity and network1, a strategy which will promote the capability, depot and stabling route utilisation objective. The route utilisation facilities objective is defined as: how maintenance and “the effective and efficient use renewals work can be carried and development of the capacity out while minimising disruption available on the network, to the network consistent with funding that is, or opportunities from using new is reasonably likely to become, technology available”. opportunities to improve safety. Extract from ORR Guidelines on Route Utilisation Strategies, April 2009 Extract from ORR Guidelines on Route Utilisation Strategies, April 2009 1.1.2 The ORR guidelines explain how Network Rail 1.1.3 should consider the position of the railway The guidelines also set out principles for RUS funding authorities, their statements, key development and explain how Network Rail outputs and any options they would wish to should consider the position of the railway see tested. Such strategies should address: funding authorities, the likely changes in demand and the potential for changes in supply. Network Rail has developed a RUS Manual which consists of a consultation guide and a technical guide. These explain the processes used to comply with the Licence Condition and the guidelines. These, and other documents relating to individual RUSs and the overall RUS programme, are available on Network Rail’s website at www.networkrail.co.uk.

1 The definition of network in Condition 1 of Network Rail’s network licence includes, where the licence holder has any estate or interest in, or right over a station or light maintenance depot, such as station or light maintenance depot

16 1.1.4 1.1.8 The process of RUS production is designed Network Rail will take account of the to be inclusive. Joint working is encouraged recommendations from RUSs when carrying between industry parties, who share ownership out its activities; in particular they will be used of each RUS through its industry Stakeholder to help inform the allocation of capacity on Management Group (SMG). In order to ensure the network through application of the normal passengers’ interests are represented the Network Code processes. SMG also includes Passenger Focus and 1.1.9 London Travelwatch (where relevant). The ORR will take account of established 1.1.5 RUSs, and those in preparation, when There is also extensive informal consultation exercising its functions. outside the rail industry by means of regular 1.2 Document structure briefings to a Wider Stakeholder Group 1.2.1 (WSG). The roles and members of both This document starts by outlining in Chapter 2, the SMG and WSG are detailed further in the dimensions of the Great Western RUS Chapter 2. and the geographical context within which it 1.1.6 is developed. It also describes the linkage to The ORR guidelines require options to be other associated work streams and studies appraised. This is initially undertaken using which relate to the RUS. the Department for Transport’s (DfT) appraisal 1.2.2 criteria. To support this appraisal work RUSs Chapter 3 describes the railway today seek to capture implications for all industry covering passenger and freight demand and parties and wider societal implications in order the capability of the infrastructure to meet that to understand which options maximise net demand. Gaps which already exist between industry and societal benefit, rather than that of demand and capacity are identified. any individual organisation or affected group. 1.2.3 1.1.7 In Chapter 4 the committed and uncommitted RUSs occupy a particular place in the planning schemes proposed for the future are explained activity for the rail industry. They use available along with known train service amendments input from processes such as the DfT’s for future timetable revisions. Regional Planning Assessments, the Wales Rail Planning Assessment, and Transport 1.2.4 Scotland’s Scottish Planning Assessment. The Chapter 5 summarises the main planning recommendations of a RUS and the evidence documents of relevance to this RUS together of relationships and dependencies revealed with their vision for the role of the railway in the work to reach them, in turn form an over the next 30 years and analyses the rail input to decisions made by industry funders passenger demand and freight traffic that is and suppliers on issues such as franchise likely to arise. specifications, investment plans or the High Level Output Specification (HLOS).

17 1.2.5

In Chapter 6 gaps between forecast demand and current capability are identified. Options for bridging the gaps pinpointed in the previous chapters are listed, discussed and given an initial appraisal of their likely costs and benefits. In some cases further appraisal work is planned during the consultation period.

1.2.6 The conclusions emerging from this option analysis are presented in Chapter 7, together with a view of how the future strategy might take shape.

1.2.7 Chapter 8 describes the longer-term scenario and expands on developments up to 2019 and beyond.

1.2.8 Chapter 9 describes the consultation process and how stakeholders can respond to this document.

1.2.9 Supporting data is contained in the appendices to this document. All information is available electronically from Network Rail’s website www.networkrail.co.uk

18 19 2. Dimensions

2.1 Introduction enable local and Regional Transport Plans 2.1.1 and freight plans to reflect a realistic view This chapter details the geographic scope of of the future rail network. the Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy 2.3 Stakeholders (RUS), its purpose, time horizon, the planning 2.3.1 context in which it is set, and the linkages The Great Western RUS has been managed to other studies along with details of the through a Stakeholder Management Group management group and stakeholder briefings. (SMG), the steering group for the strategy, 2.2 Purpose who met on various occasions at key 2.2.1 stages during the development of this RUS. The strategies that emerge through the RUSs The group included the train operating have a number of purposes; they inform: companies ( Trains Wales, , CrossCountry, First Great Western, the optimisation of the output specification and South West Trains), for rail infrastructure renewals and freight operating companies (specifically DB enhancements Schenker and Freightliner), Network Rail, the the identification of ways in which capacity Association of Train Operating Companies, could be used more efficiently, in the the Department for Transport, Transport for context of the railway and wider public London, Crossrail Limited, Welsh Assembly transport Government, Passenger Focus, London Travelwatch and the Office of Rail Regulation the development of the Government’s High (as an observer). Level Output Specification (HLOS) for the next control period 2.3.2 A Wider Stakeholder Group (WSG) was also address specific socio-economic established, including representatives from developments, growth and employment. local authorities, statutory bodies, community 2.2.2 rail partnerships, rail user groups and other The Great Western RUS will therefore: stakeholders. A number of wider stakeholder briefings were held during the process of the propose options to achieve the most Great Western RUS, the purpose of which was efficient and effective use of the existing to inform the WSG of the developments and rail network and identify cost effective progress of the RUS. opportunities to improve it where appropriate 2.3.3 In April 2008, introductory briefings took place enable Network Rail to develop an at Reading, Bristol and Plymouth where the informed renewals, maintenance and context, scope and objectives of the RUS enhancements programme in line with the were outlined along with the standard RUS Department for Transport’s aspirations processes and programme. In June 2008, and the reasonable requirements of train baseline exhibitions were held at the same operators and other key stakeholders locations to enable stakeholders to review

20 the results of the baseline exercise and share West Midlands and Chilterns RUS (Strategic their ideas and insights on the current and Routes 16 and 17). future network. This feedback, along with the 2.4.2 subsequent further documentation provided The defined scope area of the Great Western by many, provided valuable input into the RUS therefore includes the following routes: process of gap identification and subsequent optioneering. The baseline information from London Paddington to: these exhibitions is available on Network – South Rail’s website at www.networkrail.co.uk/ – Heathrow Airport routeutilisationstrategies/greatwestern – Oxford and the Cotswold line (as far as 2.3.4 An interim briefing was later held in Bristol Norton Jn, east of Worcester) (November 2008) to update the wider – Spa (via Swindon) stakeholder group on current progress of the – Pilning (via Bristol Parkway) Great Western RUS and present the identified gaps being taken forward for further analysis – Bristol Temple Meads (via Bath Spa and appraisal. Further briefings are scheduled and via Bristol Parkway) after the launch of the Draft for Consultation – Penzance (via Castle Cary and via and will also be arranged for the Final RUS Bristol Temple Meads) publication. West Ealing to 2.3.5 In addition to the above, a number of individual Slough to Windsor and Eton Central meetings were held with various stakeholders, Maidenhead to Marlow both within the SMG and WSG, as required to discuss their aspirations and views and to Twyford to Henley-on-Thames present developments. Reading to Basingstoke G.W.R Jn

2.4 Geographic scope Oxford to Bicester Town/ 2.4.1 Figure 2.1 provides an illustration of the Abbotswood Jn (southeast of Worcester) to geographic area of the Great Western RUS. Taunton (including via Gloucester and via The scope area includes lines on the Strategic Weston-super-Mare) Route 13: Great Western Main Line as far as Severn Beach Branch the boundary of the Wales RUS at Pilning and Strategic Route 12: Reading to Penzance. The Thingley Jn to Bradford Jn RUS also covers lines on Strategic Route 4: Pilning (exclusive) via Bathampton Jn and Wessex to the boundary of the South West Westbury to Wilton Jn, Dorchester Jn and Main Line RUS and to the boundaries of the Yeovil Jn

21 Figure 2.1 – Map of Great Western scope area N ON ON LEBONE RY LONDO EUST DDINGT LONDON MA LONDON PA 2 lls Route We 6 Acton Junction Route 16 Route Route 18 ne roadway B g in Eal ling on Main Li a E Act st We l Drayton Green

Hanwel H n T4 Brentford branch

Castle Bar Park

SOUT RUISLIP

es & & es

y Harlingto Ha 3

GREENFORD

Southall

t Drayton t THROW s

THROW South Greenford We HEA HEA T1, 2 &

T5 r

Route 18 Ive BAA

k gley

n

Infrastructure La THROW Colnbroo HEA

Route 16 R

n ham

Y SLOUGH ON Burn

w WINDSO & ET CENTRAL lo p d LESBUR BOURNE END Ta Flyover Junctio Summit AY Route 16 Maidenhea Furze Platt Cookham n wyford T Claydon L.N.E. Junctio PRINCES RISBOROUGH Route 16 3 MARLOW Bramley Route Mortimer BLETCHLEY rgrave OKE Wa READING -ON-THAMES

est

e e Theal R. Junction BASINGST W. HENLEY Basingstok G. lehurst Reading W Ti

WN ermaston

m

Ald BICESTER TO a

Route 16

Cholsey Midgh Islip Y 4

AY

Cowley branch tcham a

Route Th BANBUR Route 17 Y ARKW Y DIDCOT P Goring & Streatley t n r n lverco n n NEWBUR

Radley Wo Junctio

Culham Newbury Racecourse Newbury

OXFORD Appleford SALISBUR n Wilto Junctio

Hungerford Didcot Powe Statio Kintbury est Ascott-under- Wychwood Long Marsto Combe ON-IN-MARSH Hanborough 3

Finstock SWINDON Bedwyn Kemble Route Charlbury Pewsey MORET Dilton Marsh Dorchester W owbridge Honeybourne Stroud Shipton n Chippenham Maiden Newton WEYMOUTH Melksham Tr Evesham Kingham rminster Chetnole tminster

Dorchester Junctio Pershore on Wa Y Ye

h

Stonehouse Av f Thornford

te sterleig rd onclif n

n

Ya We Ya Av ood Bradford-on- WESTBUR E ovil Norto Junctio Route 17

TENHAM

AY & Freshford 4 Ye Pen Mill TH A n OL Abbotswood Junction Ashchurch A BA SP FROM ovil CHEL SP illage Cam Dursley Route Abbey W Ye Junctio ARKW

BRIST P

therington m Bruton Whatley Quarry

Ty branch h

Sharpness branch

Filton Oldfield Park Oldfield

nsha Key psham mpstone Commando mpstone V Exmout Junction N Merehead Quarry Polsloe Bridge Digby & Sowton To Exton Ly Ly EXMOUTH GLOUCESTER WORCESTER SHRUB HILL Castle Cary TO Patchway UN Montpelier e TA St James’ Park rr rquay Lawrence Hill verton Parkway h Bedminster To To e ON tton Ti rl Redland Stapleton Road Pilning Ya Exeter Central TEMPLE MEADS Parson Street

Wo onmout IGNT Av Docks OL PA Route 13 Bridgwater

Nailsea & Backwell ston Milton

Clifton Down Clifton BRIST SEVERN BEACH VIDS H arren tnes ABBOT Dawlish We Thomas

DA unnel

Cattewater branch

ignmouth To Starcross

T MOUT

ort

ON Y Te Sea Mills

Crediton p

PL ON-SUPER-MARE on oford Highbridge & Burnham Portbury Dock Ivybridge vonmouth

Dawlish W

Andrews Road Ye A Dev Severn Junction Exeter St NEWT St Heathfield branch WEST Alston

EXETER ST

T Dockyard

m

y

Lapford ha

Bere y Ke

Arms Morchard Road Road NEWPOR

Meldon Quarr

tash

Kings Nympton

APLE Sal Chapelton s Portsmouth

Calstock St Budeaux Ferry Ferry Budeaux St ctoria Road German

BARNST Bere Ferrers

St Budeaux Vi St

GUNNISLAKE

Menheniot

ne LOOE y ombe

LISKEARD

Co St Ke St

Sandplace Causeland Bodmin Parkway Moorswater branch Fowey Harbour branch Par Harbour branch own Lostwithiel T Par Luxulyan Austell Falmouth St Bugle Penmere o Penryn LMOUTH DOCKS ur Roche Perranwell Tr FA St Columb Road Parkandillack branch Redruth Quintrel Downs Hayle Camborne Y NEWQUA IVES Lelant St Erth ST Carbis Bay PENZANCE Quadruple track (mixed traffic) Double track (mixed traffic) Single track (mixed traffic) Double track (freight only) Single track (freight only) currently Single track (freight only, non-operational) Main Line RUS South West (established March 2006) RUS (option appraisal) Wales Midlands & Chilterns RUS West (defining scope) Cross London RUS (established August 2006) Coast Main Line RUS West (unstarted) Lelant Saltings Key

22 Barnstaple to Exmouth (via Exeter) 2.6.2 There are further boundary issues between Newton Abbot to Paignton the Great Western RUS and the West Plymouth to Gunnislake Midlands and Chilterns RUS. As such, these RUSs interlink in programme, scope area Liskeard to Looe and services with particular regard to the Par to Newquay CrossCountry service group.

Truro to Falmouth 2.6.3 Due to the interlinking of these geographic St Erth to St Ives areas and services which operate across Freight branches (Brentford, , routes, a number of cross boundary issues Cowley, Long Marston, Docks, have arisen. The Great Western RUS has led Tytherington, Avonmouth, Portbury. the analysis on the following services: Whatley, Merehead, Meldon, Heathfield, – Cardiff to Portsmouth Cattewater, Moorswater, Fowey, Par Harbour and Parkandillack). – Reading to Gatwick Airport 2.5 Scope of services – West Midlands to the South West and the South Coast. 2.5.1 The RUS considers all services that use 2.6.4 these routes for all or part of their journeys The Great Western RUS also considers input to the extent necessary to achieve the route and analysis nationally from both the Freight utilisation objective regardless of whether or RUS and the Strategic Freight Network as not the physical infrastructure is within the well as emerging strategies from the high boundaries of the scope area of the Great level network-wide RUS assessing national Western RUS. electrification issues; the national rolling stock and depot strategy and station development. 2.5.2 This RUS will therefore include appropriate 2.7 Linkage to other studies analysis of those traffic generators outside the 2.7.1 scope area which have a significant effect on To be successful, a RUS cannot be considered the pattern of demand within the scope area, in isolation. The Great Western RUS is related for example services such as the Cardiff to to a number of other strategies and policies Portsmouth. covering rail and other transport modes, land 2.6 Linkage to other RUSs use planning and economics for the area. Several studies have been underway whilst 2.6.1 Network Rail is continuing to work through a this document has been in production, most programme of RUSs which, once complete, notably the draft Regional Spatial Strategy will cover the rail network of Great Britain. for the South West and the High Level Output As previously mentioned, the Great Western Specification Rolling Stock plan. The final RUS interfaces with other parts of the network publication of these documents is expected where other RUSs have already been later in 2009 and will therefore help to shape established. These are the South West Main the Final RUS strategy. Line (SWML); the Wales RUS and to some extent the Cross London RUS. The Great Western RUS draws on input and analysis from these studies. Figure 2.2 presents an illustration of the geographic area and where the relationships exist with other RUSs.

23 Figure 2.2 – Map of Great Western RUS scope area with other RUS boundaries ON N DDINGT LONDO PA ells Acton W Junction SE 3 T4 LNW T1, 2 & THROW THROW HEA HEA GREENFORD T5 BAA to South Ruislip Infrastructure H THROW SLOUG HEA ON BOURNE END CENTRAL MARLOW WINDSOR & ET SE READING -ON .R. Junction to Flyover Junction Summit to Basingstoke G.W LNW HENLEY -THAMES WN BICESTER TO Y WA ckley LNW Y Ta RK DIDCOT PA NEWBUR OXFORD ON-IN to Wilton Junction -MARSH SE SWINDON olvercot Junction MORET W

d Junction oo

w Y arminster LNW W

Bromsgrove Abbots R AY SE WESTBUR OL TH A LNW BA SP to Dorchester Junction FROME TENHAM ARKW SE BRIST P WORCESTE SHRUB HILL A a Castle Cary ON Exmouth Junction Droitwich Sp CHEL SP EXMOUTH AUNT GLOUCESTER T ON Pilning Exeter Central Arms IGNT W LNW PA LN TEMPLE MEADS RT

HEREFORD Craven SEVERN BEACH VIDS Y L OL ABBOT DA

Y IFF BA NEWPO ON BRIST YMOUTH

EBBW VALE PARKWAY Alston CARD ON-SUPER-MARE PL NEWT

RHYMNEY Bere

LNW CARDIFF CENTRA TH EXETER ST CORYTON WEST SHREWSBUR Chirk L PENAR APLE YDFI T

R RT Y HY MACHYNLLETH RT ERBE

ABERDARE BARNST GUNNISLAKE ME BARR ISLAND TREH LOOE Barmouth LISKEARD BRIDGEND MAESTEG YSTWYTH THEN ANSEA Par ABER SW CARMAR ruro T LMOUTH DOCKS FA PWLLHELI VEN PEMBROKE DOCK FISHGUARD HARBOUR MILFORD HA Y NEWQUA IVES St Erth ST VERFORDWEST PENZANCE HA

Western route Western Other routes RUS Great Western RUS Wales Midlands & Chilterns RUS West Main Line RUS South West Cross London RUS Boundary location with neighbouring route SE Key

24 2.7.2 2.7.4 The main documents which have informed the More specific studies and proposals which RUS include: have been undertaken by various stakeholders have also contributed supportive information to the South West and Thames Valley the RUS. These are: Regional Planning Assessments (RPA), published in May 2007 and June 2007 consultancy studies analysing capacity at respectively. The RPA provides a medium London Paddington and Reading stations to long-term planning framework for rail. First Great Western’s HLOS Capacity Within this framework, the Great Western Study for the West of England RUS is intended to provide a more detailed strategy over a longer term of 30 years. The West of England Partnership’s Bristol Department for Transport involvement in Metro proposals development of this RUS ensures broad Council’s Portishead Rail alignment between these studies Line Study the draft Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) South West Regional Development Agency for the South West (covering the period of (SWRDA) Funding advice 2009 - 2019 2006 – 2026) and the Regional Economic Strategy (RES) for Devon County Council’s Regional Funding (covering the period of 2006 – 2015), Allocation Expression Of Interest for provide detailed supportive information with Exeter Metro regard to growth and development in the passenger surveys undertaken by user region; the economic framework, and the groups and customer panels specifically strategic policies which will help shape this. Windsor and Eton Central and the Devon 2.7.3 and Cornwall Branch lines Other influential documents include: Passenger Focus “Getting to the train” High Level Output Specification (HLOS) surveys (March 2009).

Rolling Stock Plan 2.8 RUS timeframe The Great Western RUS covers the ten year Transport for Corridor Plan period to 2019 in detail and then describes London Plan broader, high level strategic issues and interventions through to 2039. Heathrow Airport Surface Access Strategy The output will be the rail industry’s preferred The Air Transport White Paper strategy for the next railway regulatory Control Civil Aviation Authority Passenger Survey Periods 5 (2014 – 2019) and 6 (2019 – 2024) (2007) in the context of strategic priorities and considering likely requirements over a South East Plan 30-year period. South West Regional Assembly Rail Prospectus

The Regional Network Report for South West

Local Transport Plans

Delivering a Sustainable Transport System (DaSTS).

25 3. Current demand, capacity and delivery

3.1 Introduction Waterloo to Exeter St Davids and London 3.1.1 Waterloo to Bristol Temple Meads services In this chapter, the current function and Heathrow Express operates non-stop capability of the rail network in the Great express services, and the Heathrow Western Route Utilisation Strategy (RUS) area Connect stopping service jointly operated is described. Profiles are provided for both with FGW, between London Paddington passenger and freight operations, as well as and Heathrow Airport information about the current infrastructure, capacity and capability; how it performs and Chiltern Railways operates one service how it is maintained. each day to London Paddington from and from London 3.2 Train Operating Companies Paddington to Princes Risborough 3.2.1 At present, seven passenger train operators London Midland operates services which run scheduled services over the Great Western adjoin the RUS area from the West RUS area – in 2008/09, passenger train miles Midlands to Gloucester via Worcester.

equated to 87 percent of the annual train 3.2.2 mileage accumulated over the scope area. The Although the scope area of the RUS specifies passenger operators on the route are: the boundaries of the infrastructure, any First Great Western (FGW), the principal passenger services that spend all or part of operator within the RUS area, operates a their journey within the RUS geography are mix of long distance high speed, interurban included within the scope of the Great Western and semi-fast outer and inner suburban, RUS. The following cross boundary services regional and local branch line services. are therefore included: These services are operated across the London Paddington to Cardiff/Swansea entire geographic scope of the RUS Cardiff to CrossCountry operate main line services from the North and Midlands to the South Cardiff to Portsmouth Coast via Oxford and Reading and to Reading to Gatwick Airport the South West and South Wales via CrossCountry services between the South Cheltenham West and South Coast to the Midlands and Arriva Trains Wales operate services the North between Swansea, Cardiff and Cheltenham London Waterloo to Exeter St Davids. impacting on the Great Western RUS area particularly with the Cardiff to 3.2.3 Cheltenham service A number of Community Rail Partnerships operate within the Great Western RUS area; Stagecoach South Western Trains (trading those which are members of the Association as South West Trains) operates services of Community Rail Partnerships (ACORP) are fringeing on the RUS area with the London listed below:

26 Cotswold Line Promotion Group (Oxford Reading and to the South West and South – Worcester – ) Wales via Cheltenham.

Severnside Community Rail Partnership 3.3.4 (Lines around Bristol) FGW also operate inner suburban services from London Paddington to as far as Slough, Wessex Rail Partnership (Bristol – outer suburban services to Oxford and the Weymouth) , to Newbury/Bedwyn, and between Devon and Cornwall Rail Partnership Reading and Basingstoke, branch line services (Exeter – Barnstaple/Exmouth; Par throughout the Thames Valley and the joint – Newquay; Truro – Falmouth; Plymouth operation with Heathrow Express of Heathrow – Gunnislake; St Erth – St Ives). Connect services to Heathrow Airport. 3.3 Current passenger Services between Swindon and Cheltenham market profile and Swindon and Westbury also operate. 3.3.1 3.3.5 Within the Great Western RUS area, the main Between Plymouth and Penzance passenger markets for rail are identified as long, medium train services are mostly operated by FGW. and short distance commuting into London CrossCountry has a limited presence west and to a lesser extent Reading and Bristol; of Plymouth, although this is stronger in the interurban travel between main centres such summer months. A limited number of services as Bristol, Exeter and Plymouth towards from London Waterloo to Exeter St Davids London, the Midlands, the North East and (via Salisbury) operated by South West Trains Scotland; inter-regional and interurban travel; run westwards beyond Exeter St Davids to leisure and tourism; access to airports and Paignton and Plymouth, although these will the social dimension of local branch lines and cease from December 2009. rural locations. 3.3.6 3.3.2 FGW operates a structured cross Bristol The passenger service structure can be local network incorporating services between broken down into distinct groups, which Worcester/Cheltenham and Westbury/ integrate at varying locations throughout the Southampton/Weymouth and between Cardiff route and reflect the different markets served. and Taunton and Bristol Parkway and Weston- super-Mare. FGW’s hourly semi-fast service 3.3.3 between Cardiff and Portsmouth via Bristol FGW operates interurban services between and Bath, and the Severn Beach branch line London Paddington and South Wales and service add to the cross Bristol network. London Paddington and the greater Bristol area and to Oxford and the Cotswold line, to 3.3.7 Cheltenham, and to the far West of England. CrossCountry operates main line services CrossCountry’s longer distance from Cardiff to Nottingham via Birmingham, services from the North and Midlands provide providing further journey opportunities to direct links to the South Coast via Oxford and the North and Scotland. Arriva Trains Wales

27 operates services between Swansea, Cardiff 3.5.2 and Cheltenham providing a connection to the Capacity on the GWML is constrained by the long distance services at Cheltenham for travel mix of 125mph high speed services and slower further north. 90mph outer suburban services and freight. Through services from the Thames Valley 3.3.8 branches and the High Speed Trains (HST) The most intensively used Devon and Cornwall calling at Slough, reduce the main line capacity branches, to Exmouth, Falmouth and St Ives, due to the weaving movements required enjoy half hourly frequencies whilst the other between the main lines and the relief lines. West of England branches have hourly or less Relief line capacity is constrained by a number frequent interval services. of factors including the close proximity of some 3.4 Current passenger stations, the variable stopping patterns of local service provision passenger trains and the mix of freight trains. 3.4.1 Nearly all freight through the inner London The following diagrams depict a standard hour area of the route requires access to and service provision, representing the busiest from Acton Yard via a single lead connection hour, divided into the following geographic crossing the relief lines. segments: 3.5.3 Great Western Main Line (Figure 3.1) Paddington station operates to near capacity throughout the day and to full capacity at peak Thames Valley (Figure 3.2) times with accessibility for long interurban , Somerset and South style trains restricted by a number of shorter Gloucestershire (Figure 3.3) platforms on the north side of the station and Worcestershire, , the dedication of two platforms for the electric Gloucestershire and North Wiltshire Heathrow Express. Platforms 3 to 12 are (Figure 3.4) electrified.

Somerset, Devon and Cornwall (Figure 3.5). 3.5.4 Between Reading and London Paddington 3.5 Track capacity the route is operating at or near capacity for 3.5.1 large parts of the day with a CUI of about 80 The Capacity Utilisation Index (CUI) is a percent, particularly increasing in the peak measure of how much of the planning capacity and shoulder peak periods. The Reading of a section of railway is being utilised by station area is a critical “crossroads” on the the current timetable. In terms of capacity east-west and north-south axes for both utilisation, the majority of the rail network in passenger and freight flows and the lack of the Great Western RUS area, over 1,000 route available platforms and through-capacity, miles in total, can be classified as medium allied with the aforementioned Paddington to low use. However, main line capacity on constraints, prevent train service growth. The the Great Western Main Line (GWML) from area is further restricted at Reading West Jn London Paddington to Reading, through where long north – south axis freight services to Oxford and Reading to Cogload Jn near have to cross the GWML at grade. The Taunton (commonly known as the Berks and current Reading Station Area Redevelopment Hants route) reaches over 80 percent capacity programme will assist in providing additional for the majority of the day. platforms and through-capacity in addition to grade separation at Reading West, helping to address these constraints.

28 Figure 3.1 – Great Western Main Line standard hour service provision N O T G N LONDON T PADDI R O HROW P T R I A E A H , E G K H) N & N O I T O D U T A O P y r D E M NGST M I a R R A S d O H A B UT oun OXF B O (To S BOURNE NEWBURY DIDCOT N BEDWY SWINDON M A H & WESTBURY EN R, RN P E T VE S L E A CHIP RD) M RC O T O F D A W U E R O G HERE (To STR Y R A C H E T A TL B S A C R M Y E A T A H S W E K C R OU A BRISTOL L P G CHELTEN S ’ N S VID O A D T D A E UN L ST A BRISTOL TEMPLE M A IFF T R RD ETER A X C CENT E UTH O M PLY A E NCE S A N Z A W S PEN FGW Irregular Outside high-speed core route Heathrow Express CrossCountry Key

29 Figure 3.2 – Thames Valley (Relief Line/Stopping Services) standard hour service provision

N LONDON TON INLINE PADDINGTO AC MA FGW CrossCountry Joint Service ‘Connect’ FGW/BAA

AY DW LING Key OA

NB: FGW Oxford – local services call Sutton stations, & King’s Tackley at Heyford, Mids RUS) Route 16 / Chilterns. (W. EA BR LING UTH WEST EA SO GREENFORD L NWEL

HA N GREENFORD RK TON STLE LL PA AY GREE R CA DR BA UTHA S YE SO HA HROW N AT T 1.2.3. TO HE AY WEST DR Y NGLE LA SLOUGH L

RA M ETON CENT WINDSOR & BURNHA M

OW HA T PL

AT AD TA

BOURNE END FURZE PL COOK RK R Y PA LE IDENHE P AM MA E VE BICESTER TOWN ISLI KE (GREEN MORTIME BR From 2009) RA OK RLOW ST RG MA To ES WA SHIPLA SING - AM BA TWYFORD OXFORD N HENLEY- TH ML SERVICES ON ING WEST TO AS ML AD AM M RE ea CH HA Ar CECOURSE AT DERM AL MIDG NEWBURY RA TH RUS W. Mids & Chilterns NEWBURY D T Y Y EY AM LE h OR ld TLE DL KINTBURY A EA wo Nort RA CULH TH DIDCOT CHOLSE N PPLEF TILEHURS NGBOURNE Cots A READING HUNGERFORD PA BEDWY GORING & STRE

30 Figure 3.3 – Wiltshire, Somerset and South Gloucestershire standard hour service provision

Key

FGW FGW Peak only (Through ) CrossCountry FGW West Proposed service (SWT not shown) To CHELTENHAM

Wales RUS Area YATE PATCHWAY To SWINDON

SEVERN BEACH BRISTOL ST ANDREWS PARKWAY ROAD AVONMOUTH FILTON SHIRE- ABBEYWOOD HAMPTON SEA MILLS CLIFTON DOWN MONTPELIER BATH SPA REDLAND To SWINDON

STAPLETON ROAD LAWRENCE HILL To CHIPPENHAM OLDFIELD BRISTOL PARK FRESHFORD TEMPLE MEADS AVONCLIFF MELKSHAM BRADFORD- ON-AVON BEDMINSTER To TROWBRIDGE READING PARSON STREET FROME PEWSEY NAILSEA & BACKWELL WESTBURY PORTISHEAD YATTON BRUTON WORLE

CASTLE DILTON MARSH CARY

YEOVIL PEN WESTON MILL WARMINSTER MILTON THORNFORD WESTON– (Berks & SUPER-MARE Hants) YETMINSTER

CHETNOLE To HIGHBRIDGE MAIDEN SALISBURY & BURNHAM NEWTON

BRIDGWATER DORCHESTER South West WEST Main Line RUS

To TAUNTON To WEYMOUTH

31 Figure 3.4 – Worcestershire, Oxfordshire, Gloucestershire and North Wiltshire standard hour service provision

W Mids & Chiltern To RUS Area BIRMINGHAM To NEW STREET WORCESTER

EVESHAM MORETON-IN-MARSH

PERSHORE HONEYBOURNE KINGHAM

SHIPTON ASHCHURCH

ASCOTT- CHELTENHAM UNDER- SPA WYCHWOOD

CHARLBURY

FINSTOCK

GLOUCESTER COMBE

HANBOROUGH

W Mids & Chiltern RUS Area Wales RUS Area STONEHOUSE STROUD

LYDNEY

To CARDIFF KEMBLE

To OXFORD

CAM & (See Thames DURSLEY SWINDON Valley GWML Diagram) To READING (Badminton Route) YATE

CHIPPENHAM (Box Route)

MELKSHAM To BRISTOL PARKWAY To BATH SPA To WESTBURY

Key

FGW FGW Cotswold Halts 1TPD CrossCountry ATW

32 Figure 3.5 – Somerset, Devon and Cornwall standard hour service provision M

E MES HA

JA RK Y ST PA TOPS POLSLOE BRIDG LISBURY WA TERLOO SA RK PA TIVERTON & LONDON WA To To WESTBURY EXMOUTH E N L

L DO AG RA AN WTON EXTO DIGBY & VILL SO EXETER CENT COMM LYMPSTONE LYMPSTONE To BRISTO

N AS S

S THOM EXETER ST TAUNTO NEWTON ST CYRE CROS N AR RREN ST WLISH EXETER ST EXETER DAVID’S DA WA CREDITO D H H N D WLIS OR S YEOFOR DA Y PF LE T UA KING NYMPTO LA UMBERLEIG TEIGNMOUTH E AP BO AB TORR TORQ NEWTON

RNST D N ON AD MS BA AR RO AR COPPLESTONE IGNT ELTO PA TOTNES AP RTSMOUTH MORCH EGGESFORD CH PO IVYBRIDGE T D PLYMOUTH S AR E D S T AN AD AC AN H X E RO DEVONPOR OCKY AS AU A A USEL BER FERRER LT NDPL ON E MD SA ST GERM MENHENIO CA ST KEYNE SA COOMBE ST HA AL BER ST BUDE VICTORI KEY LOOE K X RD AD AU Y KE LSTOC AD WA LA LISKEA CA L RK BODMIN ST BUDE FERRY RO N PA YA E GUNNIS R PA ST COLUMB RO BUGLE LUXUL ROCH QUINTREL DOWNS LOSTWITHIE AY L WELL N AN S ST STEL LMOUTH TOWN O NEWQU AU PERR PENRY PENMERE FA S TRUR LTING Y E SA LMOUTH DOCK BA S YL FA

NT NT REDRUTH HA RBI MBORNE LA LA LE LE CA CA ST IVES NCE ZA ST FGW FGW Occasional CrossCountry of Plymouth 4TPD West Abbot of N 3TPD West Summer Saturdays (Not shown West SWT of Exeter St David’s) ERTH PEN Key

33 3.5.5 3.5.9 There is a high take-up of paths between The lack of spare capacity on the route, Reading and Newbury, where services from particularly in the /Bristol the West of England have to fit between Parkway, and Thames Valley intensive passenger and freight movements corridors, is evident at times of perturbation (between Reading and Southcote Jn) on the making service recovery difficult and resulting immediately adjacent Basingstoke section in greatly extended journey times over of the GWML. This also influences how restrictive diversionary routes. This results in capacity is shared westwards along the route a number of identifiable pinch-point locations towards Taunton. that are significant in terms of capacity constraints and performance delays through 3.5.6 restricting operational flexibility and tending Between Didcot and Oxford the mix of non- to cause performance problems in terms stop passenger and freight services with local of out of course running. They also cause services calling at lightly used stations reduces sub-optimisation of pathing opportunities and the ability to maximise capacity (CUI is about occasionally extended journey times where 87 percent). The current layout at Oxford single line conflicts occur. station necessitates empty stock movements having to cross at the north end of the station 3.5.10 between arrival and departure, which restricts The single track Devon branches run at, or flexibility of operation. The intermittent four close to capacity, as dictated by passing tracking between Didcot and Swindon further loop provision, whilst the Cornish branches restricts the forecast mix and volume of except those to St. Ives and Falmouth operate passenger and freight traffic over the route. less intensely. In the case of the St. Ives and Falmouth branches, utilisation has been 3.5.7 increased to the maximum possible level as a Capacity is constrained within the area by a result of the Community Rail initiatives. Holiday number of lengthy single line sections, notably traffic is a significant element of the passenger the Cotswold line and between Swindon and market in the coastal resorts. Kemble and the Weston-super-Mare loop. The Swindon to Gloucester line is also a main 3.6 Current passenger demand diversionary route to and from South Wales 3.6.1 if the normal route via the Severn Tunnel The total number of rail journeys made to, is closed. from and within the Great Western RUS area has increased from 52 million in 1998 to 3.5.8 approximately 74 million in 2007, equating to an With the increasing number of freight services average growth rate of four percent per annum. emanating from the Avonmouth terminal complex the route between Stoke Gifford 3.6.2 towards Westerleigh Jn can become severely Around 40 percent of rail journeys made in congested due to the track sharing of two 2007/08 were between London Paddington distinct main line passenger flows with the and the Great Western RUS area. Journeys east-west South Wales to London and north- made within the RUS area have grown the south . This also impacts most rapidly, averaging 4.6 percent per on the route further east towards Didcot and annum. Figures 3.6 and 3.7 show the split of is subject to further congestion following these journeys by year and their growth rates the introduction of the Intercity Express over the nine year period. Programme (IEP). The impact of which will be significantly greater on this section with the proposed IEP depot at Stoke Gifford.

34 Figure 3.6 – Rail journeys to, from and within the RUS area (2007/08)

26 million journeys 29 million journeys London within GW RUS area Paddington

Rest of the country 19 million journeys

Source: RIFF 1.4 and MOIRA OR17 (Western) database Note: Rover tickets and travelcards sold at outlets other than stations are not included

Figure 3.7 – Passenger journeys Key

growth between 1998/99 and 2007/08 Great Western RUS area to/from Great Western RUS area Great Western RUS area to/from London Paddington Great Western RUS area to/from rest of country

80 Growth between 1998/99 – 2007/08 70

60 31% {3.1% p.a.}

50

40 45% {4.2% p.a.}

30 Journeys (m) 50% {4.6% p.a.} 20

10 Total

0 43% {4.0% p.a.} 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08

Year

Source: RIFF 1.4 and MOIRA OR17 (Western) database Note: Rover tickets and travelcards sold at outlets other than National Rail stations are not included

35 3.6.3 interurban flows between main centres within Figure 3.8 shows the breakdown of passenger and outside the RUS area. The level of rail demand between the RUS area and other demand in the RUS area varies considerably regions outside the scope of the RUS. by time of day, journey purpose and route. Approximately 57 percent of external demand The busiest days for long distance services was to the South East and is Fridays followed by Sundays. Demand is outside the RUS area with a further 12 percent greatest when commuters travel and thus the of journeys to or from the West Midlands. RUS has focussed on the train loading on weekdays in the morning and evening peaks. 3.6.4 For the long distance services, it is recognised Within the Great Western RUS area, the main that the evening peak period is as busy and markets for rail are identified as long, medium sometimes busier, than the morning. and short distance commuting into London and to a lesser extent Reading and Bristol and the

Figure 3.8 – External demand to or from the RUS area, split by region (2007/08)

West Midlands 12%

Wales Other 13% 13%

Great Western Area

Rest of the South West Rest of the South East 7% and London 57%

Source: RIFF 1.4 and MOIRA OR17 (Western) database

36 3.6.5 3.6.6 In 2007/08, 29 million rail passengers travelled Demand into London on the LDHS services between London Paddington and the RUS varies by time of day and day of the week. The area for business, commuting and leisure busiest time period is the weekday morning purposes. Figure 3.9 shows the top ten flows three hour peak (between 07:00 and 09:59) between London Paddington and those areas with arrivals at London Paddington, reflecting served by the Long Distance High Speed the significance of the longer distance services (LDHS). commuting market into London.

Figure 3.9 – Top 10 LDHS journeys to or from London Paddington (2007/08)

Flows Journeys (million) Reading 4.6 Didcot Parkway 1.1 Swindon 1.0 Bristol Temple Meads 0.9 Bath Spa 0.8 Cardiff Central 0.7 Bristol Parkway 0.6 Newbury 0.6 Exeter St Davids 0.4 Chippenham 0.4

Source: Lennon ticket sales and data extracted from MOIRA OR17 (Western version)

37 Figure 3.10 – Morning peak arrivals of Key

LDHS passengers at London Paddington, Standing allowance weekday average 2008/09 Standard class seats Passengers (standard class tickets)

25000

20000

15000 Number 10000

5000

00 07:00 - 07:14 - 07:00 07:29 - 07:15 07:44 - 07:30 07:59 - 07:45 08:14 - 08:00 08:29 - 08:15 08:59 - 08:45 09:14 - 09:00 09:29 - 09:15 09:44 - 09:30 09:59 - 09:45 08:30 - 08:44 08:44 - 08:30 Time

Source: Passengers in excess of capacity (PIXC) count conducted in autumn 2008 (supplied by FGW)

3.6.7 3.6.8 Figure 3.10 illustrates the ratio of passengers The busiest time period is between 08:00 to seats and between passengers and total and 08:15 where the number of passengers capacity (which includes seating and standing exceeds both seating and standing capacity. allowance1) for LDHS services arriving at In 2008/09, the average passenger to London Paddington in 15 minute segments seat ratio for LDHS services arriving in the as per the current service pattern during the morning three-hour peak is 94 percent. The three-hour morning peak period on a typical average passenger to seat ratio in the high weekday in 2008/09. These include standard peak hour (between 08:00 and 08:59) is class seats and passengers with standard 109 percent and this implies that the busiest class tickets only. services experience overcrowding with many passengers standing for more than 20 minutes.

1 On the LDHS services, standing allowance has been estimated at a ratio of 1.2 times the number of standard class seats, as per the HLOS definition.

38 Figure 3.11 – Top 10 rail journeys to or from London Paddington in 2007/08 (suburban services)

Flows Journeys (million) Slough 2.0 Maidenhead 1.6 Oxford 1.5 Ealing Broadway 1.0 Hayes and Harlington 1.0 Newbury 0.6 0.6 West Ealing 0.6 Twyford 0.5 Windsor and Eton Central 0.4

Source: MOIRA OR17 (Western version) Note: Transport for London (TfL) travelcards sold at outlets other than national rail stations are not included2.

3.6.9 London Paddington is the focal point of demand in the RUS area, with the top five suburban flows to and from London Paddington being Slough, Maidenhead, Oxford, Ealing Broadway and Hayes and Harlington highlighting the concentration of demand within the Thames Valley area. Figure 3.11 illustrates the significance of the inner and outer suburban services supporting the shorter commuter journeys into London from the Thames Valley.

3.6.10 The average passengers to seating ratio for suburban services arriving at London Paddington in the three- hour peak is 104 percent, increasing to 127 percent during the high peak hour. Total passengers to total capacity (includes seating and standing allowance) ratio during the three-hour peak is 78 percent and 95 percent in the high peak hour. Figure 3.12 visually illustrates the passenger to seats and capacity ratios for the suburban services into London Paddington.

2 TfL estimate that approximately three million journeys in the RUS area to London are made using TfL travelcards

39 Figure 3.12 – Morning peak arrivals Key

of suburban services at London Standing allowance Paddington, weekday average 2008/09 Standard class seats Passengers (standard class tickets)

25000

20000

15000 Number 10000

5000

00 07:00 - 07:14 - 07:00 07:29 - 07:15 07:44 - 07:30 07:59 - 07:45 08:14 - 08:00 08:29 - 08:15 08:44 - 08:30 08:59 - 08:45 09:14 - 09:00 09:29 - 09:15 09:44 - 09:30 09:59 - 09:45

Time

Source: Passengers in excess of capacity (PIXC) count conducted in autumn 2008 (supplied by FGW) Note: Passenger loadings were recorded on train arrival at the station with the highest loadings on route to Paddington. Count includes and excludes Heathrow Express.

3.6.11 3.6.12 Between 08:00 and 08:30, the number of The top five non-London flows within the passengers exceeds both the seating and Great Western RUS area also reflects the standing capacity. Count data proves that a significance of the Thames Valley as shown number of services have more than 20 percent in Figure 3.13. Figure 3.14 shows the top five of passengers in excess of seating and non-London flows (greater than 20 miles) to standing capacity. In the shoulder peaks, there or from outside the RUS area in 2007/08. is sufficient seating and standing capacity to This indicates considerable demand for rail meet current demand. journeys to and from locations such as Bristol and South Wales.

40 Figure 3.13 – Top five non-London flows within the RUS area (2007/08)

Flows Journeys 1 Bristol Temple Meads – Bath Spa 968000 2 Slough – Windsor and Eton Central 597000 3 Reading – Maidenhead 510000 4 Reading – Slough 465000 5 Reading – Oxford 433000 Source: Lennon ticket sales and data extracted from MOIRA OR17 (Western version)

Figure 3.14 – Top five non-London flows to outside the RUS area (2007/08)

Flows Journeys 1 Bristol Temple Meads – Cardiff Central 416000 2 Oxford – Banbury 313000 3 Bristol Temple Meads – Newport Gwent 176000 4 Bristol Parkway – Cardiff Central 147000 5 Reading – Guildford 129000

Source: Lennon ticket sales and data extracted from MOIRA OR17 (Western version)

3.6.13 available with both Long Distance High Speed The RUS has also considered other key urban services and suburban services. It is estimated interchanges outside the London area. The that 95 percent of passengers travelling from most significant stations are Reading, Bristol Reading to London Paddington use the LDHS Temple Meads, Exeter and Plymouth. These services which offer fast, non-stop journeys. are discussed in turn below; The suburban services, while slower, provide access to intermediate stations on the relief 3.6.14 lines providing opportunities for commuting, Reading is both a major attractor and business and leisure purposes and for generator of rail demand in the RUS area. interchanges to the at Many passengers commute from Reading stations such as Ealing Broadway. to London each morning due to its close proximity to the capital and the mix of services

41 3.6.15 high peak hour, the passenger to seat ratio Figure 3.15 illustrates the average passenger on arrival at Reading reaches 105 percent to seat ratios and the average passenger to therefore some passengers will stand within total capacity ratios (includes both seating the available standing capacity. However, the and standard allowances) for services arriving ratio between passengers and total capacity at Reading in the morning three-hour peak is 84 percent thereby proving sufficient total period. Figure 3.16 presents these ratios capacity is available to accommodate current for the morning high peak hour. This shows demand on the Basingstoke to Reading sufficient capacity on all corridors (except corridor in the high peak. Basingstoke) to meet current demand in both the one-hour and three-hour peak periods for services arriving at Reading. On the Basingstoke to Reading services in the

Figure 3.15 – Average load factors on weekday arrivals at Reading in 2007, morning three-hour peak (07:00 – 09:59)

DIDCOT PARKWAY CORRIDOR

DIDCOT PARKWAY MARLOW BOURNE END HENLEY-ON-THAMES Goring & Streatley Shiplake Cookham Pangbourne n Furze Platt y st Drayto READING BurnhamSLOUGH Langle Iver We Hayes & HarlingtonPADDINGTON T Maidenhead Reading West wyford Ta CORRIDOR NEWBURY plow HEATHROW CORRIDOR e Colnbrook T1, 2 & 3 Theal Mortimer WINDSOR Thatcham Midgham & ETON HEATHROW T5 HEATHROW T4 Aldermaston CENTRAL Bramley BAA Newbury Racecourse Infrastructure CORRIDOR BASINGSTOKE CORRIDOR

Key

Average load factor on arrival at Reading Load factor Load factor (relative to seats) (relative to total capacity) Over 130% Over 100% 100% - 130% 70% - 100% 80% - 99% 50% - 69% less than 80% less than 50%

Note: Total capacity includes seats and standing allowance

42 Figure 3.16 – Average load factors on weekday arrivals at Reading in 2007, morning high peak hour (08:00-08:59)

DIDCOT PARKWAY CORRIDOR

DIDCOT Cholsey PARKWAY MARLOW BOURNE END HENLEY-ON-THAMES Goring & Streatley Shiplake Cookham Pangbourne n Wargrave Furze Platt Tilehurst st Drayto READING BurnhamSLOUGH LangleyIver We Hayes & HarlingtonPADDINGTON T Maidenhead Reading West wyford Ta CORRIDOR NEWBURY plow Southall CORRIDOR HEATHROW e Colnbrook T1, 2 & 3 Theal Mortimer WINDSOR Thatcham Midgham & ETON HEATHROW T5 HEATHROW T4 Aldermaston CENTRAL Bramley BAA Infrastructure Newbury Racecourse WOKINGHAM CORRIDOR BASINGSTOKE CORRIDOR

Key

Average load factor on arrival at Reading Load factor Load factor (relative to seats) (relative to total capacity) Over 130% Over 100% 100% - 130% 70% - 100% 80% - 99% 50% - 69% less than 80% less than 50%

Note: Total capacity includes seats and standing allowance

3.6.16 3.6.17 Bristol is the largest urban centre in the The level of rail demand varies considerably South West Government region providing by time of day with demand at its highest level employment, education opportunities and in the high peak hour. Figure 3.17 illustrates leisure activities. In 2007, approximately seven the ratios of passengers to seats and to total million passenger rail journeys started or capacity (includes both seating and standard ended at Bristol Temple Meads, a 75 percent allowances) at Bristol Temple Meads for trains increase from four million in 1998. Trips to arriving in the three-hour peak period. This Bristol by rail, particularly for commuting shows that total capacity provided across the purposes, have become increasingly more three-hour peak period is sufficient to meet attractive in recent years as a result of an demand as of 2007/08. improved train service and increased road congestion into and around the city centre.

43 Figure 3.17 – Average load factors on weekday arrivals at Bristol Temple Meads in 2007, morning three-hour peak (07:00-09:59)

GLOUCESTER CORRIDOR Patchway CARDIFF CORRIDOR Yate

SEVERN SEVERN BEACH BEACH CORRIDOR BRISTOL CHIPPENHAM CORRIDOR St Andrews Road PARKWAY Avonmouth

Shirehampton Filton Abbey Wood Clifton DownMontpelier Chippenham Sea Mills Redland Stapleton Road BATH Melksham Lawrence Hill SPA BRISTOL TEMPLE MEADS d f Bedminster on Parson Street Av vonclif Trowbridge A Freshfor Nailsea & Backwell Keynsham Yatton Oldfield Park Worle Bradford-on- Weston Milton WESTBURY Key

WESTON-SUPER-MARE WESTBURY Average load factor on arrival at Bristol Temple Meads CORRIDOR Load factor Load factor Highbridge & Burnham (relative to seats) (relative to total capacity) Over 130% Over 100% Bridgewater 100% - 130% 70% - 100% Taunton 80% - 99% 50% - 69% less than 80% less than 50% WESTON-SUPER-MARE CORRIDOR

Note: Total capacity includes seats and standing allowance

Figure 3.18 – Average load factors on weekday arrivals at Bristol Temple Meads in 2007, morning high peak hour (08:00-08:59)

GLOUCESTER CORRIDOR Patchway CARDIFF CORRIDOR Yate

SEVERN SEVERN BEACH BEACH CORRIDOR BRISTOL CHIPPENHAM CORRIDOR St Andrews Road PARKWAY Avonmouth

Shirehampton Filton Abbey Wood Clifton DownMontpelier Chippenham Sea Mills Redland Stapleton Road BATH Melksham Lawrence Hill SPA BRISTOL TEMPLE MEADS d f Bedminster on Parson Street Av onclif Trowbridge Av Freshfor Nailsea & Backwell Keynsham Yatton Oldfield Park Worle Bradford-on- Key Weston Milton WESTBURY Average load factor on arrival at Bristol Temple Meads WESTON-SUPER-MARE WESTBURY Load factor Load factor CORRIDOR (relative to seats) (relative to total capacity) Highbridge & Burnham Over 130% Over 100% 100% - 130% 70% - 100% Bridgewater 80% - 99% 50% - 69% Taunton less than 80% less than 50%

WESTON-SUPER-MARE CORRIDOR

Note: Total capacity includes seats and standing allowance

44 3.6.18 3.6.20 Figure 3.18 shows that all corridors except In Devon and Cornwall, holiday traffic is a the Cardiff to Bristol corridor have both a significant element of the overall rail passenger passenger to seat and total capacity ratio of market. Tourism produces seasonal variations less than 100 percent. However, it should be in rail demand to popular tourist destinations. noted that this is a level of average loadings Figure 3.19 shows how the demand to Devon and within this average a number of services and Cornwall fluctuates during the year with the would have passengers standing in the high four-weekly demand for each period compared peak hour. The Cardiff to Bristol corridor has against the annual average ranging from eight a 95 percent passenger to total capacity percent to -30 percent over the course of ratio during the high peak hour and there is 2007/08. The high peak summer months (July evidence that on the busiest services, some and August) generate up to 38 percent more services are in excess of the available capacity. demand than the four-weekly annual average and falling to below -30 per cent over Christmas 3.6.19 and the New Year. Exeter and Plymouth are the key regional centres in Devon and play an important role 3.6.21 in supporting regional economic growth. Total Demand for local services (excluding the Long rail demand to Exeter and Plymouth has Distance High Speed services) on the Devon increased rapidly in the last decade. Demand and Cornwall branch lines has also increased for rail at Exeter St Davids was approximately substantially from 1.7 million journeys in 2001 2 million per year in 2007, which represents an to 2.5 million journeys in 2008, an increase increase of 30 percent from 1998. Plymouth of 50 percent. Figure 3.20 shows the total rail experienced a higher level of growth with rail journeys (excluding the Long Distance High journeys increasing by 50 percent from 1.3 Speed services) made on the branch lines million in 1998 to around 2 million in 2007. between 2001 and 2008.

Figure 3.19 – Seasonal variations in rail demand to/from Devon and Cornwall (2007/08)

40% Key

Cornwall West Devon 30% East Devon All Areas

20%

10%

0%

Percentage -10%

-20%

-30%

-40% 21-Jul-07 13-Oct-07 28-Apr-07 23-Jun-07 05-Jan-08 01-Mar-08 31-Mar-08 02-Feb-08 10-Nov-07 08-Dec-07 18-Aug-07 15-Sep-07 26-May-07

Period (ending)

Source: Lennon ticket sales (2007/08)

45 Figure 3.20 – Demand for rail on the branch lines in Devon and Cornwall

Key

Tarka Line (Exeter - Barnstaple) Par - Newquay Tamar Valley (Plymouth - Gunnislake) Truro - Falmouth Looe Valley (Liskeard - Looe) St Erth - St Ives

500000

450000

400000

350000

300000

250000 Journeys 200000

150000

100000

50000

0 21-Jul-07 13-Oct-07 28-Apr-07 23-Jun-07 05-Jan-08 01-Mar-08 31-Mar-08 02-Feb-08 10-Nov-07 08-Dec-07 18-Aug-07 15-Sep-07 26-May-07

Period (ending)

Source: LENNON (rail) ticket sales data, excluding long distance high speed services Figures contain Carnets and Lelant Salting P&R

3.6.22 3.6.23

Exeter to Barnstaple has experienced the London Heathrow is the largest airport in the most growth with a 74 percent increase in country with around 70 million passengers passengers since 2001. Of all the branches, it per annum and is included within the Great is still experiencing the highest growth per year Western RUS area. With the opening of with an eight percent increase during the year Terminal 5 in 2008, the airport’s capacity grew to 2008. The reduction in journeys on the Par to accommodate a further 30 million passengers to Newquay branch shown in Figure 3.20 is per year and it is predicted that passenger growth due to the introduction of through high speed will increase by a further 15 percent by 2013. train services and figures for travel on these are not included.

46 3.6.24 Heathrow Express provides a faster premium Around 83 percent of passengers travelling fare shuttle service from London Paddington, to Heathrow Airport travel from London and the Heathrow Connect services offer a local the wider South East region. Various means stopping service to stations along the route of transport serve the airport with rail access attracting the commuter market and airport available through London Underground and employees. through Heathrow Express and the Heathrow 3.6.25 Connect service. Heathrow Airport is the Figure 3.21 illustrates demand for Heathrow biggest employment site within the United Express services by journey purpose. In 2006, Kingdom with more than 315 organisations 5 million passengers travelled on Heathrow employing 74,000 staff. Staff are encouraged Express representing a nine percent increase to use public transport with the airport aiming from 2000. to improve travel choices for staff with initiatives such as free buses around the airport campus and a staff travel card with up to 50 percent discounts on some routes. Whilst

Figure 3.21 – Total journeys on Heathrow Express by journey purpose

Key

Foreign Leisure Foreign Business

UK Leisure UK Business

6.0

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0 Passengers (million)

1.0

0.0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Year

Source: Data supplied by Heathrow Express

47 3.6.26 Direct Rail Services operates traffic Evidence suggests that the busiest days for for the nuclear power industry in Great Heathrow Express are Tuesdays and Fridays Britain. In the last few years the company supporting the predominant use of the service has expanded into running services for for business purposes. For services arriving the domestic intermodal and short sea into London Paddington, the morning high intermodal markets peak hour between 08:00 and 08:59 is the Fastline Freight, an established provider busiest and for those services departing of rail infrastructure services, has recently London Paddington for Heathrow Airport the operated into the intermodal market three hour evening peak between 16:00 and 18:59 is the busiest. Advenza Freight Limited offers intermodal high speed and precision logistics 3.7 Freight Operating Companies distribution throughout the United Kingdom 3.7.1 There are currently 10 licensed freight Colas Rail provides rail freight haulage operators who have access contracts across for all market sectors throughout the UK the whole of the rail network. These are; and Europe

DB Schenker Rail (UK) Limited (formerly Freight Europe offers rail freight services English Welsh and Scottish Railways), including train haulage in the UK the largest rail freight operator in Great and Europe Britain, with a licence to operate European West Coast Railway specialise in operating services. DB Schenker run trains for a charter trains, both in its own right and on wide range of markets and are structured behalf of tour operators throughout the UK into four market-based groups: Energy and has a licence for freight operations (includes coal), Construction (which includes domestic waste), Industrial Serco Rail predominantly provides (which includes metals and petroleum) engineering services to Network Rail and Network (which includes international, with the national measurement train and automotive, express parcels services and Omnicom (the national survey train). rail infrastructure services) 3.8 Current freight market profile has two divisions: 3.8.1 Freightliner Limited and Freightliner Significant volumes of freight are carried over Heavy Haul. Freightliner Limited is the RUS area, with an estimated 7,000 million the largest haulier of containerised tonnes transported per annum. The Great traffic, predominantly in the deep sea Western Main Line is the second busiest market; whilst Freightliner Heavy Haul corridor for freight into London after the West is a significant conveyor of bulk goods, Coast Main Line. In the Great Western RUS predominantly coal, construction materials area there are around 45 freight terminals and petroleum. It also operates rail handling over 12 different commodities as infrastructure services shown in Figure 3.22. In addition to these flows, which have origins or destinations within First GBRf, formerly GB Railfreight, is the RUS area, other freight traffic traverses the also a significant operator of deep sea area to destinations in South Wales and to the container trains and rail infrastructure North of England and Scotland. services. They also run a number of services for bulk market customers including coal and gypsum

48 Figure 3.22 – Freight terminals ON ON NDON YLEBONE LO EUST NDON NDON DDINGT LO MAR LO PA 1 2 s ll Route We tion ton ton 6 Ac Junc Route 16 Route 2 Route 18 3 1 5 d 4 or D H Brentf branch T4 SOUT RUISLIP GREENFOR 3 THROW 6 THROW 2 & HEA HEA T1, Route 18 T5 BAA 11 k 7 Infrastructure 8 THROW lnbroo 9 10 Co HEA Route 16 R L OUGH SL ON tion Y WINDSO & ET CENTRA Junc BOURNE END LESBUR yover yover Fl Summit AY . Route 16 S tion OW Claydon L.N.E Claydon Junc y PRINCE RISBOROUGH Route 16 HLEY 3 MARL TC Bramle Route BLE READING OKE tion e 14 Junc R. 13 BASINGST W. HENLEY-ON-THAMES Basingstok G. 12 WN BICESTER TO Route 16 20 Y 4 wley 19 Y Co branch Route WA OT 18 BANBUR Route 17 RK Y DIDC PA Y t r n 17 erco tio 15 n lv n tio FORD NEWBUR Wo Junc 16 OX SALISBUR Wilton Junc Didcot Powe Station N ng Marsto ng st Lo 26 21 We N-IN-MARSH 3 25 TO SWINDO H Route rchester rchester MORE 28 27 34 Do 35 n WEYMOUT tio chester rminster Dor Junc Wa Y h 22 sterleig rd n ill We Ya tio on rt 29 WESTBUR n M tion ovil No Junc Route 17 Y TENHAM Ye Pe TH A 4 36 Abbotswood Junc OL 23 WA tion A BA SP FROME s 24 ovil CHEL SP Route Ye Junc ARK R BRIST P R L therington 33 39 Whatley Quarry Ty branch Sharpnes branch tion OUCESTE Exmouth Junc 32 EXMOUTH GL Merehead Quarry ON WORCESTE SHRUB HIL Castle Cary AUNT T ON s Pilning 31 40 onmouth Exeter Central TEMPLE MEADS

Av Dock IGNT OL 30 PA Route 13 H AC

k 41

BRIST SEVERN BE VIDS H 38 ABBOT

DA nnel Cattewater branch Tu YMOUT ON

37 rn PL ON-SUPER-MARE tion Portbury Doc ve Se Junc NEWT Heathfield branch 43 WEST 42 Alston EXETER ST T Bere 44 NEWPOR Meldon Quarry APLE BARNST GUNNISLAKE LOOE LISKEARD 46 45 Moorswater branch Fowey Harbour branch Par Harbour branch Par o LMOUTH DOCKS 47 ur Tr FA 48 Parkandillack branch Y NEWQUA IVES ST Aggregates terminal Other bulk raw materials Metals General merchandise and rail infrastructure Waste Automotive Specialist freight PENZANCE Key

49 3.8.2 production facilities at and Port Talbot The major commodities transported within the generate significant numbers of trains each day. Great Western RUS area are aggregates, coal 3.8.7 and steel. Figure 3.23 illustrates the principal Automotive manufacturing is centred on freight flows and includes the locations of the Swindon (Honda) and Oxford Cowley (BMW). quarries on the route; the main quarries being Train loads of export cars run via the Channel Merehead, Whatley and Meldon. Tunnel and Purfleet Docks respectively. The 3.8.3 automotive import market is mainly based on The main markets served within the RUS area the ’s Portbury and Avonmouth are presented below: terminals. Daily trains between Dagenham in east London and Bridgend cater for Ford 3.8.4 traffic. A rail terminal at Swindon Hawksworth Aggregates for the construction industry handles imported steel for car manufacture. mainly originate in the Mendips, with others originating from outside the RUS area, and 3.8.8 account for much of the freight traffic between Didcot Power station is the only rail served the West Country and London with terminals power station within the RUS area. At present, at Paddington, Acton, Brentford, Hayes, West the plant is non-EU compliant as it is not Drayton, Thorney Mill, Colnbrook and others to fitted with Flue Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) the south and east of London. The aggregate equipment. Unless a dispensation is granted it flows between the Mendips and London are is likely that this station will cease coal burning the heaviest freight flows nationally and can operations by 2015. Whilst Aberthaw Power reach six million tonnes each year, equating to station lies within the scope of the Wales RUS, 4,400 tonnes per train. Other terminals served it will continue to be served from Avonmouth are at Theale, Wootton Bassett, Appleford and and Portbury. The influence of South Wales Oxford Banbury Road. on freight traffic is significant on this route due to the many impacts that through traffic 3.8.5 has on the area. It is therefore important not The route between the South Coast Port of to consider these flows in isolation. The coal Southampton and the fired Uskmouth power station in South Wales via Basingstoke, Reading and Oxford is the is mainly supplied locally from , key route for deep sea container services, with some flows from Bristol. generating significant volumes of container traffic for the West Midlands, the North and 3.8.9 Scotland. The Freight RUS, published in March Petroleum traffic generates up to five trains 2007, highlighted a specific “gap” with the per week crossing the route from Milford gauge clearance requirements on this route. Haven to either Westerleigh or Theale. A This is discussed further in Chapter 4 with the flow operates between Lindsey Oil Refinery committed scheme to enhance the gauge on (Immingham) and Westerleigh five times a this route. Avonmouth has limited container week and between Lindsey Oil Refinery and movements, however the proposal by the Bristol Theale three times a week. There is also a Port Company to construct a new container planned train once a week from Port Clarence terminal development at Avonmouth is discussed to Westerleigh and other irregular movements further in Chapter 5 under future freight growth. between Lindsey Oil Refinery and Didcot Power station. There is one oil train per day 3.8.6 from Lindsey Oil Refinery to Colnbrook. The metals market includes large volumes of steel transported from South Wales to a variety of terminals throughout the UK. Steel

50 Figure 3.23 – Freight flows by commodity ON ON NDON YLEBONE LO EUST NDON NDON DDINGT LO MAR LO PA 2 s ll Route We tion ton ton 6 Ac Junc Route 16 Route Route 18 d or D H Brentf branch T4 SOUT RUISLIP GREENFOR 3 THROW THROW 2 & HEA HEA T1, Route 18 T5 BAA k Infrastructure THROW lnbroo Co HEA Route 16 R L OUGH SL ON tion Y WINDSO & ET CENTRA Junc BOURNE END LESBUR yover yover Fl Summit AY . Route 16 S tion OW Claydon L.N.E Claydon Junc y PRINCE RISBOROUGH Route 16 HLEY 3 MARL TC Bramle Route BLE READING OKE tion e Junc R. BASINGST W. HENLEY-ON-THAMES Basingstok G. WN BICESTER TO Route 16 Y 4 wley Co branch Y Route WA OT Y BANBUR Route 17 RK DIDC PA Y t n n erco tion tio NEWBUR r lv FORD SALISBUR Wo Junc Wilton Junc OX N ng Marsto ng st Lo Didcot Powe Station We N-IN-MARSH 3 TO SWINDO H Route rchester rchester MORE Do n WEYMOUT tio chester rminster Dor Junc Wa Y h sterleig rd n ill We Ya tio on rt WESTBUR n M ovil No Junc Route 17 tion Y Ye Pe 4 TH A TENHAM OL Abbotswood Junc WA tion BA SP FROME s ovil A Route Ye Junc CHEL SP ARK R BRIST P R L therington Whatley Quarry Ty branch Sharpnes branch tion OUCESTE Exmouth Junc Merehead Quarry EXMOUTH GL ON WORCESTE SHRUB HIL Castle Cary AUNT T ON Pilning s Exeter Central onmouth IGNT Av Dock TEMPLE MEADS

PA Route 13 H OL AC

k

SEVERN BE VIDS H ABBOT

BRIST

DA nnel Cattewater branch

Tu YMOUT

ON rn PL ON-SUPER-MARE tion Portbury Doc ve Se Junc NEWT Heathfield branch WEST Alston EXETER ST T Bere NEWPOR Meldon Quarry APLE BARNST GUNNISLAKE LOOE LISKEARD Moorswater branch Fowey Harbour branch Par Harbour branch Par

o LMOUTH DOCKS ur Tr FA Parkandillack branch Y NEWQUA Aggregates (including china clay) Coal General merchandise (containers) Metals Other (oil, waste,automotive, specialist, etc) IVES ST PENZANCE Key

51 3.8.10 along with the recently extrapolated freight Daily train loads of containerised waste to forecasts to 2019 and 2030. landfill sites at Appleford and Calvert originate 3.9.3 from Brentford and Bristol. The Freight RUS recommends a proactive 3.8.11 strategy for the development of priority core Didcot is a key hub for Ministry of Defence and diversionary routes to accommodate (MOD) traffic feeding terminals at Bicester, W10 gauge. This will facilitate the growth Ashchurch, Keyham, Ernesettle and of rail’s share of the market for haulage of Warminster and other terminals outside 9ft 6in containers on conventional deck height the RUS area. wagons. Loading gauge defines the maximum height and width of vehicles that can be safely 3.8.12 accommodated without fouling structures such Freight traffic generated in Cornwall is as bridges and platforms. Within the RUS area predominantly china clay, mostly exported loading gauge predominantly ranges from W6 locally through the Port of Fowey, but with to W8, as shown in Figure 3.25. some longer distance traffic also. Cement traffic from Hope (Peak District) runs to 3.9.4 Moorswater on the Looe Branch. Aggregates Route Availability (RA) is a system for traffic runs from Burngullow to East London. determining which types of locomotive and rolling stock can travel over any given section of 3.8.13 route and is normally determined by the strength Network Rail infrastructure traffic operates of underline bridges in relation to axle load and across the RUS area, mainly serviced from the speed. The RA of a specific route is determined Westbury Local Distribution Centre (LDC). by the carrying capability of both its structure 3.9 Freight capacity and capability and track. As shown in Figure 3.25, most of the 3.9.1 RUS area is classified as RA8 which permits The busiest part of the network is between axle loads up to 22 tonnes per axle. Only in Reading and Acton as can be seen in certain specially controlled circumstances, can Figure 3.24 which illustrates the daily trains receive derogation to operate heavier axle number of scheduled freight paths in the loads over lower categorised routes. Great Western RUS area by route section. 3.9.5 The diagram shows all Working Timetable The range of loop lengths within the RUS (WTT) paths, as at May 2009, of which only area varies from 186 metres at Eggesford a percentage are actually used every day. (although rarely used for freight) to 1447 The diagram does not illustrate trains which metres at Milton. Ten percent of the loops are short-term plan special movements, and in the RUS scope area are long enough to therefore illustrates an average capacity accommodate the longest freight trains of 775 utilisation position. metres, with the majority of loops between 3.9.2 500 metres and 775 metres. Freight operators The Freight RUS presents a view of the have aspirations for loops to be at least 775 freight growth and alterations in existing traffic metres, to accommodate 121 SLUs (Standard flows that could reasonably be expected to Length Units). FOCs are engaged in a number occur on the network by 2014 and presents a of initiatives to improve path take-up and the strategy to address the key issues that arise efficiency of operations. All operators are in accommodating these changes. These seeking to maximise the use of each path on predictions form part of the baseline and are the network by running trains which are longer, used as a basis for future demand and are heavier and in some cases potentially bigger therefore considered further in Chapter 5 (both in weight and height).

52 Figure 3.24 – Scheduled freight paths ON ON NDON YLEBONE LO EUST NDON NDON DDINGT LO MAR LO PA 2 s ll Route We tion ton ton 6 Ac Junc Route 16 Route Route 18 d or D H Brentf branch T4 SOUT RUISLIP GREENFOR 3 THROW THROW 2 & HEA HEA T1, Route 18 T5 BAA k Infrastructure THROW lnbroo Co HEA Route 16 R L OUGH SL ON tion Y WINDSO & ET CENTRA Junc BOURNE END LESBUR yover yover Fl Summit AY . Route 16 S tion OW Claydon L.N.E Claydon Junc y PRINCE RISBOROUGH Route 16 HLEY 3 MARL TC Bramle Route BLE READING OKE tion e Junc R. BASINGST W. HENLEY-ON-THAMES Basingstok G. WN BICESTER TO Route 16 Y 4 wley Y Co branch Route WA OT BANBUR Route 17 RK Y DIDC PA Y t n erco tio r n lv n tio FORD NEWBUR Wo Junc OX SALISBUR n Wilton Junc N ng Marsto ng Didcot Powe Statio st Lo We N-IN-MARSH 3 TO SWINDO H Route rchester rchester MORE Do n WEYMOUT tio chester rminster Dor Junc Wa Y h sterleig rd n ill We Ya tio on rt WESTBUR n M tion ovil No Junc Route 17 Y TENHAM Ye Pe TH A 4 Abbotswood Junc OL WA tion A BA SP FROME s ovil CHEL SP Route Ye Junc ARK R BRIST P R L therington Whatley Quarry Ty branch Sharpnes branch tion OUCESTE Exmouth Junc Merehead Quarry EXMOUTH GL ON WORCESTE SHRUB HIL Castle Cary AUNT T ON Pilning s Exeter Central TEMPLE MEADS onmouth

IGNT Av Dock OL PA Route 13 H AC

k

SEVERN BE VIDS H BRIST ABBOT

DA nnel Cattewater branch

Tu YMOUT

ON rn PL ON-SUPER-MARE tion Portbury Doc ve Se Junc NEWT Heathfield branch WEST Alston EXETER ST T Bere NEWPOR Meldon Quarry APLE BARNST GUNNISLAKE LOOE LISKEARD Moorswater branch Fowey Harbour branch Par Harbour branch Par o LMOUTH DOCKS ur Tr FA Parkandillack branch Y NEWQUA IVES No scheduled freight Less than 12 trains per day 13 - 24 trains per day 25 - 48 trains per day ST PENZANCE Key

53 Figure 3.25 – Gauge and route availability ON ON NDON YLEBONE LO EUST NDON NDON DDINGT LO MAR LO PA 2 s ll Route We tion ton ton 6 Ac Junc Route 16 Route Route 18 d or D H Brentf branch T4 SOUT RUISLIP GREENFOR 3 THROW THROW 2 & HEA HEA T1, Route 18 T5 BAA k Infrastructure THROW lnbroo Co HEA Route 16 R L OUGH SL ON tion Y WINDSO & ET CENTRA Junc BOURNE END LESBUR yover yover Fl Summit AY . Route 16 S tion OW Claydon L.N.E Claydon Junc y PRINCE RISBOROUGH Route 16 HLEY 3 MARL TC Bramle Route BLE READING OKE tion e Junc R. BASINGST W. HENLEY-ON-THAMES Basingstok G. WN BICESTER TO Route 16 Y 4 wley Y Co branch Route WA OT BANBUR Route 17 RK Y DIDC PA Y t n erco tio r n lv n tio FORD NEWBUR Wo Junc OX SALISBUR n Wilton Junc N ng Marsto ng Didcot Powe Statio st Lo We N-IN-MARSH 3 TO SWINDO H Route rchester rchester MORE Do n WEYMOUT tio chester rminster Dor Junc Wa Y h sterleig rd n ill We Ya tio on rt WESTBUR n M tion ovil No Junc Route 17 Y TENHAM Ye Pe TH A 4 Abbotswood Junc OL WA tion A BA SP FROME s ovil CHEL SP Route Ye Junc ARK R BRIST P R L therington Whatley Quarry Ty branch Sharpnes branch tion OUCESTE Exmouth Junc Merehead Quarry EXMOUTH GL ON WORCESTE SHRUB HIL Castle Cary AUNT T ON Pilning s Exeter Central TEMPLE MEADS

onmouth IGNT Av Dock OL PA Route 13 H AC

k

BRIST SEVERN BE VIDS H ABBOT

DA nnel Cattewater branch

Tu YMOUT

ON rn PL ON-SUPER-MARE tion Portbury Doc ve Se Junc NEWT Heathfield branch WEST Alston EXETER ST T Bere NEWPOR Meldon Quarry APLE BARNST GUNNISLAKE LOOE LISKEARD Moorswater branch Fowey Harbour branch Par Harbour branch Par

o LMOUTH DOCKS ur Tr FA Parkandillack branch Y NEWQUA IVES W 6 W7 W8 W9 W10 1 - 6 RA 7 - 9 RA 10 RA ST PENZANCE Key Data obtained from the Sectional Appendix Data obtained from the Sectional and Gauge Availability and Network Rail Route Clearance data

54 3.10 Current RUS Infrastructure extend to Maidenhead and with the recent 3.10.1 commitment to the electrification of the Great The infrastructure characteristics in the Western Main Line the route from London scope area of the Great Western RUS varies Paddington to Oxford, Newbury and Bristol (via widely, depending on the location, historical Bath and Bristol Parkway) will be electrified service demands and recent developments. by 2016. This will be extended to Swansea This has resulted in different levels of route by 2017. These developments are discussed capability, represented across the area by the further in Chapter 4 under committed schemes track configuration of the network from east and with recent developments in Chapter 8. to west as it changes from four tracks to two 3.10.6 tracks and then to a single line. 70 percent of The length of platforms also vary along a the route is two tracks with only 12 percent line of route, this means the train length and comprising four track sections. This is shown service provided can be constrained by the in Chapter 2, Figure 2.1. shortest platform, or Selective Door Operation 3.10.2 (SDO) has to be deployed. The shortest and The principal infrastructure characteristics longest platform lengths across the RUS scope analysed as part of the baseline exercise area are indicated in Figure 3.28. Platforms includes Linespeeds, Signalling headways, lengths across the RUS area vary and can Electrification, Platform lengths, Station accommodate a mixture of two-, three-, and facilities (including car parking) and rolling four-car train configurations and longer two stock depots and stabling. plus eight-car High Speed Train formations. The constraint of short platforms is particularly 3.10.3 evident in the Thames Valley making it difficult Linespeeds vary greatly, from the high speed to deliver much needed passenger capacity sections of 100 – 125mph to the rural branch through train lengthening. lines where the majority of speeds are within the 40 – 75mph band with some areas falling 3.11 Stations below 35mph. Figure 3.26 illustrates the 3.11.1 differing linespeeds across the RUS area. Appendix A provides a detailed list of station facilities at the 192 stations located within the 3.10.4 Great Western RUS area (including the station A variety of signalling systems also feature classification) and the integration with other across the Great Western RUS area, which modes of transport. Most locations intersect again, reflects the historical differences in with the railway or run close to other modes demand and service levels for each area. of public transport and this all forms part of Signalling headways is a measure of how the passenger’s journey. The ease with which closely (in time) one train can follow another passengers can get to stations determines with the range reaching from two minutes to the attractiveness of rail travel relative to other over 10 minutes across the RUS scope area modes. Car parking availability and utilisation as shown in Figure 3.27. is also presented in Appendix A along with 3.10.5 accessibility to the station and interchange Currently, there is a limited amount of opportunities with other modes of transport. electrification within the RUS area, with the line between London Paddington and Airport Jn being the only electrified section. The lines between Airport Jn and Heathrow Airport are also electrified but these are owned by BAA. With Crossrail, the limit of electrification will

55 Figure 3.26 – Linespeeds ON ON YLEBONE LONDON EUST DDINGT LONDON MAR LONDON PA 2 Route ells 6 Acton W Junction Route 16 Route Route 18 T4 Brentford branch SOUTH RUISLIP THROW 3 GREENFORD THROW HEA HEA T1, 2 & T5 Route 18 BAA k Infrastructure THROW Colnbroo H HEA Route 16 R Y SLOUG ON WINDSO & ET CENTRAL BOURNE END YLESBUR Flyover Junction Summit A Route 16 Claydon L.N.E. Junction PRINCES RISBOROUGH Route 16 3 MARLOW Bramley Route BLETCHLEY OKE READING -ON-THAMES BASINGST R. Junction W. Basingstoke G. HENLEY WN BICESTER TO Route 16 Y 4 Y Cowley branch WA Route BANBUR Route 17 RK Y Y DIDCOT PA r n n lvercot n NEWBUR Wo Junction OXFORD SALISBUR n Wilto Junctio Didcot Powe Statio est Long Marsto ON-IN-MARSH 3 SWINDON Route MORET Dorchester W WEYMOUTH rminster Dorchester Junction Wa Y sterleigh rd n n We Ya n WESTBUR E ovil Y Norto Junctio Route 17 4 Ye Pen Mill TH A n OL TENHAM Abbotswood Junctio WA BA SP FROM ovil A RK Route Ye Junctio CHEL SP BRIST PA therington Whatley Quarry Ty branch h n Sharpness branch Exmout Junctio Merehead Quarry EXMOUTH ON WORCESTER SHRUB HILL Castle Cary GLOUCESTER AUNT T h ON Pilning s Exeter Central TEMPLE MEADS

onmout IGNT Av Dock OL PA Route 13 r

BRIST SEVERN BEACH VIDS H ABBOT DA unnel Cattewate branch

T

ON YMOUT ON-SUPER-MARE PL Portbury Dock Severn Junction NEWT Heathfield branch WEST Alston EXETER ST T Bere NEWPOR Meldon Quarry APLE BARNST GUNNISLAKE LOOE LISKEARD r Moorswater branch Fowey Harbou branch Par Harbour branch Par o LMOUTH DOCKS ur Tr FA Parkandillack branch AY 0 - 35mph 40 - 75mph 80 - 105mph 110-125mph NEWQU IVES ST PENZANCE Key Data obtained from the sectional Appendix and Data obtained from the sectional Network Rail Route Plans (April 2008)

56 Figure 3.27 – Signalling headways ON ON YLEBONE LONDON EUST DDINGT LONDON MAR LONDON PA 2 Route ells 6 Acton W Junction Route 16 Route Route 18 T4 Brentford branch SOUTH RUISLIP 3 THROW THROW GREENFORD HEA HEA T1, 2 & T5 Route 18 BAA k Infrastructure THROW Colnbroo H HEA Route 16 R Y SLOUG ON WINDSO & ET CENTRAL BOURNE END YLESBUR Flyover Junction Summit A Route 16 Claydon L.N.E. Junction PRINCES RISBOROUGH Route 16 3 MARLOW Bramley Route OKE BLETCHLEY READING -ON-THAMES BASINGST R. Junction W. Basingstoke G. HENLEY WN BICESTER TO Route 16 Y 4 Y Cowley branch WA Route Route 17 RK BANBUR Y Y DIDCOT PA r n lvercot n n NEWBUR Wo Junction OXFORD SALISBUR n Wilto Junctio Didcot Powe Statio est Long Marsto ON-IN-MARSH 3 SWINDON Route MORET Dorchester W n WEYMOUTH rminster Dorchester Junctio Wa Y sterleigh rd n n We Ya n WESTBUR E ovil Y Norto Junctio Route 17 4 Ye Pen Mill TH A n OL TENHAM Abbotswood Junctio WA BA SP FROM ovil A RK Route Ye Junctio CHEL SP BRIST PA therington Whatley Quarry Ty branch h n Sharpness branch Exmout Junctio Merehead Quarry EXMOUTH ON Castle Cary WORCESTER SHRUB HILL GLOUCESTER AUNT T h ON Pilning s Exeter Central TEMPLE MEADS

onmout IGNT Av Dock OL PA Route 13 r

BRIST SEVERN BEACH VIDS H ABBOT DA unnel Cattewate branch

T

ON YMOUT ON-SUPER-MARE PL Portbury Dock Severn Junction NEWT Heathfield branch WEST Alston EXETER ST T Bere NEWPOR Meldon Quarry APLE BARNST GUNNISLAKE LOOE LISKEARD r Moorswater branch Fowey Harbou branch Par Harbour branch Par o LMOUTH DOCKS ur Tr FA Parkandillack branch AY NEWQU IVES ST PENZANCE 2.5 mins 3 mins 4 mins 5 mins Over 5 miins One train working Absolute block Key Data obtained from Rules Of The Plan Data obtained from Rules Of

57 Figure 3.28 – Platform lengths N ON ON LEBONE RY LONDO EUST DDINGT LONDON MA LONDON PA 2 lls Route We 6 Acton Junction Route 16 ay

Route w Route 18 e Broad g

Ealin ling a on Main Lin E Act st We l Drayton Green

Hanwel H

T4 n Brentford branch

Castle Bar Park

SOUT RUISLIP

es & & es

y Harlingto Ha 3

THROW

Southall

t Drayton t

GREENFORD s THROW We HEA South Greenford HEA T1, 2 &

T5 r

Route 18 Ive BAA

k gley

n

Infrastructure La THROW Colnbroo HEA

Route 16 R

n ham

Y SLOUGH ON Burn

w WINDSO & ET CENTRAL lo p LESBUR BOURNE END Ta

Flyover Junctio Summit head n AY

Route 16 Maide Furze Platt Cookham

n yford Tw Claydon L.N.E. Junctio PRINCES RISBOROUGH Route 16 3 MARLOW Bramley Route Mortimer BLETCHLEY rgrave OKE

READING Shiplake

Wa

est e

-ON-THAMES Theal R. Junction BASINGST W. lehurst Basingstoke G. Ti HENLEY

WN

Reading W ermaston

BICESTER TO Ald

Route 16

Cholsey Pangbourne Midgham Islip Y 4

AY

Cowley branch tcham a

Route Th BANBUR Route 17 Y ARKW Y DIDCOT P Goring & Streatley t n r n lverco n n

NEWBUR

Radley Wo Junctio Culham Racecourse Newbury SALISBUR n

Wilto Junctio Appleford

OXFORD

Hungerford Didcot Powe Statio Kintbury est Ascott-under- Wychwood Long Marsto Combe ON-IN-MARSH Hanborough 3

Finstock SWINDON Bedwyn Kemble Route Charlbury Pewsey MORET Dilton Marsh Dorchester W owbridge Honeybourne Stroud Shipton n Chippenham Maiden Newton WEYMOUTH Tr Melksham Evesham rminster Chetnole tminster Kingham

Dorchester Junctio Pershore on Wa Y Ye

h

Stonehouse Av f Thornford

te sterleig rd onclif n

n

Ya We Ya Av ood Bradford-on- WESTBUR E ovil Norto Junctio Route 17

& AY Freshford 4 Ye Pen Mill TH A n OL Abbotswood Junction TENHAM Ashchurch BA SP FROM ovil A illage Cam Dursley Route Abbey W Ye Junctio ARKW CHEL SP

BRIST P

therington m Bruton Whatley Quarry

Ty branch h

Sharpness branch

Filton Oldfield Park Oldfield

nsha Key psham mpstone Commando mpstone V Exmout Junction N Merehead Quarry Polsloe Bridge Digby & Sowton To Exton Ly Ly EXMOUTH GLOUCESTER WORCESTER SHRUB HILL Castle Cary TO Patchway UN Montpelier e TA St James’ Park rr rquay Lawrence Hill verton Parkway h Bedminster To To e ON tton Ti rl Redland Stapleton Road Pilning Ya Exeter Central Parson Street TEMPLE MEADS Wo onmout

IGNT Av Docks OL PA Route 13 Bridgwater

ston Milton

Clifton Down Clifton Nailsea & Backwell SEVERN BEACH VIDS H arren BRIST tnes ABBOT Dawlish We

DA Thomas unnel

Cattewater branch

To Starcross

ignmouth MOUT

T

ort

ON Y

Sea Mills

Te p PL ON-SUPER-MARE on oford Highbridge & Burnham Portbury Dock Ivybridge vonmouth

Dawlish W

Andrews Road Ye A Dev Newton St Cyres Severn Junction NEWT St Exeter St Heathfield branch Shirehampton WEST Alston

EXETER ST

T Dockyard

m

y Copplestone

Lapford ha

Bere y Ke

Arms Eggesford Morchard Road Road NEWPOR

Meldon Quarr

tash

Kings Nympton

APLE Sal Umberleigh Chapelton s Portsmouth

Calstock St Budeaux Ferry Ferry Budeaux St ctoria Road German

BARNST Bere Ferrers

St Budeaux Vi St

GUNNISLAKE

Menheniot

ne LOOE y ombe

LISKEARD

Co St Ke St

Sandplace Causeland Bodmin Parkway Moorswater branch Fowey Harbour branch Par Harbour branch own Lostwithiel T Par

Luxulyan Austell Falmouth

St Bugle Penmere o Penryn LMOUTH DOCKS ur Roche Perranwell Tr FA St Columb Road Parkandillack branch Redruth Quintrel Downs Hayle Camborne Y NEWQUA IVES Lelant St Erth ST Carbis Bay 0 - 5 metres 51 - 100 metres 101 - 150 metres 151 - 200 metres Over 201 metres PENZANCE Lelant Saltings For locations with multiple platforms, the shortest and longest platform lengths are shown Key Data obtained from Sectional Appendix Data obtained from Sectional

58 3.11.2 3.11.3 It is noted that lack of station car parking There are many station enhancement projects capacity is a widespread issue which occurs in development sponsored by the train at many of the main regional centres. Car park operating companies, third parties, through occupancy data identifies 18 percent of car the National Station Improvement Programme parks within the RUS area as being at 100 or Access for All which aim to address station percent utilisation, with a further 41 percent of facilities including expansions to car parks. car parks with utilisation of over 75 percent. These are discussed further in Chapter 4. It is thus a key issue if access to the network is not to be deterred suppressing future passenger demand.

Figure 3.29 – Car park occupancy analysis (2008/09)

26% 18%

15%

Key

Max 100%

High > 75%

41% Med 50 - 75%

Low <50

Source: First Great Western

59 Figure 3.30 – Top ten most used stations in 2007/08

Passenger (millions) per annum London Paddington 29.1 Reading 17.0 Bristol Temple Meads 7.4 Slough 5.5 Oxford 4.7 Bath 4.3 Maidenhead 3.9 Ealing Broadway 3.5 Swindon 2.6 Didcot Parkway 2.6

Source: Lennon (rail) ticket sales (excluding interchange) Note: Transport for London (TfL) travelcards sold at outlets other than National Rail stations are not included.

3.11.4 3.12.2 Figure 3.30 highlights the top 10 most used Each of the depots is different and performs stations within the RUS area during 2007/08. a specific role, based on its location, facilities, processes and assigned rolling stock. Each 3.11.5 depot has been developed to operate on a The least used stations within the RUS area variety of activities which include overnight with less than 1000 passengers per annum servicing, maintenance, modifications, repairs, during 2007/08 include Chapelton, Coombe, tyre turning and cleaning. Each depot has a Pilning and Lelant; however this analysis different layout, with variables such as track excludes journeys made on Rover tickets layout, berths and stabling roads which dictate which may have an impact on the actual level the workflow through the site. of footfall at some of the stations. 3.12.3 3.12 Train maintenance depots The other major depot in the RUS area is that and stabling of Heathrow Express at 3.12.1 (London) adjacent to FGW’s HST depot. The principal maintenance depots in the Great Western RUS area are at Old Oak Common 3.12.4 (London), Reading, St Phillips Marsh (Bristol), In addition to the depots, the stabling of FGW Exeter, Laira (Plymouth) and Long Rock vehicles occurs at station areas in Paddington, (Penzance). These depots are operated by Oxford, Cheltenham, Gloucester, Westbury, FGW. There is an additional depot at Landore Bristol Temple Meads, Exeter and Plymouth. (Swansea) but this is outside the scope of the South West Trains use the network sidings Great Western RUS area. at Exeter New Yard, Exeter St Davids and CrossCountry stable at Barton Hill (Bristol), Laira (Plymouth) and Long Rock (Penzance).

60 3.12.5 to carry out renewal and enhancement As part of the Reading Station Area works. Both the cyclical and the abnormal Redevelopment works, the existing possessions often require diversions of maintenance depots at Reading Triangle passenger and freight services on some of the will be demolished and a new depot built on key routes. the Reading West Jn sidings. A new depot 3.13.2 at Reading will need to be constructed to With the mixture of traffic and routes within accommodate the proposed new fleets, the RUS area, engineering access varies from additional vehicles to deliver the extra capacity heavily restricted on the Great Western Main to meet the High Level Output Specification Line (as a result of franchise commitments (HLOS) targets and the Intercity Express and Heathrow Express contract requirements), Programme (IEP). to a reasonable match to requirements on 3.12.6 the branches lines. The current access Adjacent to the Great Western Main Line arrangements around the various route is the currently disused , sections are briefly described below. vacated following the move of Eurostar 3.13.3 from London Waterloo to St Pancras. North The vast majority of renewals and Pole has been identified for stabling and enhancement work is undertaken at weekends possible maintenance of the IEP trains in the and the track possession plan is constructed London area. Crossrail will concentrate its on a route wide basis to ensure that on all maintenance activities at Old Oak Common. weekends at least one route is available 3.12.7 from London to Bristol and South Wales, There are also a number of freight and north – south coast CrossCountry and maintenance depots and sites within the Great freight services can continue to operate. The Western RUS area where freight operators main considerations include no concurrent conduct servicing and light maintenance. possessions from Southcote Jn to Exeter, These include Acton, Avonmouth, Barton Hill, or Bristol to Cogload Jn and Bathampton Jn Stoke Gifford, Westbury, Merehead Quarry, to Bristol, or Bathampton Jn to Westbury. Taunton Fairwater, Newton Abbot and Fowey. In addition there are restrictions on Friday night possessions throughout the summer to 3.12.8 cater for the holiday market. This possession Figure 3.31 illustrates the current locations for strategy also needs to intertwine with other depots, stabling and maintenance in the RUS key routes throughout the rest of the country, area for both passenger and freight operators particularly Didcot North to the Midlands and and also includes the proposed Track Reading to Basingstoke. Renewals Recycling Centre at Westbury. 3.13.4 3.13 Engineering access On the four track section between Didcot 3.13.1 and London Paddington a permanent two Currently there are three types of possessions track timetable solution is established for engineering access within the RUS area: whereby access to two track sections is normal possessions taken overnight during provided overnight for up to eight hours with “white periods” when no trains are scheduled standardised weave patterns between main to run; cyclical possessions, which are taken and relief lines. Access at Airport Jn, at Slough for maintenance on a route section generally and at Reading is reduced to five hours only on a four, eight or 12-week cycle; and and weekend access is essential for the abnormal possessions, which are generally maintenance of these heavily used junctions. taken as required over a weekend in order

61 Figure 3.31 – Depot and stabling points ON ON FGW YLEBONE LONDON EUST DDINGT LONDON MAR LONDON PA London Paddington 2 n lls Route We W HEX 6 FG Acton Junction Route 16 Route Route 18 Old Oak Commo Acton h T4 Brentford branc SOUTH RUISLIP W 3 THROW THRO GREENFORD HEA HEA T1, 2 & T5 Route 18 BAA Infrastructure THROW Colnbrook HEA Route 16 n Y SLOUGH ON WINDSOR & ET CENTRAL LESBUR BOURNE END Flyover Junctio Summit AY Route 16 Claydon L.N.E. Junction PRINCES RISBOROUGH Route 16 3 MARLOW Bramley Route BLETCHLEY OKE READING n e -ON-THAMES D TM BASINGST R. Junctio W W. Basingstok G. FG HENLEY FGW WN BICESTER TO Reading Reading DMUD Route 16 Y 4 W AY Cowley branch FG Oxford Route BANBUR Route 17 Y ARKW Y DIDCOT P r lvercot n n NEWBUR Wo Junction OXFORD SALISBUR Wilto Junction Didcot Powe Station est Long Marsto ON-IN-MARSH 3 SWINDON FGW estbury Route MORET W Dorchester W WEYMOUTH rminster Dorchester Junction Y Wa sterleigh rd n d estbury We Ya W WESTBUR E ovil Norton Junctio Route 17 AY 4 Ye Pen Mill TH A ford n TENHAM OL Abbotswoo Junction s Marsh FGW BA SP A FROM ovil Route Ye Junctio FGW ARKW CHEL SP BRIST P therington Whatley Quarry Stoke Gif Ty branch h Sharpness branch St Philip’ Marsh Junction DMUD Exmout Junction N Merehead Quarry EXMOUTH Castle Cary TO Merehead WORCESTER SHRUB HILL GLOUCESTER UN unton TA Ta h ON Barton Hill FGW Crosscountry Pilning Exeter Central Gloucester TEMPLE MEADS onmout

IGNT Av Docks OL PA Route 13 T W SEVERN BEACH VIDS Barton Hill BRIST Laira FG ABBO DA unnel Cattewater branch

N

Abbot T

Crosscountry YMOUTH TO PL ON-SUPER-MARE Portbury Dock vonmouth A Severn Junction NEW Newton Heathfield branch WEST Alston mple Meads EXETER ST FGW T Te Bere ard Y Bristol T NEWPOR Meldon Quarry SW APLE Exeter New BARNST GUNNISLAKE FGW LOOE Exeter St Davids LISKEARD Fowey Moorswater branch Fowey Harbour branch Par Harbour branch Par

o LMOUTH DOCKS ur Tr FA Parkandillack branch AY NEWQU Depot Stabling point Freight maintenance point Location operator Train Proposed National Delivery Service track materials recycling depot (from 2011) IVES ST PENZANCE FGW Long Rock AAA BBB AAA AAA AAA BBB BBB BBB BBB Crosscountry Key Data obtained from FGW Depot Capabilities (April 2008) and Network Rail Customer Relationship teams

62 3.13.5 in order to achieve the outputs required for The section from Didcot to Swindon requires renewal of the ballast and track. The system extended journey times (predominantly will require overnight single line working of through rail replacement bus services) when sections of route with retimings and limited the line is closed for maintenance or renewal diversions of overnight services and stock activity. For this reason, work is concentrated moves. Conventional renewal will apply where into non-summer periods when critical operational restrictions (e.g. level crossings, maintenance and renewals work takes place. stations and junctions) prevent the use of High Output Track Renewals. Network Rail’s High 3.13.6 Output equipment is currently based at Taunton Although outside the scope of the RUS a key Fairwater Yard to allow rapid and frequent asset in the area is the Severn Tunnel, where transit to the renewal sites on the route. the extreme and aggressive environment necessitates a specific cyclical renewal 3.13.9 programme to maintain performance and safety. For some parts of the area, only one line A six-year cycle requires that a full renewal may be blocked at a time and therefore of the track and a detailed civil engineering single line working will be operated, for inspection takes place. This puts additional example weeknights between Cogload Jn strain on the diversionary route via Gloucester and Plymouth, on Filton Bank and between which adds at least one hour to the journey time. Gloucester and Abbotswood Jn. The Severn Tunnel is maintained on a recurring 3.13.10 midweek night frequency with reversible working All possessions are organised to ensure over one line. In 2009/10 there will be additional that access to freight terminals is normally and continuous engineering work taking place in available, for example Southcote Jn to the Severn Tunnel area as part of the Newport Westbury and between Westbury and East Area Signalling Renewal (NASR). This will Somerset one line is available for access to require diversions of freight and passenger the quarries. services on either side of the tunnel as a feature of the timetable. 3.13.11 A different approach to heavy maintenance on 3.13.7 the numerous West of England branches has On the rest of the route, access for been developed where workload requirements maintenance is available on overnight are such as to warrant extended midweek possessions with consent from affected blockades and bus substitution by agreement operators and with an alternative route for with the operator. This current policy will services made available. For example when continue in Devon and Cornwall where both lines are blocked between Wootton necessary but on a reducing basis. On the Bassett Jn and North Somerset Jn, trains will Torbay line, work is mainly carried out during run via Bristol Parkway. school half term holidays. 3.13.8 3.13.12 Weekend double line blockades are Works have commenced in 2009 for the employed for any major significant renewals remodelling and rebuilding of Reading station or maintenance works. Track renewals area. This is likely to involve weekend and will continue on the Bristol to Exeter route, bank holiday journey disruption and diversions primarily to the south of Taunton, and on the during the construction period. However, every Berks and Hants route to 2010. This will be effort will be made to reduce disruptions to achieved through a combination of weekend passengers to a minimum. and midweek possessions and continuous use of the High Output Track Renewals system

63 3.13.13 3.14.2 Across the Great Western RUS area, a number A coordinated approach has been developed of generic issues affecting engineering access to ensure consistency between the Western at present have been identified – many of Seven Day Railway work packages and the which are being reviewed as part of the Seven identified gaps and options under the RUS Day Railway initiative: – the results of this are discussed further in Chapter 6. Further details on the objective of growing demand for more services at the Seven Day Railway initiative is presented weekends and particularly on Sundays in Chapter 4 under committed schemes. whilst there are often diversionary routes 3.15 Performance available when lines are closed for 3.15.1 maintenance, diversion of freight services In order to establish the performance baseline is usually more restricted due to the for the Great Western RUS area, the current limitations of gauge and route availability level of performance and the historical trend for the potential for growth in freight traffic both Public Performance Measure (PPM) and in both existing and new flows could put delay minutes was assessed using data from pressure on maintenance regimes as 2006/07 and 2007/08 extracted from the data presently conducted warehouse ‘Performance Systems Strategy’ (PSS). the diversion of services to an alternative route has a knock-on impact on services 3.15.2 that normally use that route Sub areas were defined through the geographic split of the RUS scope area into 10 the diversion of services extends summary areas, aligned with strategic route passenger journey times and also reduces sections to aid analysis. A representation of the quantity of passenger carrying capacity. overall performance and level of delay per sub 3.14 Seven Day Railway area was provided. The summary sections are 3.14.1 presented in Figure 3.32. The Seven Day Railway initiative seeks to balance the need for improved late night and weekend services with the need for engineering access by providing a consistent and reiterated timetable. The concept is being developed by Network Rail with industry stakeholders by examining appropriate route sections.

64 Figure 3.32 – Geographical split of Great Western RUS area

Summary area Summary area name Strategic Route Sections reference GW01 Paddington – Didcot 13.01, 13.02, 13.03

GW02 Didcot – Pilning (via Badminton) 13.04

GW03 Greater Bristol and Westbury 4.02, 4.04, 4.05, 4.06, 13.06, 13.12, 13.15, 13.22

GW04 Reading – Cogload Jn 12.01, 13.11

GW05 Bristol – Birmingham Line 13.08

GW06 Cogload Jn – Penzance 12.02, 12.03, 12.04

GW07 Oxfordshire and North Cotswolds 13.07, 13.13, 13.21, 16.05

GW08 Thames Valley branches 13.09, 13.10, 13.18, 13.19, 13.20

GW09 Devon and Cornwall branches 12.05, 12.06, 12.07, 12.08, 12.09, 12.10, 12.11, 12.12, 12.13 GW10 Wales 13.05, 13.14, 13.16, 13.24

Note: freight locations in sub-sections 4.06, 12.14, 13.23, 13.24 and 16.05 are aligned with their nearest geographic summary area

3.15.3 3.15.4 Delay is categorised into two types: primary Reactionary delay minutes to passenger and delay and reactionary delay. Primary delay freight operators by location were extracted is delay caused directly to a train by an with mean delay per train; the results of the incident; reactionary delay is delay which is top 15 locations of each were tabled and are indirectly caused to other trains as a result of presented in Appendix B. Total delay was such an incident. The RUS does not consider further categorised by JPIP category (these primary delays (those that occur due to a are broad categories of incident causation problem with the infrastructure or the train itself used in the Joint Performance Improvement e.g. point’s failure, vandalism or shortage of Plans between Network Rail and the Train train crew) and focuses on reactionary delay. Operators). Each JPIP category was assessed This is because primary delays are addressed for the Great Western RUS area and by through other industry processes which focus each summary area. The results of the Great on reducing these incidents at source. Western RUS area are presented in Figure 3.33. Details of the delay per summary area are available on Network Rail’s website under the baseline analysis.

65 Figure 3.33 – Total delay for the Great Western RUS area by JPIP category

Key

Points, signalling and other assets Network Management/Other External Track Severe weather/Autumn & Structures Fleet Traincrew TOC Other Stations Operations

3.15.5 Bristol Temple Meads to London Analysis of the main delays showed the top South Wales to London three causes of delay in the scope area are due to Train Operating Companies (TOC) Cotswolds to London Other (external causes, freight terminal/yard Penzance to London (via Berks and Hants) delays, low adhesion includes autumn impact and non-technical fleet delays), fleet issues Birmingham to Taunton and infrastructure faults. South Wales to South Coast. 3.15.6 3.15.7 More detailed analysis on the main sources This analysis identified performance pinch- of delay per route section was undertaken. points at London Paddington, Reading, Didcot, The total delay for 2006/07 and 2007/08 was Westbury and Bristol Temple Meads as evident combined, split by primary and reactionary in the following graphs. delay, and presented by line of route for the following key routes within the Great Western RUS area:

66 Figure 3.34 – Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington

Key

TOC Reactionary FOC Reactionary

TOC Primary FOC Primary 275,000

250,000

225,000

200,000

175,000

150,000

125,000

Minutes delay 100,000

75,000

50,000

25,000

0 Slough Twyford Challow Southall Reading Swindon Bath Spa Acton West Maidenhead Chippenham Bathampton Jn Didcot Parkway Ladbroke Grove London Paddington Wootton Bassett Jn HeathrowAirport Jn Bristol Temple Meads

Figure 3.35 – South Wales to South Coast

Key

TOC Reactionary FOC Reactionary

225,000 TOC Primary FOC Primary

200,000

175,000

150,000

125,000

100,000 Minutes delay 75,000

50,000

25,000

0 Pilning Bath Spa Salisbury Westbury Patchway WylyeAhb Warminster Dr Day’s Jn Bathampton Jn Stapleton Road FiltonAbbey Wood Bristol Temple Meads

67 Figure 3.36 – Cotswolds to London Paddington

Key 275000 TOC Reactionary FOC Reactionary 250000 TOC Primary FOC Primary 225000

200000

175000

150000

125000

Minutes delay 100000

75000

50000

25000

0 Oxford Slough Kemble Twyford Challow Southall Reading Swindon Evesham Gloucester Acton West Standish Jn Maidenhead Barnwood Jn. Wolvercote Jn Didcot East Jn Didcot North Jn Didcot Parkway Ladbroke Grove Cheltenham Spa Moreton-In-Marsh London Paddington HeathrowAirport Jn Worcester Shrub Hill Ascott-Under-Wychwood

3.15.8 Area Redevelopment included in the The reasons for these performance pinch- forward projections of performance to 2014. points are discussed further in Chapter 6 The RUS has included these assumptions “Gaps and Options” where the gaps are within the baseline. quantified and the causes of the delays 3.16.3 investigated. Interventions are then proposed From the start of Control Period 4, a Freight for development and appraisal to mitigate Performance Measure has been introduced these delays. which is equivalent to the Passenger 3.16 Future performance targets Performance Measure and which, will provide 3.16.1 quantifiable performance data to be used The High Level Output Specification (HLOS) to identify and recommend mitigations and performance targets set the aspirations from improvements for performance of freight 2009 to 2014; the forward projection from services. The ORR determination states that 2014 needs to be determined. Nationally, the there must be a reduction in delays of 25 Public Performance Measure (PPM) trajectory percent to freight services by 31 March 2014. is targeted for 92.6 percent by 2014 with an 3.17 Performance and timetables overall 25 percent Network Rail reduction in 3.17.1 delay minutes. The December 2008 timetable was confirmed 3.16.2 by the Stakeholder Management Group (SMG) The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) Periodic as the base timetable for RUS analysis. A Review determination stated that Crossrail joint working group between Network Rail should be deemed as performance neutral and First Great Western was established to with the effects of the Reading Station focus on the timetable developments for the

68 Western route, reviewing problem areas and developing recommendations for timetable and performance improvements that can be undertaken up to 2014. The timetable working group and SMG agreed, that timetable changes would be managed through the Network Rail team and added to the RUS baseline with any further future timetable initiatives from 2014 onwards managed through the Great Western RUS process.

3.17.2 Further details of the purpose, results and proposals for future timetable developments are provided in Chapter 4 “Planned service changes”. 3.18 Summary The assessment of the current situation has illustrated a number of gaps. These are developed further in Chapter 6 whereby the process of gap identification, quantification and option appraisal are presented.

69 4. Planned changes to infrastructure and services

4.1 Introduction 4.2 Planned changes to 4.1.1 infrastructure This chapter outlines the major railway 4.2.1 enhancement and renewal schemes which This section presents committed enhancement are either planned (committed schemes) or schemes firstly by those specified in the proposed (uncommitted schemes) within the HLOS, then by other committed schemes forecasting horizon of the Great Western followed by uncommitted schemes that have Route Utilisation Strategy (RUS) specifically also been taken into consideration. over the next five to 10 years. It also reviews current and proposed changes to 4.2.2 Committed enhancement schemes service provision. – High Level Output Specification The 2008 Periodic Review set Network Rail’s 4.1.2 outputs, revenue requirement and access Where schemes are committed, these are charges for the period 1 April 2009 to 31 included within the RUS baseline. The March 2014 (this is referred to as Control baseline therefore equates to today’s railway Period 4 (CP4)). This is the first review since (as described in Chapter 3) plus committed the passing of the Railways Act 2005 and schemes to 2014; this is defined as the introduces the new process whereby the “do minimum”. In this context, a committed Secretary of State issues a High Level Output scheme is that which is either included in Specification (HLOS) and a Statement of the High Level Output Specification (HLOS), Funds Available (SoFA). has confirmed funding or is at GRIP stage 3 (Option Selection) or above (GRIP being 4.2.2.1 Network Rail’s “Guide to Railway Investment The HLOS states what the Government Projects” and the process by which investment wants to buy from the rail industry in terms schemes are managed). Any interventions of reliability, capacity and safety and the proposed by the RUS are assessed against projects it will fund over the five years of the this “do-minimum” scenario rather than the control period, the key elements of which are present situation. presented here before being discussed in more detail: 4.1.3 If schemes are currently uncommitted, the Reliability and punctuality (performance RUS cannot assume they will go ahead so improvement) will only consider the effect implementation Capacity (by strategic route) of such projects may have on the strategic recommendations the RUS makes. However, Safety once the RUS is established, it remains a Intercity Express Programme (IEP) live document and will be reviewed and if necessary updated whenever significant European Rail Traffic Management System change in policy or circumstances arise. (ERTMS) Maidenhead and Twyford platform extensions (relief lines)

70 Reading Station area redevelopment industry performance meets the PPM and cancellation and significant Cotswold Line redoubling lateness outputs Westerleigh Jn to Barnt Green linespeed Capacity improvements – an increase of 22.5 percent capacity to National Stations Improvement relieve overcrowding Programme (NSIP) – a target in additional passenger kilometres Network Rail Discretionary Fund (NRDF) to be accommodated on each of the Strategic Freight Network (SFN) strategic routes – major stations and other urban areas have Seven Day Railway target numbers of arriving passengers to Rolling stock. be accommodated. Figure 4.1 indicates The HLOS specifies national targets for the volume for the areas within the Great Reliability, Capacity and Safety to be achieved Western RUS by the end of CP4: – the peak three hours are between 07:00- Reliability 09:59 and 16:00-18:59 with the high peak hours being 08:00-08:59 and 17:00-17:59 – 92 – 93 percent Public Performance Measure (PPM) for services split into the – load factors are defined as the ratio of sectors of Long distance; London and passengers actually carried on a train South East and Regional compared to the design capacity of the train (including seats and standing – a 25 percent reduction on services arriving allowances) at their final destination 30 minutes or more late, or cancelled; with

– £160 million allocated for a performance improvement fund to ensure the

Figure 4.1 – High Level Output Specification total demand to be accommodated

Peak three hours High-peak hours

Forecast Extra Maximum Forecast Extra Maximum demand in demand to average demand in demand to average 2008/09 be met by load factor 2008/09 be met by load factor 2013/14 by 2014 2013/14 by 2014 Paddington 24100 2900 67% 11500 1400 76%

Other urban areas 27700 3600 41% 12300 2000 46%

71 Safety the service. A draft service specification was devised for the purpose of the IEP tender – a three percent reduction in the risk of documentation to manufacturers and this has death or injury from accidents on the been used for the purpose of RUS analysis as railway for passengers and rail workers a guide to the expected provision of services. – the network passenger safety index reduced The trains will initially be allocated to the to 0.240. (A forecast measure of the risk of Long Distance High Speed services London fatalities and weighted injuries normalised Paddington to South Wales, Bristol and West of per billion passenger kilometres) England and the Thames Valley outer suburban 4.2.2.2 services to Oxford and Newbury as illustrated in The committed enhancement schemes to Figure 4.2. The deployment of the IEP services deliver these CP4 HLOS targets are further further in the West of England will form phase described below: two which is expected to begin in 2019.

4.2.2.3 Intercity Express Programme (IEP) Following the recent commitment in July The Intercity Express Programme (IEP) 2009 to electrify the Great Western Main Line provides a new generation of trains catering (GWML), IEP fleet deployment will maximise for longer distance travel and services the opportunities this presents. on interurban and outer suburban routes, 4.2.2.4 European Rail Traffic Management replacing the existing High Speed Trains. The System (ERTMS) introduction of the modern designed units European Rail Traffic Management System on an increased service level will provide a (ERTMS) is a cab-based signalling and train significant increase in capacity which will make control system which combines the European a major contribution towards meeting the Train Control System (ETCS) and Global increasing demand for rail travel over the next System for Mobile communications – Railways 30 years. (GSM-R). ERTMS enables the signalling The Great Western IEP fleet is expected to be control centres to transmit movement delivered from 2016 onwards and comprises authorities via the GSM-R directly to the train. electric trains up to 260 metres in length. The The on-board computer knows the braking fleet will also include a significant number characteristics of the individual train and is of bi-mode trains with five-car formations able to calculate and enforce the maximum of around 128 metres in length; capable of safe speed at any time preventing the train being self-powered through the generator from exceeding its movement authority. All car and able to take advantage of overhead required information, such as speed, and electrification. The basis of the new fleet is situation on a forthcoming section of track is 10-car sets on interurban services and five-car communicated directly and continuously to sets on the outer suburban services which will the train driver via a monitor mounted in the predominantly operate as standard 10-car sets driver’s cab. With the data being computed but with five-car capability for off peak services. on-board, the system can calculate different Although the procurement of these new trains braking profiles for different train types. This is committed, development work is underway enables movement authorities to be provided on the proposed timetable and calling patterns and the distance between trains to be reduced for these new services. The train type (electric thus enabling for a more efficient movement of or bi-mode) and configuration (full length trains on the network. ten-car or half length five-cars) depends on

72 Figure 4.2 – Initial deployment of IEP ON ON YLEBONE LONDON EUST DDINGT LONDON MAR LONDON PA 2 Route ells 6 Acton W Junction Route 16 Route Route 18 T4 Brentford branch SOUTH RUISLIP 3 THROW THROW GREENFORD HEA HEA T1, 2 & T5 Route 18 BAA k Infrastructure THROW Colnbroo H HEA Route 16 R Y SLOUG ON WINDSO & ET CENTRAL BOURNE END YLESBUR Flyover Junction Summit A Route 16 Claydon L.N.E. Junction PRINCES RISBOROUGH Route 16 3 MARLOW Bramley Route BLETCHLEY OKE READING n -ON-THAMES R. Junctio BASINGST W. Basingstoke G. WN HENLEY BICESTER TO Route 16 Y 4 Y Cowley branch WA Route BANBUR Route 17 RK Y Y DIDCOT PA r n lvercot n n NEWBUR Wo Junction OXFORD SALISBUR n Wilto Junctio Didcot Powe Statio est Long Marsto ON-IN-MARSH 3 SWINDON Route MORET Dorchester W n WEYMOUTH rminster Dorchester Junctio Wa Y sterleigh rd n n We Ya n WESTBUR E ovil Y Norto Junctio Route 17 4 Ye Pen Mill TH A n OL Abbotswood Junctio WA TENHAM BA SP FROM ovil RK A Route Ye Junctio BRIST PA CHEL SP therington Whatley Quarry Ty branch h n Sharpness branch Exmout Junctio Merehead Quarry EXMOUTH ON Castle Cary WORCESTER SHRUB HILL GLOUCESTER AUNT T h ON Pilning s Exeter Central TEMPLE MEADS onmout

IGNT Av Dock OL PA Route 13 r SEVERN BEACH VIDS BRIST ABBOT DA unnel Cattewate branch

T

ON YMOUTH ON-SUPER-MARE PL Portbury Dock Severn Junction NEWT Heathfield branch WEST Alston EXETER ST T Bere NEWPOR Meldon Quarry APLE BARNST GUNNISLAKE LOOE LISKEARD r Moorswater branch Fowey Harbou branch Par Harbour branch Par o LMOUTH DOCKS ur Tr FA Parkandillack branch AY NEWQU IEP electric routes IEP bi-mode routes IEP IVES ST PENZANCE Key

73 The introduction of radio-based cab signalling new station platforms and associated facilities. will be a key enabler in the development of the The current single line sections significantly future railway. It will underpin enhancements constrain route performance and capacity to railway operations and support capacity and prevent the introduction of a regular, improvements beginning in Control Period 5 operationally robust hourly clock-face service. (CP5) and Control Period 6 (CP6). ERTMS will It also makes it difficult for the timetable to be applied to all major resignalling schemes recover from operational problems elsewhere from approximately 2014 onwards with the on the network, especially in the London area Great Western Main Line expected in 2016. and this regularly leads to further late running. The scheme will deliver improved performance 4.2.2.5 Maidenhead and Twyford platform on the route for the existing service pattern, extensions and enable the introduction of an hourly The enhancement of the up and down relief service increasing capacity. The scheme line platforms at Maidenhead and Twyford to further allows through running for freight and cater for longer suburban trains in advance diversionary operations. Implementation is of Crossrail will contribute to the delivery of planned for 2011. increased capacity into London Paddington to achieve the HLOS capacity metric and support 4.2.2.8 Westerleigh Jn to Barnt Green the operational plans. However, the scheme will linespeed improvements only be implemented should the HLOS vehicle The scheme to raise the linespeeds up to programme fail to deliver the specified metric. 110mph will deliver a significant reduction in journey times along the Bristol to Birmingham 4.2.2.6 Reading Station area redevelopment corridor and South Wales to Birmingham The redevelopment of Reading station is corridor which merge north of Gloucester, a circa £425 million scheme to relieve the with associated benefits to the wider cross bottleneck currently experienced on the boundary services. This enhancement will also GWML from the West to London and North deliver significant performance improvements to South. The programme of works delivers as well as providing an increase in both a major capacity, capability and performance passenger and freight capacity. Implementation enhancement of the station area and its is currently programmed for 2013. approaches. Based around a core of new platforms; north entrance, transfer bridge 4.2.2.9 National Stations Improvement and track work within the main station Programme (NSIP) area, the scheme involves a major capacity £150 million will be spent nationally on a enhancement through grade separation at National Stations Improvement Programme Reading West Jn and reinstatement of the (NSIP) to develop an informed programme east end diveunder. A new train maintenance for the enhancement and improvement of depot will be constructed to the west of the stations during CP4. The primary driver for this station replacing the existing depot, which is the improvement of the service environment will be demolished to accommodate the new including passenger facilities, security and track layout. Preliminary works commenced overall visual quality. during 2009 with full implementation currently The current NSIP tranche 1 stations in the programmed for 2016. Great Western RUS scope area are presented 4.2.2.7 Cotswold Line redoubling in Figure 4.3, with a brief description of the The scheme redoubles around 20 miles of scope, current status and estimated completion single track on the Cotswolds Line from west date, however these are subject to change: of Evesham through to Moreton-in-Marsh and from Ascott-under-Wychwood to Charlbury, with significant signalling modifications, three

74 Figure 4.3 – Tranche 1 National Stations Improvement Programme

Slough enhance ticket hall, new seating and customer waiting 2009 accommodation, toilets, customer information signage, fencing, bicycle parking and redefined north side road access. Newbury access improvement works to the station entrance; 2009 enhancement works to footbridge; new fences and new totems creating additional drop-off car parking. Additional passenger seating. Didcot Parkway upgrade of ticket hall; new waiting accommodation on platforms; 2009 additional cycle storage provision and possible increase in retail availability Swindon waiting accommodation on platforms, bike storage and forecourt 2010 works Cheltenham forecourt and access works; customer signage, customer 2011 seating and bike storage Gloucester forecourt works; customer signage, customer seating, bike 2011 storage Chippenham waiting accommodation, bike storage, canopies 2011

Exeter St Davids waiting accommodation on platforms, bike storage, forecourt 2011 works and ticket hall upgrades Truro waiting accommodation on platforms, bike storage, forecourt 2011 works, ticket hall upgrades and car park works Castle Cary waiting accommodation, bike storage, fencing, customer 2012 shelters and customer seating St Austell car park works, customer seating and waiting area 2012

Penzance new toilets, seating, ticket area upgrades, waiting rooms 2012

Stations currently identified for Tranche 2 enhance the capacity and capability of the rail (from 2012 onwards) are Westbury, Weston- network where this will deliver value for money, super-Mare, Exeter Central, Newton Abbot and meet identified requirements. and Plymouth with the decision made on their Schemes that have been funded by the inclusion and scope expected in 2011. NRDF and completed to date include the 4.2.2.10 Network Rail Discretionary Fund Paddington to Reading relief line linespeed (NRDF) improvements; the Taunton relief line The Network Rail Discretionary Fund (NRDF) linespeed improvements, the enhancement to is a mechanism for funding minor schemes Airport Jn and the additional third platform at (nominally under £5 million) which are Bristol Parkway. Network Rail also part funded either linked to renewals or are stand alone the Falmouth Branch line upgrade discussed schemes which have a positive whole-industry in paragraph 4.2.3.8. Future schemes currently business case. A stand alone scheme is an in development with committed funding from enhancement undertaken as a separate the NRDF include the conversion to passenger scheme independent of any planned renewal use of the up and down goods loop at Oxford; works whilst an enhancement undertaken with the south facing bay platform at Oxford station a renewal is an enhancement implemented and the Bath Spa Capacity upgrade which as part of a planned renewal. This specific increases capacity through the station area funding stream reflects the importance to reducing platform reoccupation times.

75 4.2.2.11 The Strategic Freight Network (SFN) and funding provision of £5 million for studies to develop identified schemes for delivery in £200 million has been allocated nationally CP5 – these are currently being defined and for the development of the Strategic Freight agreed with stakeholders. Network (SFN) during CP4. The SFN seeks to create a network of core and diversionary 4.2.2.12 Seven Day Railway routes on the heaviest used lines, with capability The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) has of gauge and train length available to allow allocated £160 million nationally to assist in for expected growth in traffic. An optimised the development of the Seven Day Railway pattern of freight trunk routeing will minimise initiative. The Seven Day Railway programme conflicts between freight and passenger traffic, of change will increase current levels of benefiting both forms of traffic. network availability by keeping passengers on trains rather than rail replacement buses For the Great Western RUS area the during engineering works. diversionary route between Southampton and Basingstoke via Laverstock and Andover has The funding for the Seven Day Railway been identified and approved as a committed initiative will be spent on both infrastructure scheme to enable W12 gauge. It will be enhancements to facilitate the increase in the first step in a strategy to provide both rail operations such as crossovers and bi- additional capacity and diversionary capability directional signalling, plant and equipment on the route from Southampton to the West to facilitate working under the new access Midlands and West Coast Main Line. The patterns and protection systems for staff as gauge enhancement to the main line route well as changing Network Rail’s work methods. forms the initial Transport Innovation Fund The overall vision for the Seven Day Railway (TIF) enhancement scheme (see 4.2.3.5 for initiative on the Great Western is to build a further details). railway that reduces disruption to all customers (passenger and freight) and better meets their Train lengthening opportunities are also needs, whilst delivering efficient and effective being assessed under the SFN, with the maintenance, renewals and enhancements. Southampton to West Midlands route a Within the Great Western RUS area, the candidate scheme currently being progressed routes identified in the HLOS for Seven Day to GRIP stage 3 (Option Selection), permitting Railway are: growth without increasing capacity utilisation. However, in order to facilitate this infrastructure London Paddington to Cardiff changes may be necessary. London Paddington to Bristol The route to the south London Paddington to Exeter of London has funding of £10 million allocated for its delivery. There are two Bristol to Birmingham. potential components of this; the first is an Following discussions with operators, the enhancement of the route between Tonbridge following extensions to this programme are and the via Redhill to proposed which include the main lines from allow Class 92 locomotives to operate. The Cardiff to Swansea; Exeter to Plymouth second is to look at creating a south of London and Reading to Birmingham. A back to orbital route between Tonbridge and Reading basics review of both the train timetable and via Redhill and Guildford and is currently maintenance methods and requirements will uncommitted. lead to further improvements initially proposed Also included in the SFN is a specific fund for within Wales. infill gauge schemes to progress towards the SFN vision of extensive W12 gauge clearance

76 4.2.2.13 Rolling stock RUS area. These schemes, in addition to The Department for Transport’s (DfT) White the capacity specified schemes above, have Paper “Delivering a Sustainable Railway” formed part of the baseline and as such have (2007), stated that a rolling stock plan would been taken into consideration during the be published, setting out in greater detail appraisal work. how rolling stock would be used to deliver 4.2.3.1 Electrification increased capacity. While the primary focus In July 2009, the commitment to electrification of this rolling stock plan is on delivering the of the GWML beyond the scope of Crossrail additional capacity in CP4 it also sets out the to Maidenhead, in accordance with the steps that the Government is taking to achieve position set out in the Network RUS (May the longer-term aspirations set out in the Rail 2009) was announced. The route from London Technical Strategy. Paddington to Bristol/Swansea, and to In terms of the HLOS, the additional capacity Oxford/Newbury, will be electrified as shown in will be secured either through the procurement Figure 4.4. Development works will commence of new rolling stock; or through redeploying immediately, with the majority of construction existing rolling stock which is displaced work between 2014 and 2016. Subject to by new. The replacement, whether new detailed planning work, electric services will be or redeployed from elsewhere, will derive introduced progressively: London Paddington opportunities for journey time improvements to Oxford, Newbury and Bristol by the end of and increase operational flexibility. 2016 and London Paddington to Swansea by the end of 2017. First Great Western has submitted their Request for Proposal for the HLOS rolling 4.2.3.2 Crossrail stock to the DfT for 40 additional vehicles for Crossrail is a new railway proposal for London the Thames Valley area and 12 additional and the South East. The route utilises the vehicles for the West of England (including current network of lines and will run from Devon and Cornwall). This has been assumed Maidenhead and Heathrow in the west across for the purposes of the Great Western RUS London into Essex and Greater London in baseline as a committed scheme. the east, travelling underground through new twin-bore tunnels between London Paddington With the recent commitment to the and East London. It will initially operate with electrification of the GWML, the requirements 10-car electric trains, capable of carrying more for rolling stock radically changes as there than 1500 passengers in each train delivering becomes less need for diesel trains and a substantial economic benefits in London and greater requirement for electric trains. The the South East and across the UK. Crossrail previously planned procurement of new will make travelling in the area easier and diesel trains has now been superseded with quicker whilst reducing crowding on London’s a new rolling stock plan to be published by existing transport network. the DfT in autumn 2009. Until this information is available, the current assumptions remain. Royal Assent was given to the Crossrail Bill The RUS will revise any analysis accordingly in July 2008 and the new Crossrail Act 2008 following publication of the rolling stock plan gave authority for the railway to be built. Main later in the year. An update will therefore be construction works are scheduled to commence provided in the final Great Western RUS. in 2010 with the service operational from 2017. Further details on the scope and developments 4.2.3 Other committed enhancement for Crossrail are presented in Chapter 8. schemes (2009 – 2019) The following schemes are other committed enhancements within the Great Western

77 Figure 4.4 – Electrification of Great Western Main Line ON ON NDON YLEBONE LO EUST NDON NDON DDINGT LO MAR LO PA 2 s ll Route We tion ton ton 6 Ac Junc Route 16 Route Route 18 d or D H Brentf branch T4 SOUT RUISLIP GREENFOR 3 THROW THROW 2 & HEA HEA T1, Route 18 T5 BAA k Infrastructure THROW lnbroo Co HEA Route 16 R L OUGH SL ON tion Y WINDSO & ET CENTRA Junc BOURNE END LESBUR yover yover Fl Summit AY . Route 16 S tion OW Claydon L.N.E Claydon Junc y PRINCE RISBOROUGH Route 16 HLEY 3 MARL TC Bramle Route BLE READING OKE tion e Junc R. BASINGST W. HENLEY-ON-THAMES Basingstok G. WN BICESTER TO Route 16 Y 4 wley Y Co branch Route WA OT BANBUR Route 17 RK Y DIDC PA Y t n erco tio r n lv n tio FORD NEWBUR Wo Junc OX SALISBUR n Wilton Junc N ng Marsto ng Didcot Powe Statio st Lo We N-IN-MARSH 3 TO SWINDO H Route rchester rchester MORE Do n WEYMOUT tio chester rminster Dor Junc Wa Y h sterleig rd n ill We Ya tio on rt WESTBUR n M tion ovil No Junc Route 17 Y TENHAM Ye Pe TH A 4 Abbotswood Junc OL WA tion A BA SP FROME s ovil CHEL SP Route Ye Junc ARK R BRIST P R L therington Whatley Quarry Ty branch Sharpnes branch tion OUCESTE Exmouth Junc Merehead Quarry EXMOUTH GL ON WORCESTE SHRUB HIL Castle Cary AUNT T ON Pilning s Exeter Central TEMPLE MEADS onmouth

IGNT Av Dock OL PA Route 13 H AC

k

SEVERN BE VIDS H BRIST ABBOT

DA nnel Cattewater branch

Tu YMOUT

ON rn PL ON-SUPER-MARE tion Portbury Doc ve Se Junc NEWT Heathfield branch WEST Alston EXETER ST T Bere NEWPOR Meldon Quarry APLE BARNST GUNNISLAKE LOOE LISKEARD Moorswater branch Fowey Harbour branch Par Harbour branch Par o LMOUTH DOCKS ur Tr FA Parkandillack branch Y NEWQUA IVES ST Electrified routes PENZANCE Key

78 4.2.3.3 West Ealing bay platform The South West Regional Development As featured in the Thames Valley Regional Agency (SWRDA) has however submitted Planning Assessment (2007) this scheme a bid for £20 million as a contribution to will provide additional capacity into London the scheme as part of their short-term Paddington for other services. Greenford commitments in the South West Regional services will terminate at a new west facing Funding advice for 2009 to 2019. bay platform at West Ealing and could 4.2.3.7 Clifton turnback be increased in frequency. The scheme As part of the Severnside Community Rail is included within the Crossrail proposals Partnership, Bristol City Council and Network and as such implementation forms part of Rail have jointly funded the provision of a the Crossrail programme and is currently turnback facility at Clifton Down station on the scheduled for 2013. Severn Beach branch line. This enhancement 4.2.3.4 Reading Green Park permits the turning of trains back towards A third party funded new station between Bristol Temple Meads during times of Reading and Basingstoke adjacent to perturbation and introduces the operational the at Junction 11, is being flexibility to allow the operation of a more developed to serve the business community frequent service between these stations. at Green Park. The station is proposed to be The scheme was completed in April 2009. completed by 2011. 4.2.3.8 Falmouth branch line upgrade 4.2.3.5 Southampton to West Coast This project was the aspiration of Cornwall gauge enhancement County Council to enhance the service on the This scheme to construct a W10 gauge Falmouth Branch line to two services an hour cleared route from Southampton to the West throughout the day. The provision of a new Coast Main line via Basingstoke, Reading, passing loop and platform improvement works Didcot and Leamington is a Transport at Penryn were undertaken as part of the Innovation Fund (TIF) scheme which will scheme, which was completed in April 2009. enable the movement of 9ft 6in containers The route has recently been designated a on standard height wagons on this core Community Rail Line and this enhancement is route. Preliminary works are underway with promoted by the DfT as a way forward for the completion programmed for 2011. Community Rail initiative.

4.2.3.6 Swindon to Kemble redoubling 4.2.3.9 Access for All To improve capacity and performance on In 2005, the DfT agreed a funding pattern for the Swindon to Kemble route this scheme the next ten years to provide an ‘accessible proposes to redouble a 12 mile section of route’ at selected stations as part of an single line. This will enable an improvement Access for All Programme. The Access for in reliability and the use of this section of All Programme is part of the Railways for All the railway as a key diversionary route for Strategy, launched in 2006 to address the South Wales when the main line route via the issues faced by mobility impaired passengers Severn Tunnel is closed. In its current role, the using railway stations in Great Britain. Central single line section severely restricts service to the strategy is the commitment of £35 development, diversionary capacity and million nationally per year, until 2015, for performance. The scheme is currently being provision of an obstacle free, accessible route developed to GRIP stage 4 (Single Option to and between platforms at priority stations. Development); however, there is currently no This generally includes the provision of lifts commitment to fund implementation. or ramps, as well as associated works and refurbishment along the defined route.

79 The current stations, scope and programme for those stations in the Great Western RUS area is as follows:

Figure 4.5 – Access for All programme of works

Station Scope Completion

Exeter Central Lifts Completed

Taunton Lifts Completed

Westbury Lifts Completed

Twyford New footbridge, lifts, tactiles 2009

Chippenham Lifts and footbridge 2011

Gloucester Lifts and footbridge 2011

St Erth Lifts, footbridge 2012

Burnham scope to be confirmed 2014

4.2.4 Uncommitted enhancement schemes full capacity and the conventional and next (2009 – 2019) generation tools for increasing capacity will There are a number of schemes and initiatives be exhausted. There will be the need for for improving future capacity, capability and/or additional intervention, including the building performance, which have been considered, of a new high speed line. The current phase of even though they are currently unfunded. As the work programme is aimed at developing a there is no firm funding commitment, they are business case for a new high speed line for an taken as uncommitted (so do not form part of exemplar corridor. the RUS baseline) but due to their significance 4.2.4.2 Paddington station remodelling and the effect that can be achieved through With the introduction of IEP trains, the platform their implementation, we have, where area at Paddington station will need remodelling necessary, considered there impact through with potential signal relocations, additional our analysis. electrification and platform lengthening in 4.2.4.1 High speed lines order to accommodate the volume of growth HS2 is a new company established to review – the current IEP service specification is likely the development of potential high-speed lines to require up to 14 long platforms. In addition improving connectivity between London and to these station works, due to the predicted the North West – HS2 is mainly focusing on increasing volumes of traffic in each direction the route from London to the West Midlands, (with the introduction of IEP and Crossrail), with potential links to Heathrow Airport. grade separation of the throat into Paddington is also a likely requirement. Network Rail has commissioned a New Lines Programme to investigate the case for building 4.2.4.3 London Heathrow – western access one or more new lines as additions to the There are longer-term aspirations for national network. The focus of the New Lines accessing Heathrow Airport by rail via a Programme is to test the hypothesis that in western access (ie. on to the Great Western the future, the existing rail lines from London Main Line, west of West Drayton) beyond the to the north and west will be operating at objectives of Crossrail. This would enable

80 trains to run directly between Reading and passenger services and creating an alternative (T5) (for which passive freight route between the South of England provision has been provided at T5). The and the Midlands, the North and Scotland. scheme is in the early stages of development. 4.2.4.6 Evergreen III – Bicester Chord 4.2.4.4 AirTrack This forms part of Chiltern Railways secondary AirTrack is a BAA proposal to connect Heathrow franchise commitment to provide a London Airport directly to the national rail network south Marylebone to Oxford service through the of the airport through the provision of three construction of a new south-west chord new services to T5 via Staines: from London line connecting the and Waterloo via Richmond; from Guildford via the former Oxford to line where Woking; and from Reading via Bracknell. The they cross south of Bicester. The scheme scheme will require four kilometres of new will rebuild the Bicester to Oxford section railway to connect the new station at T5 to the of the route for 100mph capability, with five existing Windsor line near Staines with the minute planning headways and involves the rebuilding of 400 metres of railway in Staines. construction of a new Park and Ride station at Water Eaton, to the north of Oxford. The The redevelopment work at Reading scheme aims to be operational by 2012. station (under the Reading Station Area Redevelopment scheme) provides for 4.2.4.7 Reopening of the Portishead line additional capacity to be introduced at the A scheme to reopen six kilometres of disused southern side of the station with a new third railway between the current limit of the line platform and platform extensions to enable adjacent to the Portbury Dock boundary longer 12-car trains to be accommodated. (Portbury Jn) and Portishead town centre with The new Reading station will enable the the conversion of the current freight only line to terminus of the AirTrack proposal to offer a passenger status is undergoing evaluation. new rail link into Heathrow Airport from the The reopened line would support both a west. Implementation of AirTrack is currently passenger service to operate between programmed for 2014 (subject to funding) Portishead and Bristol Temple Meads and and would provide the opportunity for more freight services for Portbury Docks. Passenger rail service options in the future. The scheme service frequency is yet to be confirmed is currently funded to complete the required and is subject to a range of optioneering Transport and Works Order (TWO). decisions. Promoted by North Somerset 4.2.4.5 Council (NSC), the scheme is part of a wider The primary objective of this initiative is to West of England Partnership promoted Bristol improve east-west connectivity in the Oxford area bid under the Transport Innovation Fund to Cambridge arc. The East West Rail (EWR) (TIF) and is currently being developed to GRIP Consortium wish to reintroduce passenger stage 3 (Option Selection). The South West services from Oxford and to Regional Development Agency (SWRDA) Bletchley and . The primary has also submitted a bid for £25 million as purpose of the reopened railway is as a a contribution to the scheme as part of their local transport link supporting growth and medium term commitments (2014 – 2019) in development, and as a means of easing traffic the South West Regional Funding advice for congestion problems in Oxford, Bletchley 2009 to 2019. and Milton Keynes. Further development of the route would deliver significant capacity headspace on the Cherwell Valley and other existing routes and is seen as a long-term strategic route, supporting inter-regional

81 4.2.5 Planned major renewal schemes Figure 4.6 lists the major planned renewal schemes within the RUS area for CP4:

Figure 4.6 – Major planned renewal schemes for CP4

Implementation Scheme

2009/10 Switch and Crossing (S&C) track renewals – Ableton Lane, Bathampton Jn, Oxford North Jn and Thingley Jn, Heywood Road Jn, Long Rock and St Budeaux Jn 2009/10 Earthworks renewals – Chipping Sodbury, Cleeve, Kemble and Tredington, Heywood Road Jn and Dawlish 2009/10 Building Renewals at Exeter St Davids station

2010/11 S&C renewals – Southall West Jn, Barnwood Jn, Berkeley Road Jn, Lawrence Hill, Stoke Gifford Jn, Thingley Jn and Whitehill, Keyham, Saltash and Tiverton 2010/11 Earthworks renewals – Bourton, Rodbourne and Uffington

2010/11 Didcot Parkway, Taunton, Exeter St Davids and Plymouth – CCTV, Customer Information Systems and Public Announcement 2011/12 S&C renewals – Acton East Jn, Greenford, Didcot North Jn, Dr Days Jn, Grange Court, Yatton, Taunton and Topsham 2011/12 Telecoms renewals - Swindon and Bristol Temple Meads - CCTV, Customer Information Systems and Public Announcement 2012/13 S&C renewals – Didcot East, Newbury West, Woodborough, Swindon East, Aish, Hermerdon and Saltash

4.2.5.1 4.3 Planned service changes The major planned renewal schemes currently 4.3.1 December 2009 timetable changes programmed for CP5 include the resignalling During the production of the Great Western of Reading, Oxford, Swindon, Bristol, Exeter RUS, there have been two timetable changes and Plymouth. However, with the proposed (December 2008 and May 2009). Some of the introduction of ERTMS on the Great Western earlier analysis resulted in identifying proposals Main Line between London Paddington and which have since been implemented as part Bristol due to commence towards the latter of these timetable changes and latterly will be stages of CP4, with estimated completion introduced in December 2009. The specific during CP5, it is anticipated that this will elements of this are addressed further in supersede the existing signalling system and Chapter 6; however, the following amendments in effect replace the need for conventional are expected to be undertaken in the December resignalling. 2009 timetable (subject to the normal timetabling process and franchise Service Level 4.2.5.2 The resignalling of Exeter and Plymouth will Commitment consultation where applicable): continue based on current asset condition and 4.3.2 First Great Western is currently programmed for implementation 4.3.2.1 High speed services during 2016 -– 2018, with Cornwall resignalling To provide faster journey times between programmed within CP6. South Wales and London for peak business flows it is proposed that the 05:59 Monday – Friday Swansea to

82 London Paddington ceases to call at Didcot 4.3.4 Removal of South West Trains Parkway and Reading arriving London services west of Exeter Paddington at 08:55 From December 2009, South West Trains (SWT) will terminate their London Waterloo To provide a faster evening service to to South Devon services at Exeter St Davids, South Wales it is proposed that the ceasing operations west of Exeter to Paignton Monday-Friday 16:45 from London and Plymouth. The London Waterloo to Exeter Paddington should cease to call at St Davids service will increase to one train Didcot Parkway per hour as opposed to the current two-hourly To reflect patronage levels the 10:35/10:54 service facilitated by the provision of a new Plymouth to London Paddington will start passing loop at Axminster implemented during from Bristol Temple Meads. This service is 2009. This fulfils the company’s franchise paralleled in Devon by the 08:37 Penzance commitment to provide an hourly service to London Paddington (via the Berks and between Exeter St Davids and London Waterloo Hants line) via Honiton, Axminster and Crewkerne.

To reflect patronage levels it is proposed The new infrastructure enables this increased that on Saturdays the 19:00 London service level but in order to facilitate additional Paddington to Taunton service terminates resources for the increased hourly service, the at Bristol Temple Meads but is replaced by termination point becomes Exeter St Davids. an extension of the 19:50 Cardiff Central to The DfT has requested First Great Western to Bristol Temple Meads to Taunton, which will provide similar services west of Exeter once provide additional calls at Bedminster and the SWT services are withdrawn. This will be Parson Street. The last London Paddington facilitated in the short term by locomotive and to Weston-super-Mare/Taunton through coaches in the Bristol area. Discussions on the trains will remain at 18:30 and 20:30 longer-term rolling stock solution are ongoing.

Sunday morning services between Bristol 4.3.5 Future service provision with IEP and London Paddington run at a core and Crossrail hourly basis but the service commences 4.3.5.1 with a non-standard pattern of departures With the introduction of IEP (2016) and at 07:40, 08:10 and 09:00 from Bristol Crossrail (2017) there will be significant Temple Meads changes to the service provision across the route. With the absence of confirmed 4.3.2.2 London Thames Valley services timetables for both IEP and Crossrail, the To provide an enhanced service at Radley current service specifications have been used it is proposed that off peak Monday–Friday to assess capacity and service provision. departures from London Paddington at Detailed below are the anticipated changes XX57 and Oxford at XX37 call additionally presented by the current service structure as at Radley per the current draft service specifications. It 4.3.2.3 West services is recognised that when final specifications An additional service Monday–Friday will for these schemes are available, further, more be provided from Bristol Temple Meads detailed analysis will be required to ensure that (16:54) to Westbury (17:14) IEP, Crossrail and freight services can all be accommodated. 4.3.3 CrossCountry CrossCountry propose no changes and the timetable will remain as per May 2009.

83 4.3.5.2 Main line services (Great Western programme) replacing the existing two and Main Line) three-car diesel trains. IEP trains will begin to replace the current All Henley branch trains will operate to Twyford eight-car High Speed Trains across much only in connection with these services and all of the GWML network including the Oxford/ Marlow/Bourne End services will operate to Cotswold corridor. Projected growth in demand Maidenhead only, both will remain as existing is expected to be catered for by a substantial diesel trains. increase in capacity of the new 10-car train formations (formed of two five-coach units) On the Kennet Valley section between which will be capable of working in electric or Reading and Newbury, services will be diesel mode. provided by an hourly semi-fast service between London Paddington and Exeter In addition to the higher capacity of the new St Davids, with extra peak hour services trains themselves, an increase in frequency between London Paddington and Newbury. from two trains per hour to three trains per In conjunction with this arrangement longer hour is currently proposed for the Oxford distance services (to Plymouth and Cornwall) corridor, with through working to the Cotswold will run faster to Exeter St Davids than at Line (from Oxford to Worcester, Great Malvern present. and Hereford) at standard hourly intervals. This is as per the current service specification. 4.3.5.5 Inner suburban (services east of Slough) 4.3.5.3 Main line services (interurban) Crossrail services will operate at a similar On the core London Paddington/Bristol/South frequency to today with four trains per Wales corridor IEP trains will continue to hour all day Maidenhead to West Drayton provide half hourly services, with some South (inclusive) and on to London Paddington Wales services accelerated to run non-stop and the Crossrail core. Projected growth in between Reading and Bristol Parkway. A fifth demand will be catered for by a substantial train per hour is currently proposed between increase in the capacity of the new, standard London Paddington and Bristol Temple Meads 10-car electric train formations. The new trains via Bristol Parkway to cater for projected will feature a greater proportion of standee growth more generally. Swindon and Didcot capacity to reflect the higher level of demand will be served by alternative high speed for short commuter journeys to inner and services which will include some services central London. starting from these stations. The existing two-hourly through service from London Between Hayes and Acton (inclusive), the Paddington to Cheltenham will potentially Heathrow Terminal 4 service will provide a increase to an hourly frequency. minimum level of four trains per hour. In the peak hours, eight trains per hour, all day 4.3.5.4 Outer suburban (beyond Slough to Crossrail services will be supplemented by a Oxford and Newbury) further two additional trains per hour east of In order to cater for Twyford an outer suburban West Drayton. The normal linkage of these service will be operated on the relief lines, services across London will be between integrated with Crossrail Maidenhead services, Maidenhead and Shenfield and between which will run between London Paddington Heathrow Terminal 4 and Abbey Wood. and Oxford, calling at the local Thames Valley stations between Reading, Didcot and Further details of the introduction of IEP and Oxford. With electrification of the GWML, it is Crossrail and the impact on the Great Western envisaged that these services will be four-car RUS area are provided in Chapter 8. electric trains (redeployed from the Thameslink

84 4.4 Definition of “do-minimum” case 4.4.2.3 4.4.1 Generic assumptions (for non-London Furthermore, until July 2008 when the services) parliamentary order gave Crossrail Royal Options developed later in this document Assent, it was uncertain whether Crossrail (Chapter 6) are compared against a do- would be delivered as scheduled for 2017. minimum case that assumes the interventions This also gave rise to two different do in 4.2 as committed schemes will happen as minimum cases – with and without Crossrail. planned. Any interventions that are proposed 4.4.2.4 in the RUS are therefore assessed against The other variable within this scenario matrix this “do-minimum” rather than the present was electrification. When work on the Great day situation. Western RUS commenced in March 2008, 4.4.2 Four scenarios for London services electrification was still an uncommitted 4.4.2.1 desirable. This has since progressed with the As there were a large number of known recent commitment to electrification of the developments (committed and uncommitted) Great Western Main Line. However, due to the already programmed for the Thames Valley uncertainty of this during the process of RUS area over the time period of the RUS, four analysis two different do minimum cases were different scenarios were developed for the considered – with and without electrification. “do-minimum” case for London services. This 4.4.2.5 is due not only to the mix of interventions Since Crossrail, IEP and electrification but also due to the high level of uncertainty interventions interact, it was necessary to in the actual timeframes, scope and service develop four different scenarios to manage specifications of these proposals at this time. the different possibilities that could exist. This 4.4.2.2 enabled the RUS to progress with analysis and The introduction of IEP on the Long Distance proposals for potential interventions to assist High Speed services is a generic assumption with the issues of capacity and performance for this RUS as a commitment under the that were identified through the gaps process HLOS. However, in developing the RUS, it (detailed in Chapter 6). was uncertain whether diesel or electric IEP 4.4.2.6 trains would be procured which gave rise to The table below describes the four scenarios two alternative do minimum cases – diesel used for the London services: and electric.

Figure 4.7 – Scenario matrix for London services

Scenario IEP Electrification Crossrail (to Maidenhead) A Y N (IEP-Diesel) N

B Y Y (IEP-Electric) N

C Y N (IEP-Diesel) Y

D Y Y (IEP-Electric) Y

Electrification refers to London Paddington to Bristol/Swansea and Oxford/Newbury IEP refers to London Paddington to South Wales, Bristol and some West of England services

85 Scenario A Scenario B Electrification as now (Heathrow) Electrification No Crossrail No Crossrail Current suburban services Current suburban services IEP diesel IEP electric

Scenario C Scenario D Crossrail plus electrification Crossrail to Maidenhead to Maidenhead Electrification Residual suburban service to Residual suburban service to Paddington High level Paddington High level IEP diesel IEP electric

4.4.2.7 4.5.3 The interventions that have been assessed Introducing additional capacity during the against these scenarios, as part of this RUS, peak, whether as longer trains or more are detailed in Chapter 6 Gaps and Options. frequent short trains, will generally require additional rolling stock to be sourced. The 4.5 Rolling stock standard approach when assessing these 4.5.1 options in a RUS is to include the full lease The proposed rolling stock replacement cost of the extra rolling stock unit(s), giving programme creates an opportunity which due consideration to the types that might potentially will not reoccur for another 30 years. be available from leasing companies or This involves the choice of new rolling stock manufacturers if new build is required. which could provide a significant opportunity to address a number of gaps that exist in this 4.5.4 RUS. These benefits are magnified with the The RUS therefore seeks to identify principles incremental extension of electrification. The for future rolling stock provision, as a replacement, whether new or redeployed contribution to a wider rolling stock strategy from elsewhere can unlock additional journey to be developed by or on behalf of the opportunities; increase operational flexibility Government. The aims should be to enable: and potentially improve capacity. additional rolling stock to be introduced 4.5.2 incrementally on routes in the Great The electrification programme for the GWML Western RUS area radically affects the requirements for rolling appropriate rolling stock to be deployed on stock over the next decade. There will be each service group. less need for diesel trains and a greater requirement for electric trains. The current proposals under the HLOS rolling stock plan have been used to date as part of the RUS baseline. However, it is recognised that with the commitment to electrification, the previous plan for new diesel trains has been superseded. As such a new rolling stock plan is expected to be published, of which the RUS will take cognisance of and adjust analysis accordingly.

86 4.6 Depots and stabling 4.6.1 Nationally a strategy is being developed in order to accommodate the additional vehicles procured as part of the HLOS. This will affect depots across the RUS area which may need to be enhanced or have additional facilities provided as it is recognised that the current capacity and facilities available at the depots may not be able to accommodate the new vehicles procured as part of the fleet replacement due around 2014.

4.6.2 It is also recognised that there is limited capacity at the existing depots for the stabling of any more units. Therefore, depending on the specification of the new units, facilities at current depots may need to be reviewed as an integral part of the fleet replacement programme. The Network RUS is examining the rolling stock and maintenance depot strategies for the whole of the UK network and is due to commence consultation in 2009.

4.6.3 Chapter 3 presented the current situation with regards to depots and stabling capabilities within the RUS area and it is expected that this will be sufficient for the expected number of vehicles under the HLOS within the Thames Valley region. A review of the requirements in the West of England is underway with a number of locations being considered.

4.6.4 In addition to the HLOS vehicles, IEP will also bring about its own requirements for depots, stabling and maintenance facilities with the current proposal to use the North Pole Depot in London and new facilities to be built in Reading and Bristol. Chapter 8 expands on these requirements with the development work being undertaken.

87 5. Planning context and future demand

5.1 Introduction 5.2 Regional planning documents 5.1.1 5.2.1 Regional Planning Assessments This chapter considers the planning context for 5.2.1.1 the Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy The Department for Transport’s (DfT) Thames (RUS). The Great Western RUS is related Valley and South West Regional Planning to a number of other strategies and policies Assessments for the railway published in May covering rail and other transport modes; a 2007 and June 2007 respectively considered synopsis of the key documents that have the impact of future levels of growth across the influenced the analysis is presented. This is rail network and the capacity issues that may followed by the predicted changes in demand emerge from this over the short, medium and for both the passenger and freight markets long term to 2026. within the area of the Great Western RUS, 5.2.1.2 outlining the process undertaken and the The RPAs identify the role of rail as supporting resultant predictions. London’s role as a world city and the local 5.1.2 economies of other key urban centres, by The following key documents represent the enabling rail commuting linking employers planning context and have been influential in to sources of skilled labour; supporting the the RUS process: growth and integration of London and South East, and the South West economies. The Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for the South West Rail Prospectus also notes that South West (draft) rail has a key role to play in facilitating longer Regional Economic Strategy (RES) for the distance movements connecting the South South West West to London, the South East and West Midlands as well as supporting tourism and Regional Planning Assessments (RPA) for providing access to ports and airports. the Thames Valley and South West 5.2.1.3 The South West Rail Prospectus The DfT’s Thames Valley RPA forecasts The Future of Air Transport growth for morning peak arrivals into Reading to increase by 15 percent between 2006 and The Strategic Rail Authority Great Western 2016 and by 31 percent to 2026. The South Main Line RUS West RPA forecasts that demand for rail Network RUS: Scenarios and Long journeys towards London in the morning peak Distance Forecasts and Electrification will be met throughout the route by increased service provision up to 2016. However, by 2026 Freight Route Utilisation Strategy (FRUS) seating demand is forecast to be in excess of Delivering a Sustainable Transport System capacity from as far as Castle Cary by up to 14 (DaSTS). percent. The RPAs also indicate that interurban growth on the Bristol to London Paddington route is forecast to be in excess of seating capacity by as much as 18 percent, from as far west as Chippenham by 20261. Demand for

88 holiday traffic to Devon and Cornwall is set to the future development of the region from grow, with significant growth forecast for local 2006 to 2026. It seeks to tackle the major services to Exeter, mainly on the Exmouth challenges that the region faces over this branch and from the south Devon area. period, including accommodating a substantial increase in population and a growing economy, 5.2.1.4 tackling climate change and reducing the Demand for travel from the South West to region’s ecological footprint as defined by the London and to the Midlands and the North consumption of natural resources and energy. is also on the increase and is expected to continue. Between Bristol and Birmingham 5.2.2.2 36 percent growth in demand is forecast Transport links, business, social requirements between 2006 and 2016 with 63 percent and environmental concerns, as well as the growth to 2026. There is a key business need way different areas and places function, all for connectivity to London and the South East, have a significant influence. An important including Heathrow Airport with journey times spatial context for the South West is provided from key centres such as Taunton in under two by the relations it has with adjacent regions hours, Exeter under two and a half hours and namely the South East, West Midlands and Plymouth in under three hours. Demand has Wales. Evidence demonstrates that the most been particularly strong in the evening peak, significant linkages between the South West on Fridays and throughout the weekend, with and the wider United Kingdom are those with Sundays being CrossCountry’s second busiest London and the South East, particularly for the day of the week. business community.

5.2.1.5 5.2.2.3 The Government’s “Delivering a Sustainable By 2026, the RSS estimates that the region could have a population of around six million. Railway” White Paper (2007) also proposes Regional housing requirements plan for a continuation of the Community Rail economic growth at 2.8 percent per annum Development Strategy. This aims to improve with an increase in the total number of jobs by long-term sustainability on local and rural lines 2026 of between 365,000 and 465,000. by encouraging demand growth and managing costs down. With the exception of the Exmouth 5.2.2.4 and Paignton branch, all branch lines in Devon The RSS identifies 21 Strategically Significant and Cornwall have either a Community Rail Cities and Towns (SSCTs) across the region line or service designation, therefore demand which form the basis for the extensive growth on these lines will be strongly influenced by in dwellings and jobs anticipated over the their respective local rail partnerships. period to 2026. Table 5.1 summarises the projected increases in jobs, dwellings and 5.2.2 Regional Spatial Strategy for the population in the SSCTs by 2026. South West 2006 – 2026 5.2.2.1 The draft Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West sets the spatial framework for

1 As quoted in the South West RPA, 6.2.1 the “seating capacity is based on the December 2006 timetable allowing for further resources changes planned by FGW for the 2007 timetable change and the additional seating arising from the refurbishment and recognition of the FGW HST formations.” 89 Figure 5.1 – Projected increases in the 21 SSCTs by 2026

SSCT Jobs Dwellings Population

Barnstaple 6300 4800 9600 Bath 16000 – 20000 7500 15000 Bournemouth 18100 – 23000 15600 31200 Bridgwater 18500 6200 12400 Bristol 73000 – 93000 64000 128000 Cheltenham 8000 – 10800 12500 25000 Chippenham 6300 4500 9000 Cornwall Towns 16500 13800 27600 Dorchester 7300 – 9500 4000 8000 Exeter 22300 – 28500 18500 37000 Gloucester 9300 – 12700 17500 35000 Plymouth 42000 31500 63000 Poole 14700 – 18,900 10000 20000 Salisbury 10800 – 13600 5000 10000 Swindon 26000 – 32000 35000 70000 Taunton 18500 14000 28000 Torbay 11700 10000 20000 Trowbridge 11700 5000 10000 Weston-super-Mare 8500 – 10000 12000 24000 Weymouth 7300 – 9500 5000 10000 Yeovil 9100 6400 12800

Total 336100 – 394100 302800 605600

Cornwall Towns includes Camborne, Pool, Redruth, Falmouth, Penryn and Truro Torbay includes Torquay, Paignton and Brixham

5.2.2.5 Plymouth to provide for local and commuter The RSS includes the Regional Transport journeys is also proposed to deliver spatial Strategy and a set of transport policies to growth and congestion targets. deliver this strategy. This states that the 5.2.2.6 most important transport factor affecting The growth shown in Figure 5.1 emphasises the performance of the regional economy is the large increases in jobs, and hence both reliable connections to London and the South commuting and business travel, which is East (and international markets beyond). anticipated in Swindon, Bristol, Exeter and Much of the region lies within the two-hour rail Plymouth and hence the potential for rail to journey time to London which is characteristic have a major role in both these markets in each of locations having the best economic of the areas. As a result, there is an emphasis prospects. Further development of the heavy on these key locations in the development of rail network in Greater Bristol, Exeter and operations in the region.

90 5.2.2.7 challenges. Options are then generated, sifted The draft Regional Spatial Strategy is and prioritised before decisions are made on aligned with the Regional Economic Strategy the future transport programme. which seeks to sustain regional economic 5.2.4.2 performance, improve the quality of skills DaSTS outlines five goals for transport, across the region, encourage regeneration of focusing on the challenge of delivering deprived areas and address inequalities within strong economic growth while at the same the region. time reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It 5.2.3 Regional Economic Strategy for the outlines the key components of the national South West 2006 – 2015 infrastructure and discusses the difficulties of 5.2.3.1 planning over the long-term in the context of The aim of the Regional Economic Strategy uncertain future demand. is to address the particular economic 5.2.4.3 needs of the region. It achieves this whilst DaSTS draws together the recommendations also supporting, enhancing and delivering in both the draft Regional Spatial Strategy and European, national and regional strategies and the Regional Economic Strategy presenting policies. The RES states that Bristol has a lead nine main growth areas identified by the role as a city-region of international, national region as per the RSS and the priorities for and regional significance and can use its delivering sustainable economic growth in the status as a national science city to strengthen RES. These areas require the largest quantum the West of England’s regional economic of sustainable growth (84 percent of growth base. Plymouth has the potential for a more in dwellings and 86 percent of growth in significant role in the region as have Exeter, employment). The nine growth areas are: Swindon and Gloucester/Cheltenham. Cheltenham and Gloucester 5.2.3.2 Regionally, it is important that the RES Swindon reinforces the aims set out in the Integrated West of England (Bath, Bristol and Weston- Regional Strategy (IRS), and complements super-Mare) the Regional Spatial Strategy to ensure that the region is working in an integrated way Taunton to agreed goals. The Integrated Regional Exeter Strategy for the South West is an important mechanism for better integrated working in the Torbay (Torquay, Paignton and Brixham) region as it provides a set of broad objectives Plymouth and priorities relevant across sectors. Just Connect is an Integrated Regional Strategy for Key Cornish towns (Camborne, Redruth, the South West for the period 2004 to 2026. Truro, Falmouth and Penryn)

5.2.4 Delivering a Sustainable Transport South East (Bournemouth and System (DaSTS) Poole (outside the RUS scope)).

5.2.4.1 5.2.4.4 Delivering a Sustainable Transport System With the RSS and the RES the challenges (DaSTS) is the DfT’s new approach to long- across economic development, housing and term transport planning and will be used in transport and the issues faced in different determining funding decisions for the five-year parts of the region are well known. The South period from 2014 to 2019. DaSTS sets out West Regional Development Agency and the the process for determining priorities with the South West Councils have formed a four-stage establishment of goals and the identification of programme to develop the evidence base

91 necessary to support the principle objectives of Parkway station and interchange for the city their Regional Funding Allocation (RFA) 2 bid and the airport to enable through links. whilst adopting the DaSTS process. 5.2.5.4 5.2.5 The Future of Air Transport Despite wishing to contain travel and demand 5.2.5.1 to airports within the South West, the The Government’s White Paper “The Future development of a western rail link to London of Air Transport” published in 2003 set Heathrow is favoured by the region as there out a national strategic framework for the continues to be strong demand particularly development of airport capacity until 2033. from the business community for improved Developments at Heathrow Airport, such as rail access to Heathrow Airport. The recent the new Terminal 5, which opened in March commitment to electrification between London, 2008 and the modernising of other terminals Bristol and South Wales will have an impact has and will continue to have a major on the case for western rail access. impact on the RUS area. Forecast growth 5.3 Eco-towns in passengers using Heathrow Airport has 5.3.1 identified the need for further airport expansion Eco-towns are a proposed programme of leading to the proposal for a third runway and exemplar sustainable new towns to be built in sixth terminal. The challenge for rail will be England. They will be new towns of at least how it can contribute to providing national links 5,000 – 20,000 homes intended to create to key centres as a potential alternative to new settlements to achieve zero carbon domestic flights. emissions and more sustainable living, using 5.2.5.2 the best new design and architecture. The The national policy framework established in developments are intended to encourage a the White Paper supports the development of modal shift from road to rail and promote a car Bristol as the main regional airport in the South free community, with reduced emissions and West but also supports improved access and traffic congestion being the key measures. development to the other airports within the 5.3.2 area namely Exeter, Plymouth and Newquay. In November 2008, a shortlist of 12 sites was These airports are forecast to grow from 4.5 announced for public consultation of which, million passengers per annum in 2000 to three impacted on the Great Western RUS almost 20 million passengers per annum by area: Weston Otmoor, Middle Quinton and St 2030. Developing the role of the South West Austell. In July 2009, the DfT announced four airports to support the growth of tourist visits to confirmed sites to be progressed to the next the region will be key. phases of planning, public consultation and 5.2.5.3 local planning approval. The four sites are St In the context of national policy, the aim of Austell (China Clay) in Cornwall, North West the region’s air strategy as presented in the Bicester in Oxfordshire, Whitehill-Bordon Regional Spatial Strategy is to meet more of in and Rackheath in Norfolk. Of the South West’s demand for air services within these, the site at St Austell is within the scope the region with reduced journeys to airports of this RUS with the site at Bicester bordering outside the region, particularly in the form of the area with the West Midlands and Chilterns road traffic to London Heathrow and Gatwick. RUS. It is currently expected that this first This will be achieved through the development wave of eco-towns will be established by 2016. of existing airports through improved access The progression of these sites will increase and investment at Bristol and Exeter airports. levels of rail demand in the surrounding areas; To improve access to there however the options for rail have yet to be is a proposal to develop Worle station as a evaluated. In 2010, the identification of the

92 second wave of eco-towns will commence 5.4.4 through local and regional plans. The following sections present the forecasts of passenger demand to 2019 for the Great 5.4 Passenger demand: Drivers Western RUS area within the markets of Long of change Distance High Speed services; suburban 5.4.1 services and key interurban centres. A review Beyond the early years of the strategy, of the long-term, long distance forecasts as forecasts become increasingly less certain. presented by the Network RUS specifically In considering demand beyond 2019, the for the Great Western RUS area is included RUS notes the Government’s aspiration in followed by a review of the future freight the “Delivering a Sustainable Railway” White forecasts and market scenarios. Paper, to provide a reliable network capable of handling double the number of passengers 5.4.5 over the next 30 years. This aspiration sets an It is important to note that the forecasts for overall context for the future development of passenger demand do not include any effect the railway but is not intended to be a forecast from electrification. It is recognised that there for any specific route or area. are quantitative and qualitative benefits evident from electrifying the railway which 5.4.2 will impact and increase passenger demand. Current economic conditions will affect passenger numbers and freight volumes, 5.5 Forecast passenger demand although to what extent is somewhat unclear. 5.5.1 Forecasting approach There remains considerable uncertainty 5.5.1.1 regarding the severity of the recession and The Passenger Demand Forecasting the timescale for recovery. As the Freight RUS Handbook (PDFH) is the industry standard was published in March 2007, it provides a framework for modelling growth, using demand pre-recession view of freight demand and drivers, such as UK demographics, economic growth. Much of the passenger demand growth and the characteristics of competing forecasts used in the Network RUS and the modes to predict the change in passenger Great Western RUS were formulated using demand. A number of data sources regarding 2007/08 data with some more recent counts these external drivers were used in compiling undertaken. the forecasts:

5.4.3 gross domestic product (GDP) and The RUS assumes that recovery does happen, central London employment forecasts even if the timescale is uncertain, and on that were obtained from Oxford Economic basis the forecasts are a reasonable view Forecasting of growth in the medium to long term. For forecasts of local population and example, it could be that the level of demand employment were obtained from version forecast for 2019 may be achieved slightly 5.4 of the Department for Transport’s later (or indeed earlier). Early indications show TEMPRO model that the effect of the recession on passenger demand has been minimal with the demand elasticity assumptions were drawn from for rail still increasing although at a lower rate PDFH version 4.1, except for elasticity than the rapid growth experienced in the last to fare increases, for which PDFH 4.0 few years, however, there has been a greater guidance was used impact on freight. assumptions about the real cost of fuel and levels of car ownership were derived from TEMPRO version 5.4.

93 5.5.1.2 growth; the growth rate then returns to the The PDFH has been used to predict future rate predicted using the standard PDFH growth in rail journeys, except where this has methodology. These forecasts were agreed by been shown to be an under or over prediction the Stakeholder Management Group and used of historic growth in the RUS area. In these for the RUS analysis. cases, an alternative methodology (or overlay) 5.5.1.5 based on historic evidence has been used. In developing the demand forecasts for Evidence suggests that the PDFH framework the Great Western RUS, Reading and the can underestimate the recent acceleration in surrounding area to the west have been passenger growth experienced in some urban grouped together to form the forecasts for and interurban rail markets outside of London. Long Distance High Speed services while the An extensive validation exercise was therefore shorter commuter market comprising of the undertaken to assess how well the PDFH stations located to the east of Reading are methodology would have explained historic grouped as suburban services. Each of these growth on key flows in the Great Western markets and their forecasts are discussed in RUS area. turn below. 5.5.1.3 5.5.2 Passenger forecasts – Long Distance For London flows, the RUS found that the High Speed PDFH was able to reasonably predict the 5.5.2.1 historic growth that occurred between 1998 The growth forecast for passenger flows from and 2006 once various changes that had within the Great Western RUS area to London occurred over this time period had been Paddington on the Long Distance High Speed included eg. timetable changes, the impact (LDHS) services is predicted to increase of performance improvement and the between 2008 and 2019 by 31 percent in effect of installing ticket barriers at London the peak and 42 percent for all day services. Paddington. Similarly demand into Reading This is equivalent to a 2.5 percent increase in could be explained by PDFH methodology. the peak and a 3.2 percent increase all day These forecasts were therefore agreed by the per annum. These growth forecasts include Stakeholder Management Group and used for exogenous factors, such as economic and the RUS analysis. employment projections as well as the cost of 5.5.1.4 travel with rail fares and fuel prices. However, it was evident that the PDFH under 5.5.2.2 predicted historic growth on the urban and These forecasts do not include the full impact interurban flows in the RUS area. This under of the Intercity Express Programme (IEP) prediction was particularly significant for and electrification of the Great Western Main flows into Bristol and flows between the RUS Line (GWML) on service provision, capacity area and other regions, particularly the West and demand. This is due to the service Midlands and South Wales. An alternative specification for IEP services still being approach to forecasting was therefore developed and therefore the impact that these developed using a combination of historic schemes may have on demand has not been growth and PDFH estimates, in line with explicitly modelled. the methodology used in other RUSs. This approach assumes that the current short- term rate of high growth continues in the first two years; this is then followed by four years of standard PDFH growth with an additional “overlay” to capture the unexplained historic

94 5.5.2.3 5.5.3.2 However, with the current IEP service These forecasts do not include the potential specification the proposed quantum of services impact of the Crossrail scheme on passenger has been used as a basis to undertake demand as the Crossrail timetable is still under initial capacity analysis to ascertain how the development (now at Iteration 2), therefore the increase in service provision (as presented in RUS has not explicitly analysed the impact on Chapter 4) can assist with accommodating demand of the Crossrail scheme. However, predicted growth. With the draft design for the capacity analysis has been undertaken at a new diesel and electric trains, an indication of high level using the capacity assumptions the number of seats and standing allowance for the proposed 10-car Crossrail service has enabled high level load factor analysis to with the Crossrail Iteration 1 timetable which be undertaken. demonstrates that sufficient capacity will be available on the suburban services. It is 5.5.2.4 anticipated, that following the implementation This analysis has demonstrated that the extra of Crossrail in 2017, passenger demand and capacity provided by IEP (in either bi-mode travel patterns in the Thames Valley area or electric form) is sufficient to accommodate will begin to be affected towards the end of predicted demand into London Paddington to the 10-year RUS forecast period following 2019 during the three-hour peak period (07:00 an introductory period of the new services. and 09:59). This additional capacity is provided Looking ahead, it is predicted that on-train through the increased capability of the rolling capacity on Crossrail services into London stock and through the proposed increase in Paddington will be sufficient until at least 2026. service frequency on a number of routes. 5.5.4 Passenger forecasts – key urban 5.5.3 Passenger forecasts – suburban centres services 5.5.4.1 Reading 5.5.3.1 Peak arrivals into Reading are predicted to Demand from the short to medium commuter increase by 28 percent between 2008 and market in the Great Western RUS area to 2019, this equates to a rate of 2.3 percent London is predicted to increase by 21 percent per annum. All day demand is predicted to in the peak and by 25 percent all day between increase at a higher rate of 31 percent in the 2008 and 2019. This is equivalent to an annual same forecast period, equating to an annual growth of 1.8 percent for peak services and 2.1 increase of 2.5 percent. percent for all day services. These forecasts predominantly represent demand from stations 5.5.4.2 Bristol to the east of Reading to central London such Peak demand to Bristol is predicted to grow as Maidenhead, Slough and West Drayton. It by 41 percent between 2008 and 2019 which is recognised that following the introduction is equivalent to an annual growth rate of 3.2 of electrification on these services by the percent. Off peak demand is predicted to grow end of 2016, additional capacity will be by 37 percent over the same time period, provided through the introduction of four-car which is principally assumed to be for leisure electric trains (proposed to be redeployed purposes. This forecast is aligned with the from the ) replacing recent high growth experienced in the Bristol the existing two and three-car diesel trains. conurbation area as a result of a number of This change may also positively impact on demand drivers; these include an increase the attractiveness of rail and therefore level in road congestion during peak hours and of passenger demand for these services, changes in commuting patterns favouring rail however the potential impact of this has not travel. This growth forecast is also consistent been included in the forecasts. with the forecast in the South West Regional Planning Assessment, which predicts an

95 average growth rate of 3.5 percent per annum at a rate higher than PDFH forecasts and (all day) between 2006 and 2026 under the the magnitude of growth is likely to be similar “High Growth Scenario”. to Bristol.

5.5.4.3 Exeter and Plymouth 5.5.5 Predicted loadings – key urban It has been shown that the PDFH tends centres to under predict rail passenger growth 5.5.5.1 Reading experienced in urban and interurban rail Figure 5.2 shows the estimated load factors markets outside of London. As shown in (relative to seats) on arrival at Reading in Chapter 3, urban centres in the South West 2019.This is a ratio of passengers to seats region such as Exeter and Plymouth have expressed as a percentage. This is presented experienced strong growth in rail demand over by corridor in the three-hour morning peak the last decade. Therefore, for the purpose period followed by the high peak hour in of option appraisal as detailed in Chapter 6, Figure 5.3. the passenger growth forecast, established 5.5.5.2 for Bristol has been adopted and used for All corridors, except Wokingham and Exeter and Plymouth. A bespoke forecast has Basingstoke, will have sufficient seats not been explicitly developed. It is anticipated available to meet expected demand across the that in the short to medium term, rail demand high peak hour and three-hour peak period. at these urban centres will continue to grow

Figure 5.2 – Average weekday load factors on arrival at Reading in 2019, three-hour peak (07:00-09:59)

DIDCOT PARKWAY CORRIDOR

DIDCOT Cholsey PARKWAY MARLOW BOURNE END HENLEY-ON-THAMES Goring & Streatley Shiplake Cookham Pangbourne n Wargrave Furze Platt Tilehurst READING st DraytoHayes & BurnhamSLOUGH LangleyIver We HarlingtonPADDINGTON T Maidenhea Reading West wyford Ta CORRIDOR NEWBURY plow Southall HEATHROW CORRIDOR n e d Colnbrook T1, 2 & 3 Theal Mortimer WINDSOR Thatcham Midgham & ETON HEATHROW T5 HEATHROW T4 Aldermasto CENTRAL Bramley BAA Infrastructure Newbury Racecourse WOKINGHAM CORRIDOR

BASINGSTOKE Key CORRIDOR Average load factor on arrival at Reading Load factor Load factor (relative to seats) (relative to total capacity) Over 130% Over 100% 100% - 130% 70% - 100% 80% - 99% 50% - 69% less than 80% less than 50%

Note: Total capacity includes seats and standing allowance

96 Figure 5.3 – Average weekday load factors on arrival at Reading in 2019, high peak hour Key (08:00-08:59) Average load factor on arrival at Reading Load factor Load factor (relative to seats) (relative to total capacity) DIDCOT PARKWAY Over 130% Over 100% CORRIDOR 100% - 130% 70% - 100% 80% - 99% 50% - 69% DIDCOT less than 80% less than 50% Cholsey PARKWAY MARLOW BOURNE END HENLEY-ON-THAMES Goring & Streatley Note: Total capacity includes seats and standing allowance Shiplake Cookham Pangbourne n Wargrave Furze Platt Tilehurst READING st DraytoHayes & BurnhamSLOUGH LangleyIver We HarlingtonPADDINGTON T Maidenhead Reading West wyford Ta CORRIDOR NEWBURY plow Southall HEATHROW CORRIDOR e Colnbrook T1, 2 & 3 Theal Mortimer WINDSOR Thatcham Midgham & ETON HEATHROW T5 HEATHROW T4 Aldermaston CENTRAL Bramley BAA Infrastructure Newbury Racecourse WOKINGHAM CORRIDOR BASINGSTOKE CORRIDOR

These estimated load factors take into account with the stations at Guildford and Gatwick the additional capacity expected to be provided Airport also experiencing on-train crowding. through the High Level Output Specification However, both of these corridors will have (HLOS) with the rolling stock proposals and sufficient total capacity (includes seats and the Intercity Express Programme. These standing allowance) to meet predicted growth interventions have been included within the in the morning peak. analysis as they form committed schemes as 5.5.5.4 Bristol discussed in Chapter 4. The level of crowding on services into Bristol 5.5.5.3 during the morning three-hour peak period The HLOS response submitted by First Great is forecast to increase by 2019. Figure 5.4 Western (FGW) to a Request for Proposal by shows estimated load factors by corridor in the the DfT includes provision for train lengthening morning three-hour peak period followed by on the Wokingham and Basingstoke corridors. the high peak hour in Figure 5.5. For the Basingstoke corridor, these additional vehicles resolve the expected crowding in 2019 on the suburban services – the resultant crowding as shown in Figure 5.3 remains on the long distance CrossCountry services into Reading. On the Wokingham corridor, after the introduction of the HLOS additional vehicles, it is still expected that the Gatwick Airport to Reading services will continue to have more passengers than seats available on arrival in the morning peak period at Reading in 2019,

97 Figure 5.4 – Average weekday load factors on arrival at Bristol Temple Meads in 2019, three-hour peak (07:00-09:59) GLOUCESTER CORRIDOR Patchway CARDIFF CORRIDOR Yate

SEVERN SEVERN BEACH BEACH CORRIDOR BRISTOL CHIPPENHAM CORRIDOR St Andrews Road PARKWAY Avonmouth

Shirehampton Filton Abbey Wood Clifton DownMontpelier Chippenham Sea Mills Redland Stapleton Road BATH Melksham Lawrence Hill SPA BRISTOL TEMPLE MEADS d f Bedminster on Parson Street Av onclif Trowbridge Av Freshfor Nailsea & Backwell Keynsham Key Yatton Oldfield Park Worle Bradford-on- Average load factor on arrival at Bristol Temple Meads Weston Milton WESTBURY Load factor Load factor (relative to seats) (relative to total capacity) WESTON-SUPER-MARE WESTBURY CORRIDOR Over 130% Over 100% Highbridge & Burnham 100% - 130% 70% - 100% 80% - 99% 50% - 69% Bridgewater less than 80% less than 50% Taunton

WESTON-SUPER-MARE Note: Total capacity includes seats and standing allowance CORRIDOR

Figure 5.5 – Average weekday load factors on arrival at Bristol Temple Meads in 2019 high peak hour (08:00 – 08:59) GLOUCESTER CORRIDOR Patchway CARDIFF CORRIDOR Yate

SEVERN SEVERN BEACH BEACH CORRIDOR BRISTOL CHIPPENHAM CORRIDOR St Andrews Road PARKWAY Avonmouth

Shirehampton Filton Abbey Wood Clifton DownMontpelier Chippenham Sea Mills Redland Stapleton Road BATH Melksham Lawrence Hill SPA BRISTOL TEMPLE MEADS d f Bedminster on Parson Street Av onclif Trowbridge Av Freshfor Nailsea & Backwell Keynsham Key Oldfield Park Yatton Worle Bradford-on- Average load factor on arrival at Bristol Temple Meads Weston Milton WESTBURY Load factor Load factor (relative to seats) (relative to total capacity) WESTON-SUPER-MARE WESTBURY Over 130% Over 100% CORRIDOR 100% - 130% 70% - 100% Highbridge & Burnham

80% - 99% 50% - 69% Bridgewater less than 80% less than 50% Taunton

Note: Total capacity includes seats and standing allowance WESTON-SUPER-MARE CORRIDOR

98 5.5.5.5 5.5.6 Passenger forecasts – cross RUS flows As part of their HLOS Request for Proposal 5.5.6.1 response, FGW propose 12 additional vehicles Significant growth is predicted to 2019 on flows to enable train lengthening on a number between the Great Western RUS area and of routes in the West of England and the South Wales and between the Great Western predicted load factors presented in Figure 5.4 RUS area and the West Midlands. All day and Figure 5.5 have taken this into account. passenger demand in this market is predicted The Cardiff to Bristol corridor is still predicted to grow by over 30 percent between 2008 and to experience a high level of crowding in 2019. The greatest growth is expected between 2019 with some passengers standing across Bristol and South Wales at 35 percent, followed the high peak hour above the total capacity by Reading and the West Midlands at 34 provision (this includes both seating and percent with a 32 percent growth predicted standing allowances). It is recognised that between Bristol and the West Midlands. additional capacity will need to be sought and 5.5.7 Network RUS: Long distance this is discussed further in Chapter 6. Although passenger demand forecasts Gloucester and Weston-super-Mare corridors 5.5.7.1 are predicted to experience a passenger The Network RUS “Scenarios and long to seat ratio of 100 percent or above in the distance forecasts” published in June 2009 high peak hour, there remains sufficient total presented the growth in rail demand over a capacity to accommodate predicted demand in 30-year horizon for conurbation flows on the the peak to 2019. western route by four scenarios, these are shown in Figure 5.6.

Figure 5.6 – Network RUS scenarios

Relatively high economic growth Low economic growth Moderate increase in UK energy prices High energy prices High technological innovation and intervention Technological innovation driven by market forces Migration is managed to acceptable levels Low inward migration Distance from market becomes a significant factor in New focus on community and quality of life business decisions Cost of transport increases Social equality and opportunities drive government policy Cities grow independently of London Industry regionalises with continued importance of London

Strong economic growth continues Modest Economic Growth Energy prices grow at an affordable rate Significant increase in energy price Technological innovation driven by market forces Technological innovation hampered by lack of High levels of inward migration international cooperation London plays key role in UK wealth creation Moderate inward migration Improved quality of life Limited regionalisation of cities with ties to London as the major conurbation

99 5.5.7.2 5.5.7.3 The Network RUS demand forecast is The effect of increasing the attractiveness of developed using an alternative approach rail compared to road is strongest for flows to PDFH as it recognises that PDFH is not such as Bristol to Swansea and Plymouth always appropriate for longer-term forecasts. where rail has a relatively low market share The forecasts are based on a detailed but where small changes in rail’s competitive consideration of factors affecting long distance position can lead to large changes in market market size and market share and represent share. It is recognised that future changes to a longer-term view to 2036. The strategic rail patterns positively impacts on the role of national corridor for the western route includes rail, strengthening its position and increasing the key conurbations on London to Bristol demand. However, the potential changes and Plymouth; London to South Wales and in the economy, as reflected in the various from South Wales to the South West routes. scenarios, will impact to differing extents on Figure 5.7 illustrates the forecast growth in the level of growth forecast. long distance rail trips to cities on this corridor. The long distance passenger corridor in the Network RUS also includes the from to Bristol, although not shown in Figure 5.7; it will impact on the Great Western.

100 Figure 5.7 – Network RUS: Western corridor demand forecasts to 2036

LONDON

123% 65% 102% 56% Swansea 88% 46% 98% 51% 118% 66% 47% 6% 83% 47% 78% 39%

171% 92% Bristol 130% 67%

100% 48% Cardiff 115% 68%

126% 65% 105% 61%

119% 59% Plymouth 130% 65%

Key

Global responsibility Local awareness

Continued Profligacy Insularity

Scale 1: 2007 2-way daily flow size 3500 2500 1500 500

101 5.6 Forecast freight demand to increase the proportion of freight carried by 5.6.1 rail throughout the United Kingdom. The DfT’s Freight demand forecasts were developed “Delivering a Sustainable Transport System” nationally in the Freight Route Utilisation White Paper provides support for transferring Strategy (FRUS) published in March 2007; freight from road to rail in order to reduce this presented a strategy for accommodating road congestion and carbon emissions, with the forecast freight traffic across the national the Ports Policy Review interim report (2007) network over the 10-year period from 2004/05 forecasting that by 2030 half of all rail freight to 2014/15 and estimated approximately 25 will be port related. percent growth in the number of freight trains 5.6.3 per day. In August 2008, the Rail Freight Group (RFG) 5.6.2 and Freight Transport Association (FTA) In compiling these forecasts, two methods published forecasts for demand for rail up to were used. Firstly, a “bottom up” approach 2015 and 2030. These forecasts present a using current flows and known changes 30 percent increase in tonne km from 2006 projected forward to 2014. This was to 2015 and more than doubling by 2030. undertaken by the Freight Operating However, the growth in intermodal traffic Companies and predicted a 26 percent is forecast to be much higher, more than growth. The other method referred to as the doubling by 2015 and a five-fold increase by “top down” approach used a more scientific 2030 reflecting a continuing expansion of trade approach using the “Great Britain Freight from continental Europe and further afield, Model” (GBFM), a calibrated model based on plus a significant use of rail to and from rail- evidence of actual rail market shares. This connected warehouses. estimated a 28 percent growth to 2014. 5.6.4 Since the publication of the FRUS, these Figure 5.8 presents the national rail freight forecasts have been supplemented by forecasts to 2030: aspirations by the DfT and other stakeholders

Figure 5.8 – National rail freight forecasts

2006 2015 2030

Tonnes (millions) 123.7 130.3 197.8

Tonne km (billions) 23.5 31.0 50.4

Trains (‘000s) 409 434 634

Percent tonne by rail (km) 12.6 15.0 20.7

102 5.6.5 5.6.7.1 Intermodal The Strategic Freight Network (SFN) has Strong deep sea container growth is forecast produced a current indication of the order of to continue with the W10 gauge clearance growth to 2019 and 2030 for specific corridors. scheme underway between the Port of These forecasts are an approximation and are Southampton and the West Coast Main Line. currently being refined and agreed with key Once the enhancement scheme is delivered stakeholders. Once agreed, these forecasts in 2011, the forecasts identify growth of six will be presented on a route by route basis to eight trains per day in each direction to across the national rail network with capacity and from the port by 2014/15. It is further assessments undertaken to review if this predicted that by 2030, there will be a shortfall growth can be accommodated on the current in capacity by up to 50 trains per day on network – where it can’t, the SFN will propose this route. Growth in container traffic is also and appraise interventions. expected with the proposed aspirations of the Bristol Port Company as discussed in 5.6.6 paragraph 5.6.8. Initial assessments for the indicative level of freight growth on the Reading to London 5.6.7.2 Aggregates Paddington corridor, Didcot to Leamington Growth in aggregates freight traffic is also and across Bristol have been included in expected to occur to meet the house building the Great Western RUS option appraisal programme demands in the South East of work (see Chapter 6). These forecasts are England, the construction of the Olympic subject to confirmation of the actual growth Games sites and Crossrail. The construction that is expected to occur over the next ten to of Crossrail will generate significant volumes twenty years. They represent the incremental of freight movements both for aggregates and increase in the number of trains per day cement traffic to site, and extracted materials in each direction at 2019 and 2030. The from the tunnelling works from site. The FRUS breakdown of the forecasts used for each indicates up to three additional trains per day route is presented in Figure 5.9. will be required to meet the predicted growth in construction traffic, with a substantial increase 5.6.7 Current market scenarios under the SFN forecasts to 2019. The potential for freight growth exists in all market sectors but the current economic fluctuations make accurate forecasting difficult. However, it is not unreasonable to assume that following a period of static or negative growth freight will return to, or exceed, previously attained levels of traffic. The following scenarios describe the main opportunities in each sector:

Figure 5.9 – Strategic Freight Network – forecast growth

Location 2019 2030

Paddington to Reading 25 36

Didcot to Oxford 29 43

Bristol 7 13

103 5.6.7.3 Coal 5.6.8 Terminal developments The most significant driver of change in The Regional Spatial Strategy for the South demand patterns is the Energy Supply Industry West supports opportunities for developing (ESI) coal market. This is due to ongoing shifts freight markets in the region particularly for towards importing coal supplies and volume Bristol which is the largest port in the South shifts between competing import facilities. West. Opportunities to develop the markets The future of the UK energy policy and carbon of these ports are supported, especially emission levels will affect the demand for coal. where measures include improved rail access It is currently unclear how this will affect the to enable more sustainable distribution. demand for . Biofuel alternatives The Bristol Port Company has high level being considered require substantial volumes proposals for increased rail volumes from a of coal, and any growth in this type of fuel at proposed container terminal development the expense of coal (for conventional coal- at Avonmouth. Further growth driven by the fired power generation) is likely to increase the development of this new terminal could drive demand for train paths rather than lead to a new capacity gaps. reduction. 5.7 Summary The future of Didcot Power station is The above analysis has enabled a number currently unclear. At present, the plant is of “gaps” to be identified between the current non-EU compliant as it is not fitted with Flue levels of supply and demand and that Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) and unless a which will be required over the next 10-year dispensation is granted it is likely that the period to 2019 in order to accommodate station will cease operations from 2015. This predicted growth. The gaps identified and the would release additional capacity on the route interventions assessed are discussed further between Avonmouth and Didcot should the in the following chapter “Gaps and options”. power station cease coal burning operations. However, if it remains operational, future freight capacity on this section would need to be reviewed to assess whether the current infrastructure can accommodate such growth along with the other enhancements proposed for the area specifically with the introduction of the Intercity Express Programme.

5.6.7.4 Other materials The FRUS estimates two additional metal product trains per day and one additional petroleum train per day will be needed across the RUS area.

104 105 6. Gaps and options

6.1 Introduction 6.3 Process 6.1.1 6.3.1 Previous chapters have presented baseline The process adopted during the Great data (the current capability and requirements of Western RUS was to identify and catalogue the network), committed schemes, forecasts of where issues exist on the current railway future demand and other drivers of change. This and where they are expected to exist going chapter builds on this by detailing the process of forward. This was undertaken through the gap identification, the options to address these baseline study (with stakeholder input) and gaps and the process of their appraisal. through an analysis and comparison of current (Chapter 3) and predicted changes in demand 6.2 Gaps (Chapter 5) as well as a review of strategic 6.2.1 documentation for the geographical area. A Route Utilisation Strategy (RUS) gap is This provided identification of potential “gaps” defined as the difference between what the between what the railway system delivers now system can currently supply, in terms of and what it is required to deliver going forward infrastructure and train services, and what is over the timeframe of the RUS. likely to be demanded of the system, in terms of what it needs to do going forward for passenger 6.3.2 and freight at suitable levels of performance. A list of 128 issues were assembled from this process, which were then subjected to 6.2.2 detailed analysis by the Great Western RUS RUS gaps can be broadly classified into Stakeholder Management Group (SMG). four types: Each issue was meticulously reviewed and capacity and capability – where the size, categorised as a gap, an option, a constraint number and mix of services (passenger or a stakeholder aspiration. This finalised the and/or freight) does not meet current or gaps which were considered to need further, future needs more detailed analysis.

performance – where the performance 6.4 Identification of gaps outputs of the railway system fall short of 6.4.1 requirements From the list of 128, the SMG determined there were 21 gaps to be pursued under the journey times – where location to location Great Western RUS. A summary table of the journey times (passenger or freight) do not identified gaps is as follows: meet current or future needs

connectivity – where journeys between locations (passenger or freight) do not meet current or future needs.

106 Figure 6.1 – Table of gaps

No. Nature of gap Key issues

1. Paddington peak capacity existing and predicted crowding and ability to meet forecast growth to 2014, 2019 and beyond on services at London Paddington during the peak 2. Inner suburban service pattern existing and predicted crowding and ability to meet forecasted growth and service provision following proposed interventions with Crossrail and Intercity Express Programme 3. Paddington to Reading all existing and predicted crowding and ability to meet forecast day capacity growth to 2014, 2019 and beyond on all day services between London Paddington and Reading 4. Paddington to Reading performance existing performance issues and requirement to meet the High Level Output Specification targets to 2014 and beyond 5. Slough to Windsor all day capacity existing crowding and ability to meet forecast growth to 2019 6. Freight capacity and capability in/ freight paths, loading gauge and train lengthening with around London and freight capacity current schemes under the Freight RUS, Strategic Freight North/South Network, Crossrail and East West Rail 7. Reading peak capacity existing and predicted crowding and ability to meet forecast growth to 2019 and beyond on services during the peak at Reading 8. Didcot to Wolvercot Jn performance existing performance issues at Didcot East Jn, Didcot North Jn and Oxford 9. West Midlands to South Coast: a) lack of direct services from the North East, Yorkshire and a) connectivity Derbyshire to the South Coast b) all day capacity b) existing and predicted crowding and inability to meet forecast growth to 2019 and beyond on all day services between the North and the South Coast 10. Swindon to Gloucester performance existing performance problems and service levels for normal service provision and under diversionary working 11. South Wales to South Coast all day existing and predicted crowding and ability to meet forecast capacity growth to 2019 and beyond on all day services between South Wales and the South Coast 12. West Midlands to South West a) lack of direct services from Greater Manchester and the a) connectivity South West beyond Bristol b) all day capacity b) existing and predicted crowding and inability to meet forecast growth to 2019 and beyond on all day services between the North and the South West

107 13. Bristol peak capacity existing and predicted crowding and inability to meet forecast growth to 2019 and beyond on services during the peak at Bristol Temple Meads 14. Bristol performance existing performance issues on the approaches to Bristol Temple Meads, specifically due to conflicting moves at Bristol East Jn 15. Westbury area performance existing performance issues in the Westbury station area 16. Exeter and Plymouth area existing connectivity issues between and across Exeter service pattern and Plymouth 17. Interurban journey times opportunities for improving journey times on services through either linespeed improvements and/or changing calling patterns 18. Early morning arrivals to key limited early morning journey opportunities from London regional centres Paddington to Plymouth and from Birmingham to Cardiff 19. Station crowding existing and predicted capacity problems identified at London Paddington; Ealing Broadway; Windsor and Eton Central; Reading, Oxford and Bristol Temple Meads stations 20. Seasonal fluctuations existing and predicted fluctuations in supply and demand to, from and within Devon and Cornwall 21. Impact of Heathrow Airport including impact of Crossrail and Heathrow Express on London western access demand to Heathrow Airport; local demand and services to Heathrow Airport from Reading including current and expected demand to Heathrow Airport from the South West

Figure 6.2 visually demonstrates these gaps rolling stock, predominantly as a result of the across the Great Western RUS area. additional vehicles expected to be provided through the High Level Output Specification 6.5 Generic gaps (HLOS), but also with reference to IEP, is 6.5.1 being addressed nationally through the A number of generic strategic gaps, relevant to Network RUS and IEP project. the overall rail network, were identified by the SMG as part of the gaps process. The majority 6.5.2 of which have been discussed in Chapter 4 as These strategic gaps are therefore being committed schemes with the Intercity Express managed through various means and as such Programme (IEP), electrification and Seven are not intended to be duplicated by this RUS. Day Railway initiative. The Strategic Freight The performance and capacity metrics from Network and the Freight RUS captures the the HLOS have been incorporated in the RUS generic gap of freight train length and network gap list and are addressed accordingly through capability whilst depot capacity for new the option analysis below.

108 Figure 6.2 – Great Western RUS scope area with identified gaps N ON ON LEBONE 19A RY LONDO EUST DDINGT LONDON MA 1 LONDON PA 2 s ll Route We 6 Acton Junction Route 16

Route y Route 18

6A roadwa B g ling on Main Line Ealin a 19B E Act st We l Drayton Green d

Hanwel H n T4 Brentfor branch

Castle Bar Park

SOUT RUISLIP

es & & es

y Harlingto Ha 3

THROW

Southall

t Drayton t GREENFORD s

THROW

South Greenford We HEA HEA T1, 2 &

17A

T5 r 21

Route 18 Ive BAA

4

gley

n

Infrastructure La THROW 3 Colnbrook HEA Route 16 R 2 5

19C ham

Y SLOUGH ON Burn

w WINDSO & ET CENTRAL lo p d LESBUR BOURNE END Ta Flyover Junction Summit AY Route 16 Maidenhea Furze Platt Cookham n wyford T Claydon L.N.E. Junctio PRINCES RISBOROUGH Route 16 3 MARLOW 19D 7 Bramley Route Mortimer rgrave OKE BLETCHLEY READING Shiplake Wa est

e e 17B

-ON-THAMES Theal R. Junction 9 BASINGST W. Basingstok G. lehurst Ti Reading W

WN HENLEY ermaston

BICESTER TO m

Ald a

Route 16

Cholsey Pangbourne Midgh Islip Y 4 17G

19E

17C tcham Cowley branch AY a

Route 8 Th 6B BANBUR Route 17 17D Y Goring & Streatley Y ARKW t DIDCOT P r lverco n n NEWBUR

Radley Wo Junction

Culham n Racecourse Newbury OXFORD Appleford SALISBUR Wilto Junction

Didcot Powe Statio

Hungerford Kintbury est Ascott-under- Wychwood Long Marsto Combe ON-IN-MARSH Hanborough 3

17E

Finstock SWINDON Bedwyn Kemble Route Charlbury Pewsey MORET Dilton Marsh 17N Dorchester W owbridge Honeybourne Stroud Shipton Chippenham Maiden Newton WEYMOUTH Melksham Tr 10 Evesham Kingham rminster Chetnole 17J tminster

Dorchester Junction Pershore on Wa Y Ye

h

Stonehouse Av

17M f Thornford 17F 17I

17H

te sterleig rd onclif n d

18B n Ya

We Ya Av

15 ood Bradford-on- 17O WESTBUR E ovil Norto Junctio Route 17

& AY Freshford 4 Ye Pen Mill TH A n OL Abbotswoo Junction TENHAM Ashchurch 17K BA SP FROM ovil y A illage Cam Dursley Route Abbey W h Ye Junctio ARKW 17T h CHEL SP

BRIST P

11 therington m Bruton Whatle Quarry

Ty branc h

Sharpness branc

Filton Oldfield Park Oldfield

nsha Key psham mpstone Commando mpstone V Exmout Junction N Merehead Quarry Polsloe Bridge Digby & Sowton To Exton Ly Ly EXMOUTH WORCESTER SHRUB HILL Castle Cary TO 17L GLOUCESTER Patchway UN 17P Montpelier e TA St James’ Park rr rquay 16 Lawrence Hill verton Parkway Bedminster To To e ON tton Ti rl Redland Stapleton Road Pilning 12 Ya Exeter Central TEMPLE MEADS Parson Street

18A Wo 17R onmouth IGNT Av Docks OL PA 17Q Route 13 20B Bridgwater

Nailsea & Backwell ston Milton

Clifton Down Clifton h BRIST SEVERN BEACH VIDS H arren tnes ABBOT Dawlish We Thomas

DA unnel

Cattewater branc ignmouth To

Starcross

T MOUT 19F

ort

ON Y Te Sea Mills

Crediton p

PL ON-SUPER-MARE on oford Highbridge & Burnham Portbury Dock Ivybridge h vonmouth

Dawlish W

14 Ye A Dev Andrews Road Newton St Cyres Severn Junction Exeter St NEWT Heathfield branc Shirehampton St WEST Alston

EXETER ST

13 Dockyard T

m

y Copplestone

Lapford ha

Bere y

16 Ke

Arms Eggesford Morchard Road Road NEWPOR

Meldon Quarr

tash

Kings Nympton

APLE Sal Umberleigh Chapelton s Portsmouth

Calstock St Budeaux Ferry Ferry Budeaux St ctoria Road German

BARNST Bere Ferrers

St Budeaux Vi St

GUNNISLAKE

Menheniot

ne LOOE y ombe

LISKEARD

Co St Ke St

Sandplace Causeland r h Bodmin Parkway h h Moorswater branc Fowey Harbou branc Par Harbour branc own Lostwithiel T Par Luxulyan Austell Falmouth 17S St Bugle Penmere o Penryn LMOUTH DOCKS ur Roche Perranwell Tr FA 20A St Columb Road h Parkandillack branc Redruth Quintrel Downs Hayle Camborne Y NEWQUA IVES Lelant St Erth ST Carbis Bay PENZANCE Lelant Saltings Capacity Journey time Performance 1 2 3 Generic gaps Key

109 6.6 Quantification of gaps 6.6.2.4 6.6.1 In the longer term, additional capacity could be Once the gaps have been identified, the next provided on the line by either increasing the stage is to quantify the gap. During the process service to a four-car train and/or increasing the of assessing and quantifying the RUS gaps, linespeed of the route in order to increase the a number of gaps were resolved and were frequency of the train service. Based on the therefore not progressed any further, these are current prediction of growth, it is expected that discussed below: this will be required from 2020 onwards. With the introduction of the Crossrail scheme, the 6.6.2 Gap 5: Slough to Windsor and Eton bay platform at Slough will remain capable of Central all day capacity accommodating at least a four-car train. 6.6.2.1 The issue of on-train crowding on services 6.6.3 Gap 6: Freight capacity and capability throughout the day between Slough and (in and around London and north-south) Windsor was raised during the gaps process. 6.6.3.1 The timetable at the time of analysis (May 2008) Freight capacity and capability was raised as provided three trains per hour Monday to Friday a gap by stakeholders across the RUS area, during the morning and evening peaks with two specifically in and around London and for flows trains per hour during the inter-peak period. north to south. Concerns were raised with regard to future freight growth particularly in 6.6.2.2 the London area after the completion of the However, from December 2008 the service Crossrail scheme with freight capability noted provision increased to three trains per hour specifically as an issue in and around the all day Monday to Friday. The current level of London area. demand was assessed with forecast growth to 2019 to understand whether the two-car 6.6.3.2 service of three trains per hour was sufficient The Freight RUS identified freight capacity to cater for the expected levels of demand. requirements nationally to 2014. The Strategic The results showed that the three trains per Freight Network (SFN) is analysing freight hour provided a passenger to total capacity growth nationally beyond 2014 to both 2019 (includes seats and standing allowance) ratio and 2030 and will consider any interventions of 70 percent during the morning high peak that may be required to meet this growth. hour, reducing to less than 20 percent in the Freight capacity and capability needed to be off peak. This level of service provision is considered in line with these existing strategies therefore sufficient to accommodate predicted and as such no specific options to address growth until at least 2019. these gaps were analysed in the Great Western RUS. However, the SFN forecasts 6.6.2.3 for freight growth to 2019 and 2030 have been A review of the existing service provision and included, where applicable, in the analysis of forecast growth to 2019 on weekend services other options to address other gaps. was also undertaken. From July 2009, the Saturday service has been increased from 6.6.3.3 two cars to three cars for the summer months. The proposed and committed schemes for First Great Western (FGW) are currently development and implementation under the reviewing the continuation of this extension as SFN are listed below along with an update well as evaluating the operation of three trains on the infrastructure enhancements provided per hour on Saturdays as an alternative. by the Crossrail scheme which provide improvements for freight.

110 6.6.3.4 the Cherwell Valley resignalling scheme The Freight RUS divided gaps into capacity and addressed issues between Jn and capability. For the Great Western RUS area, the Leamington capacity gap identified related to the predicted signalling headways will be improved as growth to 2014 (of up to six additional trains per part of the Banbury signalling renewals day) in intermodal traffic on the Southampton to during Control Period 4. The resignalling West Midlands route. This is driven by the gauge scheme also includes modernisation of the clearance enhancement scheme addressing station layout at Banbury. the capability gap for traffic from the Port of Southampton to the West Coast Main Line 6.6.3.7 (WCML) via Winchester, Reading West, Coventry A timetable assessment completed for the and Nuneaton. The increase in capacity, and Freight RUS indicated that four paths per the potential gap arising, is assessed later in the day, in each direction, were available without chapter in Option C under 6.9.3. any subsequent enhancement work between Southampton and the WCML. The Great 6.6.3.5 Western RUS has completed a revised As stated in Chapter 4 under committed capacity study for the Didcot to Leamington schemes, the gauge enhancement of this route area under Gap 8 (Didcot to Wolvercot Jn to W10 is currently underway. As a result of this performance), incorporating the latest freight enhancement, it was evident that diversionary forecasts from the SFN for expected growth routes would also be required to accommodate to 2019 and 2030 along with predictions in W10 traffic. Two diversionary routes were the increase of passenger services through identified and assessed, via Laverstock and the introduction of IEP. The characteristics Andover or via Melksham, with the route via of the additional freight trains were 75 mph Laverstock and Andover approved under the intermodal trains at 1400 tonnes. The results SFN as a committed scheme. This again, forms of the study proved that the predicted growth part of the RUS base. The route via Melksham is is compatible with the existing infrastructure currently uncommitted but remains an aspiration subject to the provision of a third bi-directional under the SFN for future development. line from Didcot North Jn towards Appleford 6.6.3.6 (see 6.9.3 for further details). Although the base case in the Freight RUS did 6.6.3.8 not identify the Southampton to WCML route In the longer term, the potential reopening as a capacity constraint, it was noted that with of the Oxford to Bletchley line could offer a the predicted demand generated by the gauge preferable routeing option for this freight flow. enhancement, a future capacity gap could This is being reviewed further under the West arise. The Freight RUS presented a number Midlands and Chilterns RUS with a common of options to address this for the short and strategy being developed with the West Coast long term, many of which are being addressed Main Line RUS. Building on the East West through other schemes: Rail scheme, the consortium is reviewing a train lengthening opportunities are being new north-south routeing strategy between assessed through the SFN the WCML and the South Coast via Reading which could be developed, for both passenger the Reading Station Area Redevelopment and freight services. If freight services are scheme provides grade separation at further extended to , this could provide Reading West Jn a north-south freight route from the Midland Oxford Resignalling will review signalling Main Line to the South Coast (subject to gauge headways between Didcot and Aynho Jn capability for W10 traffic). when undertaken in Control Period 5

111 6.6.3.9 and addressed and as such, no further The SFN is reviewing gauge enhancements interventions were proposed. An update on from the West Midlands to Doncaster which the development of these schemes will be could potentially further enhance and enable provided in the Fnal Great Western RUS. extension of the route from Southampton to 6.6.4 Gap 18: Earlier arrivals at key West Midlands further north. The increase in regional centres network capability that this could provide would 6.6.4.1 assist in addressing the north – south capacity Earlier morning arrivals for services at gap as identified under the Great Western RUS. Plymouth (from London Paddington) and 6.6.3.10 Cardiff (from Birmingham) was raised as a gap. For the London area, as part of the SFN A high-level economic appraisal on the option there is a GRIP (Guide to Railway Investment of a new service from London Paddington to Projects) stage 3 study reviewing the options Plymouth indicated that the scheme offered a for a London orbital route from the Channel poor value for money business case. Tunnel to the north and west of London via 6.6.4.2 Redhill and Reading which can also link into With the Birmingham to Cardiff journey north–south movements as well as those opportunity it was further clarified that the gap around London. related to direct journeys from Birmingham 6.6.3.11 New Street to Cardiff Central between 05:30 Crossrail provides W10 gauge from Acton to and 07:30. If the 05:42 service could be Maidenhead with passive provision for W12. retimed to depart Birmingham New Street The proposed infrastructure works listed later and achieve a faster running time, the below will assist with freight flows and improve identified gap could be filled. It was therefore access to terminals: agreed that this was a timetabling issue to be reviewed and that the Great Western RUS grade separation at Acton with a passenger should not consider it further. ‘diveunder’ improving access/egress to/ from Acton Yard 6.6.4.3 With the London to Plymouth journey improved grade separation at Airport Jn opportunities, a review of the travelling pattern a repositioned loop at Bridge to of users was completed on the first morning ease access to/from the Brentford Branch services between London Paddington and Plymouth to understand who was travelling, a repositioned fifth line between West where they were heading and what the Drayton and Iver. purpose of their travel was. The results of this 6.6.3.12 highlighted the focus of demand was more on The latest Crossrail service specification local journeys specifically between Swindon (Iteration 2) incorporates the specified and Bristol and between Exeter St Davids and provision of freight paths per day, in and Plymouth rather than end to end long distance around London, which accommodates the SFN London to Plymouth journeys. This confirmed growth forecasts of 25 paths per day to 2019 the high levels of demand for the inter-regional and 36 paths per day to 2030. connections which are further assessed under options H and L. Due to the results of the 6.6.3.13 From the work streams currently in progress, passenger survey and the limitations of the there is evidence that the freight capacity business case, the Great Western RUS did not and capability gaps into and around London consider this gap any further. and north to south are being reviewed

112 6.7 Option definition 6.7.2 6.7.1 A number of gaps with a degree of After each gap has been quantified and the commonality were grouped together to issues assessed, they are then considered form an option thus allowing the 21 gaps to using a standard “toolkit” of possible be addressed by 15 defined options. The solutions. The option toolkit includes a proposed options were reviewed and agreed range of interventions, from the operation by the SMG before further assessment of longer trains within current infrastructure, commenced. re-timetabling to improve capacity, to platform 6.7.3 extensions and the construction of additional Figure 6.3 presents the Gap and Options tracks. Using the toolkit, interventions are matrix which provides a brief description of defined and developed into proposed options each of the options and includes which gaps to identify the next steps in the analysis. are addressed through each option:

Figure 6.3 – Gaps and option matrix

Option Gap addressed:

Option A: Increase capacity and improve performance on the Paddington to 1, 2, 3, 4, 6a and Reading corridor including connectivity to Heathrow Airport and also including 21 a potential western access This option tested the requirements for lengthening services during the peak into Paddington; all day capacity and performance with and without Crossrail and Intercity Express Programme in addition to proposals for improved access from the west to Heathrow Airport

Option B: Lengthen services on the Reading to Gatwick Airport corridor 7 This option tested the requirements for lengthening services during the peak into Reading specifically on the Wokingham corridor

Option C: Improve capacity and performance through infrastructure 8 enhancements; Didcot – Wolvercot Jn This option tested various infrastructure enhancements to increase capacity and alleviate performance delays between Didcot and Wolvercot Jn

Option D: Improve connectivity and increase capacity on the West Midlands to 9 South Coast corridor This option tests the requirements for lengthening services on the Newcastle to Reading and Manchester to Bournemouth services with alternative service provisions modelled to improve connectivity from the North to the South Coast

Option E: Improve capacity and performance through infrastructure 10 enhancements; Swindon and Gloucester This option assumes double tracking between Swindon to Kemble and reviews reducing headways from Kemble to Standish Jn to improve performance and increase capacity, particularly when the route is used for diversionary purposes

113 Option F: Review service provision on the Cardiff to Portsmouth corridor 11 This option tested the requirements for lengthening services during the peak on the Cardiff to Portsmouth route and reviewed an alternative service proposition for additional capacity and an improvement in journey times

Option G: Improve connectivity and increase capacity on the West Midlands to 12 South West corridor This option tests the requirements for lengthening services on the Manchester to Bristol Temple Meads and Edinburgh to Plymouth services with alternative service propositions modelled to improve connectivity from the North to the South West

Option H: Lengthen services into Bristol Temple Meads and review service 11 and 13 proposition This option tested lengthening a number of services that operate to/from Bristol Temple Meads to alleviate on-train crowding and contribute towards the management of predicted demand

Option I: Improve capacity and performance through infrastructure 14 enhancements at Bristol This option tested various infrastructure enhancements for the north, south and east approaches to Bristol Temple Meads in order to improve the performance of the station layout particularly at Bristol East Jn and increase capacity across Bristol

Option J: Review service proposition across Bristol to provide additional 11, 13 and 14 capacity and improve performance This option reviewed an alternative service proposition for cross Bristol services as a longer-term improvement to capacity, performance and connectivity

Option K: Improve capacity and performance through infrastructure 15 enhancements at Westbury This option tested the provision of an additional platform face at Westbury to increase capacity and improve performance around the station area

Option L: Increase connectivity between Exeter and Plymouth 16 This option tested various timetable alterations for local services across Exeter and through extensions of long distance services from Bristol Temple Meads to Exeter and Plymouth

Option M: Improve linespeeds and change calling patterns on interurban 17 journeys This option tested increasing linespeeds and/or changing calling patterns on a number of interurban routes in order to improve journey times

Option N: Improve passenger throughput at known constrained stations 19 This option reviewed stations where passenger capacity was near to, or exceeding, the capability of the station

Option O: Seasonal fluctuations 20 This option assessed supply and demand for the long distance services and for those branch lines where services are affected during the summer timetable. Capacity and operational interventions were also reviewed

114 6.8 Assessment of options However, all schemes are subject to funding 6.8.1 being available. Each of the options has been assessed for 6.8.3 operational and/or economic impact where The figures presented in this chapter result applicable. Timetable and performance from high-level feasibility work (equivalent analysis is used to determine whether or not to GRIP 0), and represent the most likely an option is practicable, i.e. the proposed value for money based on a range of key service can actually be timetabled reliably on sensitivities. Each option is presented below, the network. Economic appraisals compare detailing the scope, the process undertaken the revenue implications and socio-economic and the recommendations of the analysis. benefits of changes to infrastructure and/or Where an option is recommended, the relevant service specifications (frequency, journey Transport Economic Efficiency (TEE) table or time, stopping pattern) against operating cost BCR is provided. (Opex) changes and any capital costs (Capex) necessary to enhance infrastructure to permit 6.9 Option appraisal such service alterations. 6.9.1 Option A: Increase capacity and improve performance on the Paddington to 6.8.2 Reading corridor including connectivity to Options that have been developed to Heathrow Airport and western access address gaps to 2019 have been subject The gaps identified relate to capacity, to an appraisal which is compliant with the performance and connectivity on the Department for Transport’s (DfT) Transport Paddington to Reading corridor including Analysis Guidance (webTAG). Where service provision and western access to appropriate, Benefit Cost Ratios (BCRs) are London Heathrow. Using the four scenarios, reported, which indicate the value for money of as presented in Figure 6.4, for the Intercity any particular scheme. The DfT funding criteria Express Programme (IEP), electrification and permits recommendation of funding through Crossrail, various options for capacity and the RUS process if the BCR is at least 1.5, service provision were reviewed. which is indicative of medium value for money. However, schemes involving infrastructure investment are required to offer high value for money indicated by a BCR of at least 2.

Figure 6.4 – Scenario matrix for London services

Crossrail (to Scenario IEP Electrification Maidenhead) A Y N (IEP-Diesel) N

B Y Y (IEP-Electric) N

C Y N (IEP-Diesel) Y

D Y Y (IEP-Electric) Y

Electrification from London Paddington to Bristol/Swansea and Oxford/Newbury IEP from London Paddington to South Wales, Bristol and some Exeter/Plymouth services

115 No specific options were devised to address timetable structure to understand how this performance as this work is being undertaken affected both capacity and connectivity. as part of the Reading Area Station Scenario A and B focused upon the pre- Redevelopment scheme which addresses Crossrail world, with the main difference current issues on the main line substantially being electrification under scenario B as this improving performance (predicted output is a will affect whether bi-mode or electric IEP 37 percent improvement in train delay minutes) trains would be used (electric trains provide and capacity (125 percent improvement significant additional seating capacity). on through line platform capacity). Any Scenario C and D included Crossrail but recommendations made to capacity and was with and without electrification beyond service provision should also, in effect, improve Maidenhead. The results and analysis for each the performance of the services. scenario are summarised below.

As part of the analysis a number of 6.9.1.1 Scenario A and B assumptions were made on schemes with Analysis shows there is sufficient on-train which the Great Western RUS interfaces. The capacity to meet passenger demand and RUS assumes that the Paddington Station forecast growth to 2019 on Long Distance Remodelling scheme will deliver the necessary High Speed services (LDHS) with IEP (either infrastructure changes to accommodate IEP diesel or electric). However, on-train crowding and that London Underground Limited’s (LUL) on the inner suburban services (Oxford to proposals will address station capacity issues London Paddington (stopping), Greenford to for their proposed service revision. London Paddington and Heathrow to London Paddington) is predicted to get worse by 2019. With regards to timetables, the RUS Analysis showed that to maintain the current analysis used the IEP service specification load factor in 2019 on these services, a total (January 2008) as per the DfT’s Invitation of approximately 1200 extra seats would be to Tender (ITT) documentation with the required across the morning peak period. In Crossrail Iteration 1 timetable. The following total, this equates to three additional vehicles assumptions were made: for both the Oxford to London Paddington and prior to Crossrail: all non-IEP services Greenford to London Paddington services continue as now and 10 additional vehicles for the Heathrow Connect to London Paddington services across post Crossrail: two outer suburban trains the peak period. per hour to London Paddington A sensitivity test to change the service Heathrow Express continues as now (four provision on the inner suburban services was fast trains per hour). undertaken to see whether this addressed Although, the service specification of IEP is on-train crowding. This considered replacing uncommitted, the proposal has been used for the current Greenford to London Paddington the purpose of analysis under the RUS. It is services with two-car Greenford to West Ealing recognised that this is subject to change, and shuttles plus an additional two trains per hour further detailed assessments will be completed from West Drayton to London Paddington in line with the predicted freight forecasts to (five cars) with current Heathrow Connect ensure all services can be accommodated. (two trains per hour) continuing as now. The The RUS analysis focused on what the results showed an average ratio of passengers capacity provision of these proposed services to seats of less than 90 percent across the would be and how this fitted with predicted three-hour peak which would address identified demand and, where possible, reviewed the capacity problems.

116 The IEP timetable was reviewed with various from Bourne End and Henley to London propositions modelled. This included operating Paddington. The recent commitment to the IEP trains on the December 2008 timetable electrification of the Great Western Main Line with the inclusion of Twyford and Maidenhead (GWML), west of Maidenhead, provides the relief line stops on the outer suburban opportunity for the extension of Crossrail services. The IEP specification (January 2008), services to Reading which will bring significant had shown a reduction in calls at Twyford and benefits, by giving the wider Thames Valley Maidenhead. direct rail access to central London and the city while also creating extra capacity at London Following the commitment to both Crossrail Paddington for longer distance services. (July 2008) and electrification (July 2009), This is achieved through the removal of the scenarios A and B become obsolete and residual diesel services which provided the therefore the options were closed. The RUS service between Reading and intermediate therefore focused on scenarios C and D. stations. The extension of Crossrail would 6.9.1.2 Scenario C and D also reduce the infrastructure requirements Analysis shows there is sufficient on-train for the scheme at Maidenhead and Slough. capacity to meet passenger demand and The DfT and Crossrail will be reviewing the forecasted growth to 2019 on both Long costs and benefits of this option. The possible Distance High Speed services, outer and inner electrification of the branch lines in the Thames suburban services with the implementation of Valley will also be reviewed in addition to some IEP (electric) and Crossrail. short sections of the route in West London to The IEP and Crossrail service propositions provide connectivity between freight lines. were reviewed with a number of revisions Electrification will enable the current Thames modelled. Under the IEP specification (January Valley suburban services into London 2008), there was a reduction in calls at Twyford Paddington to be operated by electric trains and Maidenhead. The RUS reviewed the instead of the existing diesel trains. It is option of operating Didcot Parkway to London proposed that existing Thameslink four-car Paddington shuttles to improve connectivity electric trains will be transferred onto the and provide a relief line stopping service as GWML, replacing the current two and three-car far as Maidenhead; which then ran on the fast diesel trains, when the new Thameslink fleet lines to London Paddington. is introduced. These vehicles can operate up A further sensitivity was undertaken on the to 100mph and provide additional capacity. It level of demand at Twyford and Maidenhead is planned that suburban services between to assess whether this change in supply Oxford, Reading and London Paddington will under the IEP specification would meet future be operated with these vehicles by the end requirements. The results showed sufficient of 2016. on-train capacity at Maidenhead to meet Heathrow Airport already benefits from an demand in the morning peak provided by the electrified rail link to London but passengers current level of service. In the future, demand from the west are required to change trains will be catered for by the proposed four trains or use coach links to the airport. A recent per hour Crossrail service. Connectivity from study commissioned by local authorities in Twyford proved sufficient for demand to at the Thames Valley identified a potential case least 2019 under the current IEP specification. for direct rail access to the airport from the The RUS completed a high-level review of the west, particularly from Slough, Maidenhead Crossrail proposition which included extending and Reading. One of the constraints identified Crossrail from Maidenhead to Reading and was the lack of electrification on the GWML operating additional through peak hour trains to support services from Heathrow Airport.

117 The commitment to electrification will have a With the uncertainty, fluidity and changing positive impact on the case for western rail base of the RUS (particularly for the Thames access to Heathrow Airport and will continue to Valley area) the SMG agreed that no further be assessed. work should be undertaken by the Great Western RUS for this option and that it should A comparison of the SFN forecasts with the be remitted to the individual project teams provision of freight paths in the Crossrail established to manage and coordinate these timetable proved sufficient to accommodate schemes. Further details on the developments predicted growth to at least 2030. The SFN of IEP, Crossrail and connections to airports forecasts 25 paths per day to 2019 and 36 are provided in Chapter 8; a longer-term view. paths per day to 2030. The Crossrail Access Option requires that there should be 69 6.9.2 Option B: Lengthen services on the westbound and 73 eastbound freight paths Reading to Gatwick Airport corridor per day; with the current Crossrail timetable On-train crowding for services into Reading (Iteration 2) meeting this requirement. station was identified as a gap through the baseline analysis. Load factor forecasts to Further to the RUS analysis of capacity and 2019 (as presented in Chapter 5) identified service provision with IEP and Crossrail, the that the Wokingham and Basingstoke corridors capacity at Paddington station emerged as would still experience passenger to seat ratios an issue with regards to track and platform of over 100 percent on arrival at Reading capacity in the station area. This occurs during the high peak hour (08:00-08:59). As from the potential mix of services which will part of the HLOS response to the Request operate post 2016 with Heathrow Express, for Proposal by the DfT, First Great Western IEP, Crossrail and residual diesel services. (FGW) has proposed additional vehicles on the An earlier timetable study completed in Basingstoke corridor which will address issues 2008 determined insufficient capacity within of on-train crowding on the suburban service. the existing layout at Paddington station to Crowding will remain on the long distance accommodate future growth. A more detailed services and this will be addressed through study is currently underway to specifically option D (see 6.9.4). determine the number, and length, of platforms that will be required, the results of which will On the Wokingham corridor, under FGW’s be available in autumn 2009. This will be HLOS proposal, the two-car service currently aligned with any necessary infrastructure operating between Redhill and Reading will be enhancements of the approaches into the lengthened to three cars. A sensitivity test which station area to accommodate the increase included the proposed AirTrack service was in services and depot connections with the completed to see whether the implementation of proposed IEP depot at North Pole. An update AirTrack would resolve the predicted crowding will be provided in the Final Great Western RUS. in 2019 on this corridor. This analysis confirmed that there would still be a capacity issue in During the course of analysis under this RUS, particular with regard to three morning peak further timetable specifications were produced hour services from Guildford. revising both the IEP and Crossrail timetables. These were being developed simultaneously The option for providing additional capacity by the established project teams for each into Reading through train lengthening was of these schemes. As such, many of the considered. Appraisal work was undertaken recommendations that would have been on the proposal to lengthen the three morning proposed in the RUS have been accommodated peak hour services from the Guildford line in the revised service propositions. into Reading, by one extra vehicle, with two services providing a sufficient BCR of greater

118 than 1.5. However, this proposal relied then only operate during the peak periods, upon the attaching and detaching of an addressing the capacity gap, and could be additional vehicle to form a four-car unit for stabled or deployed elsewhere during the the peak period only. This was deemed an off peak. Other potential uses for the rolling unrealistic assumption and would in practice stock are also available during the inter-peak be inoperable. A sensitivity test of operating but these have not been included in the the additional unit throughout the day was analysis. The revised appraisal for this option appraised, however due to the increase in provides a medium value for money scheme operational cost, it produced poor value for and can therefore be recommended as a way money and the option was discounted. to relieve crowding on the service. Figure 6.5 presents the Transport Economic Efficiency Taken with the knowledge that other (TEE) table for this option. stations on the experience overcrowding, a review of the entire route A number of the platforms on the route are from Reading to Gatwick Airport was only capable of accommodating three or undertaken. From this, it was evident that four-car trains and therefore Selective Door four Reading to Gatwick Airport services Opening (SDO) would need to be deployed could benefit from train lengthening, two in to make the service operationally practical. each direction. It is recognised that the operation of the four additional vehicles, should they be fitted with The option reviewed lengthening these SDO, would not be compliant with the rest of three-car services by two cars each. This the fleet and therefore an operational solution was considered operationally viable due to would need to be found. the ability to be able to detach and reattach a two-car unit. The additional units would

Figure 6.5 – Transport economic efficiency table for lengthening the Reading to Gatwick Airport service

30-year appraisal £million (2002 PV)

Costs (present value) Investment cost 0.0 Operating cost 8.7 Revenue -2.8 Other government impacts 0.6 Total costs 6.5 Benefits (present value) Rail users’ benefits 9.6 Non-users’ benefits 1.1 Total quantified benefits 10.7 NPV 4.2 Quantified BCR 1.7

119 The Sussex RUS has analysed peak arrivals 3. Grade separation at Didcot East and into Gatwick Airport. The Great Western construction of an Up Avoider platform analysis has since reviewed every service 4. Extend and convert to passenger status the on the North Downs route and incorporates up goods loop at Didcot Parkway the analysis and recommendations from the Sussex RUS of lengthening one peak 5. Extend Didcot North Jn towards Appleford service into Gatwick Airport. The analysis creating a four track section. concludes that in total there is a business case These schemes were modelled in Railsys to lengthen four Reading to Gatwick Airport (a simulation model utilising proposed services (two in each direction). infrastructure with service provisions) to During the Sussex RUS Draft for Consultation understand and quantify the reliability benefits further analysis is being undertaken to review that could be achieved by the enhancements. the extension of services from Redhill to Gatwick Option 1 provides additional tracks between Airport which is a requirement of the Greater Oxford and Radley. This is achieved through Western Franchise. The potential remodelling extending the down relief line to connect with at Redhill in CP5 would enable through services the down goods loop and through to reception to operate to Gatwick Airport on a more ordered no.1, and through the extension of the up loop pattern of service, facilitating the existing from Hinksey North to Hinksey South and onto franchise commitment of providing two trains Radley. Option 2 constructs a four track section per hour to Gatwick Airport. A positive business north of Oxford station by extending the case to extend these services would facilitate an down goods loop to Wolvercot Jn, redoubling improvement to service frequency on the route the junction and double tracking between between Reading and Gatwick Airport. Wolvercot Jn and Charlbury.

6.9.3 Option C: Improve capacity and Through the Railsys model, both options 1 performance through infrastructure and 2 highlighted constraints at Oxford station enhancements; Didcot to Wolvercot Jn. due to the capacity constraint and routing The process started with a review of the limitations available with the current layout baseline analysis whereby performance and number of platforms. Both schemes between Didcot and Wolvercot Jn was improved performance into, and out of, Oxford identified as a pinch-point for reactionary delays but any benefit derived was eradicated by the ( ) and classified as a gap. Through Chapter 3 capacity constraints at the station. As such, a quantification of this gap, the main cause of theoretical future layout revising Oxford station delay was identified as being due to lost paths was produced (see Appendix C). The revised following late running trains. Specifically at layout was designed to accommodate IEP and Oxford, the analysis showed delays occur future growth as well as taking cognisance due to lost paths when regulated for other late of other known initiatives for the area with running trains and awaiting platform allocation the south facing bay platform, East West Rail and station congestion. and Chiltern Railways aspiration for an hourly As options to improve the performance Oxford to London Marylebone service. The gap between Didcot and Wolvercot Jn, the proposal for the IEP services currently involves following five infrastructure enhancements the splitting of two five-car sets (joined to make were proposed: a 10-car train) at Oxford to create five-car sets to serve specific routes, e.g. one five-car set 1. Four tracking between Radley and Oxford would go forward to the Cotswolds line whilst 2. Four tracking between Oxford and the other five-car set may return to London. Wolvercot Jn, redoubling Wolvercot Jn, and Options 1 and 2 were re-modelled in Railsys the route to Charlbury against this new Oxford station layout to

120 assess any potential benefits. The scheme minimal performance benefits, this option was was appraised which demonstrated that not taken any further. the combined option of options 1 and 2, Option 5 extends Didcot North Jn towards against the new station layout, provided Appleford creating a four track section. This greater benefits when undertaken as a presented a performance improvement package. This appraisal did not however through the separation of non-stopping include the further benefits available from the services via the Didcot Avoiding lines with additional capacity for passenger and freight, services running more slowly to and from opportunities for journey time improvements Didcot West curve. These benefits were or any changes in operational expenditure captured in the business case and with the all of which can enhance the business case. cost of the renewal (scheduled for Control The RUS would therefore recommend that the Period 4) of Didcot North Jn included in the current Oxford Station Area Redevelopment appraisal, the enhanced scheme generated scheme, in conjunction with the proposed a sufficient benefit cost ratio for the SMG Oxford resignalling, consider the wider to recommend further development work to strategic benefits of capacity, journey time understand the incremental scope and cost of enhancements, Seven Day Railway initiatives this enhanced option. and performance that can be achieved through wider ranging improvements at Oxford station. From the appraisals of the aforementioned schemes, it became apparent that given the Option 3 proposed a new flyover at Didcot improvements in performance over the last East Jn with a new platform on the Up year, the options produced marginal benefits. Avoiding line. This would eliminate conflicting The baseline analysis undertaken for the RUS moves at Didcot East Jn through grade used performance data from 2006/07 and separation of the junction. However, the 2007/08 and it was from here that the pinch- Railsys output showed minor improvements point of Didcot was evident and quantified to performance due to the grade separation as a gap. However, since this analysis was being undertaken at Reading West Jn as part undertaken, there has been a substantial of the Reading Station Area Redevelopment improvement in performance in the Great scheme. As a committed scheme, this forms Western RUS area and this is predicted to part of the RUS baseline and is included in the continue with the metrics to be delivered model layout in Railsys. The grade separation during CP4. The Railsys model also included between Oxford Road Jn and Reading West the committed schemes that form the Great Jn will enable freight services to cross onto the Western RUS base and with the Reading relief lines avoiding any conflict with the main Station Area Redevelopment scheme and the lines. This removes further conflicting moves Cotswold line redoubling scheme significantly at Didcot East Jn. As such, the implementation improving the performance of the area, any of another flyover at Didcot East Jn would further benefits are minimal. produce marginal benefits. The scheme offers poor value for money with a BCR of less than Performance is, and always will be a moveable 1 and is therefore not recommended. target, which has recently considerably improved. It is therefore considered that Option 4 reviewed extending the up goods performance around the area of Didcot is loop from east of Steventon to connect with no longer a key concern for the route and the up relief line. The line would be converted will remain under control. To quantify this, to passenger status and would enable slower the baseline analysis was rerun using the services to be removed from the main lines. 2008/09 data and presented a 27 percent The operational impact of the scheme offered improvement in performance specifically in this a small improvement to reliability. Due to the area compared with the baseline analysis from

121 2006 – 2008. Issues that now arise result from a review of freight regulation points at secondary delays, and the inability to recover (in line with the SFN and performance by train regulation due to the lack West Midlands and Chiltern RUS). of infrastructure capacity in the area. With the infrastructure at Didcot North Jn The gap was therefore further analysed for raised again through the capacity study capacity purposes, and with the introduction (further to option 5 identified for performance of IEP and expected growth in freight traffic, a improvements), options for the layout were capacity analysis was undertaken for the area reviewed in order to achieve the most optimum to assess how the current infrastructure could solution for both capacity and performance accommodate such growth. improvements along with the Seven Day

The current forecasts from the Strategic Railway initiative. The preferred option was to Freight Network for the Didcot to Oxford route incorporate an enhancement to the junction present substantial growth to 2019 and 2030, with the planned track renewal in 2012. primarily in intermodal traffic from the Port of However, following an engineering review it Southampton to the West Coast Main Line became evident that it is not feasible to provide which is predominantly due to the current an additional line bypassing the junction due gauge enhancement scheme underway. The to the limited land available and the curvature number of trains predicted per day in each of the junction. It would also be difficult to direction is 29 to 2019 and 43 to 2030. These relocate the junction, again because of land are incremental to today’s figures. issues and the close proximity of a footbridge.

With the proposed freight forecasts, equating Alternative options were therefore reviewed to one additional freight train per hour in with the most practical solution being the each direction to 2019 and two additional provision of a passing loop on either side freight trains per hour to 2030, the 2019 and of the main lines between the junction and 2030 scenarios were modelled to include the Appleford, to be used by passenger or additional freight with the proposed IEP service freight services whilst retaining the access to specification. This involved the replacement of Appleford sidings. Both loops would have 775 the current December 2008 Class 1 services metres capability. However, this option would between London Paddington, Oxford and the be completed independently of the planned north Cotswold line with the proposed IEP renewal of the junction which will continue in timetable with all other services timetabled CP4 and the benefits from this would not be around this. able to be captured in the business case.

The results of the capacity study proved This option will be further evaluated during that the additional freight forecasted with the consultation period of the RUS, to quantify the increase in services following the the capacity, performance and Seven Day introduction of IEP could be facilitated on the Railway benefits through timetable and current infrastructure subject to the following performance modelling. The business case enhancements: for this enhancement will therefore be revised accordingly and assessed as a stand alone Didcot North Jn to Oxford: a bi-directional scheme to see whether it provides value for line between the junction and Appleford money. The results of this analysis will be crossing presented in the Final Great Western RUS. Oxford station: revised layout sufficient to accommodate IEP and freight growth

122 6.9.4 Option D: Improve connectivity and the RUS process. It was therefore concluded increase capacity on the West Midlands to that the re-routeing option would need to be South Coast corridor developed in more detail through other industry On-train crowding has been highlighted as an processes, and it is not anticipated that any of issue on the Manchester to Bournemouth and the geographical RUSs will consider this issue Newcastle to Reading services. CrossCountry in any further detail. has undertaken recent passenger counts (May Sensitivity 2 will be undertaken during the 2009) which will be assessed and appraised Great Western RUS consultation process with for any train lengthening opportunities. This initial results based on the revenue effects will be completed during the consultation of this option presented in the Final Great period of the Great Western RUS with analysis Western RUS. However, the full appraisal and recommendations presented in the Final will be presented in the West Midlands and RUS document. Chiltern RUS and will include any infrastructure Following this analysis, further sensitivities will intervention costs which may be required be tested on the Newcastle to Reading service to accommodate all services (including this to assess whether a change in the service potential re-routeing) on the Leamington proposition will assist issues of capacity and – Coventry – Birmingham New Street corridor. improve connectivity. The sensitivities below will Sensitivity 3 will be considered in the Great be modelled against the current service routing Western RUS, although as with sensitivity (Newcastle – Doncaster – – Reading) 2, the full appraisal of possible infrastructure and against a proposed extension of this costs in the Birmingham area will be reported service to Southampton and/or Bournemouth. in the West Midlands and Chiltern RUS. The following sensitivities will then be applied 6.9.5 Option E: Increase capacity to both the current and extended service and improve performance through proposition: infrastructure enhancements; Swindon 1. Newcastle to Reading via Leeds (instead of to Gloucester Doncaster) Performance issues between Swindon and Gloucester were acknowledged through the 2. Newcastle to Reading via Birmingham baseline analysis. The Swindon to Kemble International (instead of Solihull) redoubling scheme (as discussed in Chapter 4) 3. Newcastle to Reading via Leeds and is a scheme currently being progressed to GRIP Birmingham International. stage 4 (Single Option Development) which The analysis for sensitivity 1 has been could assist in addressing this performance undertaken as part of the Yorkshire and issue and is included in the RUS baseline. Humber RUS. This work suggested that the re- Although there is currently no funding routeing via Leeds has a high value for money commitment for its implementation, the RUS is business case based on the assessment aware of the South West Regional Development carried out, and demonstrated no unusual Agency’s (SWRDA) bid for £20 million as a practicality or funding issues. On this basis contribution to the scheme as part of their short- it would normally have been recommended term commitments for regional funding. for inclusion in the strategy. However, the option was found to be heavily dependent on other industry processes including HLOS, the development of the regular interval timetable, and the wider socio- economic impacts that are not assessed under

123 Swindon to South Wales via Gloucester Funding is expected to be secured for the is also a key diversionary route when the development of the scheme and the business Severn Tunnel is closed; this not only case for the incremental enhancement for contributes to poor performance on the the signalling improvements between Kemble route but also constrains current and future and Standish Jn from the Seven Day Railway capacity. This was further acknowledged by initiative. The feasibility of the scheme will the train and freight operators as part of the therefore be developed with GRIP 4 expected western route consultation on the Seven Day to be completed by summer 2010, at which Railway initiative. point a decision will be made as to whether this scheme provides sufficient value for money. The Great Western RUS built on the proposed redoubling scheme and reviewed The RUS supports the development of what infrastructure requirements would be the business case for the incremental necessary to increase the capacity of the enhancement and recognises that should route to enable the operation of four trains per the scheme achieve the necessary BCR, it is hour to accommodate future growth and for beneficial to combine it with the Swindon to diversionary purposes. These consist of: Kemble redoubling.

an hourly passenger train (either local or 6.9.6 Option F: Review service proposition high speed service) between Swindon and on the Cardiff to Portsmouth corridor Cheltenham Spa calling at Kemble, Stroud, On-train crowding on the South Wales to Stonehouse and Gloucester. (From 2016 South Coast services was identified as a gap, this will be replaced by IEP with a proposed with two affected service groups: Cardiff to hourly London Paddington to Cheltenham Portsmouth and Bristol to Weymouth. Capacity service); was assessed on these service groups throughout the day with a comparison of winter an hourly freight service operating between and summer months to understand any impact Swindon (Loco Yard) and Gloucester Yard of seasonality. Jn (assumed a Class 6 with 2000 tonnes trailing load); and For the Cardiff to Portsmouth service, using counts from November 2008 and predicting two London Paddington to South Wales growth forward to 2019, three services in each high speed services diverted when the direction during the morning and evening peak Severn Tunnel is closed. will have more passengers than available A timetable model to accommodate this level of seats. For the Bristol to Weymouth service, service was completed and concluded that with one service in each direction in each peak was the resignalling works under the Swindon to identified with on-train crowding. Kemble scheme, two additional signals would The first stage of the option appraisal reviewed be required (one in each direction) between train lengthening as a short-term solution Stonehouse and Standish Jn to provide to meet the current and expected levels of improved headways along this route and demand. The results of this analysis are allow the four services to operate. This would presented under option H: Bristol capacity deliver both capacity and performance gains. (see 6.9.8). In summary, there is a case to The potential for a new North Swindon station lengthen five morning and evening peak hour and a turn back facility at Kemble were also services on the Cardiff to Portsmouth corridor. included in this analysis.

124 As a longer-term option for the Cardiff to showed that this option provides high value for Portsmouth service, a change in the service money, as presented in Figure 6.6, when taken proposition was reviewed to address on-train with the potential train lengthening business crowding and improve journey times which case (option H under 6.9.8). The RUS was identified as an interurban route under recommends that this proposal is implemented. Gap 17 (see option M under 6.9.13). A service Network Rail has also established a joint Cardiff proposition was developed which involved to Portsmouth Route Improvement Project removing several stops from the existing Group with FGW to focus on this service service and introducing an additional local group and derive initiatives to help improve stopping service. This therefore provided a performance. The group will review possible means of addressing the capacity issues and changes to the service proposition towards also enabled the principal service to achieve Portsmouth with a view to possible journey time improved journey times. Economic appraisal savings across the route as a whole.

Figure 6.6 – Transport economic efficiency table for revised service proposition of the Cardiff to Portsmouth service

30-year appraisal £million (2002 PV)

Costs (present value)

Investment cost 0.0

Operating cost 2.5

Revenue -1.3

Other government impacts 0.3

Total costs 1.5

Benefits (present value)

Rail users’ benefits 2.4

Non-users’ benefits 0.6

Total quantified benefits 3.0

NPV 1.5

Quantified BCR 2.0

125 6.9.7 Option G: Improve connectivity and As part of their response to the Request increase capacity on the West Midlands to for Proposal for HLOS, the DfT requested South West corridor FGW to propose deployment of 12 additional vehicles as one of the options to enable train On-train crowding has been highlighted as lengthening on a number of routes in the an issue on the Edinburgh to Plymouth and West of England. This proposal has been Manchester to Bristol Temple Meads services. included in the RUS analysis as the HLOS CrossCountry has undertaken recent passenger forms part of the RUS base as a committed counts (May 2009) which will be assessed scheme. The assessment has therefore and appraised for any train lengthening reviewed train lengthening over and above opportunities. This will be completed during the the HLOS proposal, to identify the number of consultation period for the draft Great Western additional vehicles that would be required to RUS with analysis and recommendations accommodate demand on each corridor. presented in the Final RUS document. Analysis shows that there is a business A change to the service proposition of the case to lengthen 11 trains in total across Manchester to Bristol Temple Meads service the morning and evening peaks (07:00 to was assessed, through extending this service 09:59 BTM arrivals and 16:00 to 18:59 BTM to Exeter St Davids and/or Plymouth to departures) which in total adds 17 additional improve connectivity (identified under gap 16 vehicles in both peak periods. As a number of Exeter to Plymouth) and to potentially assist in the additional vehicles will operate in both the crowding relief for the Edinburgh to Plymouth morning and evening peaks, the business case service. The results of this are presented later supports the procurement of nine additional in this chapter under 6.9.12 option L. vehicles in order to strengthen these services. 6.9.8 Option H: Lengthen services into Figure 6.7 presents the number of additional Bristol Temple Meads vehicles recommended per corridor combined The option to increase peak capacity for the morning and evening three-hour peak into Bristol Temple Meads (BTM) by train periods with the expected ratio of passengers lengthening was devised from the baseline to total capacity before and after the analysis and load factor predictions to 2019 enhancement. This shows that train lengthening (with predicted growth at Bristol Temple on the Cardiff to Portsmouth and Cardiff to Meads as presented in Chapter 5). More peak Taunton corridor provides high value for money. services will have passengers standing either For the Gloucester to Westbury corridor, close to, or above, total capacity (this includes demand is concentrated in the morning high seat and standing allowances). A business peak hour with a predicted passenger to seats case for providing additional vehicles has been ratio of 120 percent and a total capacity ratio developed using 2007/08 passenger counts of 95 percent in 2019 before the enhancement. and the RUS passenger forecasts to 2019. Train lengthening is recommended for the Train lengthening is considered as a short- Gloucester to Westbury corridor subject to a term solution to address crowding issues with review of the expected growth as a result of the a longer-term solution of changing the service relocation of Ministry of Defence employees to frequency examined and presented under Filton Abbey Wood in 2011. option J in 6.9.10.

126 Figure 6.7 – Additional vehicles by corridor across the morning and evening peak (07:00 to 09:59 Bristol Temple Meads arrival and 16:00 to 18:59 Bristol Temple Meads departure)

Corridor Number of Number of BCR Ratio of Ratio of lengthened additional passengers to passengers services vehicles total capacity to total 2019/20 without capacity with enhancement enhancement

Cardiff to Portsmouth 5 9 2.8 100% 85%

Cardiff to Taunton 4 6 2.5 110% 80%

Gloucester to Westbury 2 2 1.9 70% 50%

Total 11 17

The Great Western RUS therefore It is however recognised that should SDO recommends the lengthening of 11 peak trains be fitted only to the nine additional vehicles, which will add 17 additional vehicles to the they would not be compliant with the rest of morning and evening peak periods on the the fleet and therefore an operational solution above corridors. would need to be found. The TEE tables are presented in Figures 6.8 and 6.9 for each of With the recommended procurement of nine the corridors for both the scenarios of platform additional vehicles, there may be requirements lengthening and Selective Door Opening. to either lengthen platforms at some of the stations to physically enable the longer trains The analysis also included the services into to operate or provide Selective Door Opening Bristol Temple Meads from both Severn Beach (SDO). The business case analysis for all of and Chippenham; however the option of the corridors has been completed assessing train lengthening on these corridors provided both scenarios of either platform lengthening or poor value for money and is therefore not SDO with the capital cost of this. The value for recommended. With the recent completion of money for each corridor remains the same for the turnback at Clifton Down the proposal to either option and therefore the recommendation operate a more frequent service will address does not change under these scenarios. issues when it is implemented.

127 Figure 6.8 – Transport economic efficiency table for train lengthening: Platform lengthening scenario

£million (2002 market prices)

30-year appraisal Cardiff – Cardiff – Taunton Gloucester Portsmouth – Westbury Costs (present value)

Investment cost 0.4 0.3 0.0

Operating cost 23.1 9.9 4.6

Revenue -14.2 -5.0 -2.3

Other Government Impacts 2.8 1.0 0.5

Total costs 12.2 6.2 2.7

Benefits (present value)

Rail users’ benefits 19.5 9.7 2.9

Non-users’ benefits 13.5 5.0 2.2

Total quantified benefits 33.0 14.7 5.1

NPV 20.8 8.5 2.4

Quantified BCR 2.7 2.4 1.9

Figure 6.9 – Transport economic efficiency table for train lengthening: Selective Door Opening scenario

£million (2002 market prices)

30-year appraisal Cardiff – Cardiff – Taunton Gloucester Portsmouth – Westbury Costs (Present value)

Investment cost 0.0 0.0 0.0

Operating cost 23.2 9.9 4.6

Revenue -14.2 -5.0 -2.3

Other Government Impacts 2.8 1.0 0.5

Total costs 11.9 6.0 2.7

Benefits (Present Value)

Rail users’ benefits 19.5 9.7 2.9

Non-users’ benefits 13.5 5.0 2.2

Total quantified benefits 33.0 14.7 5.1

NPV 21.1 8.7 2.4

Quantified BCR 2.8 2.5 1.9

128 6.9.9 Option I: Increase capacity services. This presented a high level all- and improve performance through encompassing option, increasing line speeds infrastructure enhancements at Bristol and revising junction layouts, which came at The performance analysis as part of the a high cost. As such, the option offered poor baseline identified a high degree of reactionary value for money. delays occurring around Bristol, specifically at A revised layout for the area, with options for Bristol East Jn, due to the number of crossing three or four tracks, utilising the existing layout and reversible moves required into and out at Dr Days Jn and simplifying the requirements of Bristol Temple Meads. Three infrastructure at Filton was developed and modelled in interventions were proposed in response to the Railsys. This revision generates performance identified performance issues in this area: and journey time improvements at a reduced 1. Three or four tracking from Dr Days Jn cost due to the simplification of the layout. to Filton The business case for the scheme with an option for either three or four tracks has been 2. A new passing loop (on the up line) at St completed on the revised reliability benefits but Anne’s between North Somerset Jn and St still generates poor value for money. Anne’s Tunnel With the committed growth in train movements 3. Extension and conversion to passenger in the area with the introduction of the status of the carriage line from Bristol West proposed IEP specification, it is evident to Parson Street creating a four track railway. from the initial timetable review that the The scope, analysis and results for each are current infrastructure cannot accommodate discussed further below: the additional services. The issue therefore 6.9.9.1 Three or four tracking from Dr Days becomes that of insufficient infrastructure Jn to Filton capacity. A capacity study will be undertaken to Filton Abbey Wood and Dr Days Jn have review the current and predicted growth in both become bottlenecks in the Bristol area as a passenger and freight traffic. This will identify result of the high number of passenger and what infrastructure is required to accommodate freight flows traversing the junctions where the such growth. The results of this study will be infrastructure at these locations reduces from presented in the Final RUS. four tracks to two. The introduction of a four The scheme to enhance Filton Bank has also track section from the existing four tracks at been identified as a key requirement for the Dr Days Jn up to and including Filton Abbey Seven Day Railway initiative, as currently all Wood (known as Filton Bank) was modelled in lines have to be closed when engineering work Railsys. The junction speeds were increased to takes place and no diversionary routes are 40mph and the layout at Dr Days Jn converted available. With this and the proposed growth in into a larger junction in order to achieve the the area, with an additional hourly IEP service, separation of passenger and freight flows the proposed IEP depot in the Bristol area as far as possible. In order to support the and the freight forecasts for the Bristol area scheme, a new junction would also be required from the Strategic Freight Network, the SMG at Horfield to facilitate freight and stopping have agreed that the business case be further services originating in the eastern direction developed during the consultation period of the accessing the relief lines and an additional RUS. This will enable all benefits to be defined platform created at Filton Abbey Wood. and quantified in the business case – capacity, Railsys analysis demonstrated performance Seven Day Railway, journey time and improvements due to the ability of services performance improvements. A revised business to overtake on the additional lines and the case for this scheme, and any subsequent potential to segregate non-stop and stopping recommendations, will therefore be completed.

129 An additional option reviewed as part of the 6.9.9.3 Extension and conversion of the above scheme, was the extension of the carriage line from Bristol Temple Meads to down goods loop from Platform 2 at Bristol Parson Street Parkway to the Down Filton line. This provided To improve performance at Bristol Temple an improvement for services towards Wales Meads to and from the west (Taunton/Weston- and Bristol Temple Meads minimising the super-Mare), an option to extend and convert interaction by allowing services towards to passenger status the carriage line from Bristol to bypass the main lines at Stoke Bedminster to just beyond Parson Street Gifford Jn. The Railsys results highlighted the was considered. This would create a four removal of waiting time at Bristol Parkway track section between Bristol Temple Meads for late running services towards Wales and and just beyond Parson Street with the vice versa and therefore proved beneficial to existing platforms at both stations modified develop the business case. Due to the high to create island platforms. The scheme is costs for the signalling alterations necessary, also considered essential to provide sufficient the scheme offers poor value for money and capacity to deliver the half-hourly service for is not recommended to be taken any further the proposed reopening of the Portishead at this stage. It may become more valuable in branch for passenger services and further the future when IEP is introduced particularly cross Bristol opportunities. when the location of the new depot is taken The additional capacity created through into account. the additional track reduces congestion at 6.9.9.2 A new passing loop at St Anne’s Bristol West Jn through the segregation of A new up goods passing loop between North stopping and non-stopping traffic (local and Somerset Jn and St Anne’s Tunnel, to mirror long distance) across the four lines and the existing down goods loop was proposed as delivers journey time improvements. It has an option to improve performance particularly been identified that long distance southbound around Bristol East Jn. Performance analysis services from Bristol Temple Meads will benefit showed that the actual position of the loop most from this scheme. Economic analysis provided minimal performance benefits due based on performance benefits alone shows to its close proximity to Bristol Temple Meads that the option provides high value for money, and the Rhubarb curve. As such, the loop as presented in Figure 6.10, when 26 minutes was not used at all during the perturbation of reactionary delays per day are recovered simulation in Railsys. at Bristol West Jn. Analysis on current performance confirms that this is achievable As an alternative, new passing loops on and the scheme would therefore normally the up and down main line at Keynsham be recommended. were modelled to see the effect of these on performance. The new loops would be However, with the delivery of improved positioned on the 12 mile stretch between Bath performance under the HLOS CP4 targets, the and Bristol Temple Meads and could assist business case will need re-evaluating using train service regulation. Performance analysis the latest performance figures at the time in confirmed a marginal performance benefit, CP5. With the resignalling for Bristol also due particularly for the non-stopping services. in CP5, the scheme should be reviewed as an However, with the proposed infrastructure cost, incremental enhancement to the resignalling the appraisal results showed that the level scheme where the opportunity will also arise to of benefits was not sufficient. The scheme is redesignate the four tracks into pairs of main therefore not recommended. line and relief lines.

130 This scheme is also highly favourable due to the The results of the three infrastructure options number of economic and housing developments considered for performance improvements also around Bedminster which are projected for the next highlights that should the timetable structure be five to ten years and with the proposed reopening of revisited, to take account of the new infrastructure the Portishead branch line for passenger services. provided, then there is also the potential to realise Bedminster could also become a cross Bristol capacity and journey time improvements. These interchange for certain services relieving pressure improvements result from the segregation of stopping on the station capacity at Bristol Temple Meads. and non-stopping services within the Bristol area. An The scheme to create the four tracks will enhance initial assessment of this has been undertaken at a the transport links from these areas into Bristol high level and is presented next in option J. and therefore further reviews of the timetable and calling patterns of services should be undertaken. The creation of the four track section provides the capacity necessary to deliver those services.

Figure 6.10 – Transport economic efficiency table for extending the carriage line from Bristol Temple Meads to Parson Street

60-year appraisal £million (2002 PV)

Costs (Present value)

Investment cost 6.0

Operating cost 0.0

Revenue -4.3

Other government impacts 0.9

Total costs 2.6

Benefits (Present value)

Rail users’ benefits 4.0

Non-users’ benefits 1.1

Total quantified benefits 5.1

NPV 2.5

Quantified BCR 2.0

131 6.9.10 Option J: Review service proposition The service specification includes the following across Bristol to provide additional trains per hour (tph) visually presented in capacity and improve performance Figure 6.11:

As a longer-term approach to address capacity 1tph Weston-super-Mare to Yate and performance issues around Bristol, a 1tph Weston-super-Mare to Chippenham revised service proposition was assessed to understand the potential impact of this, its 1tph Taunton to Cardiff via operation and any further infrastructure that Weston-super-Mare would be required to accommodate it. The 1tph Portishead to Gloucester objectives of the proposal were to reduce the reversing moves at Bristol East Jn as identified 1tph Portishead to Clifton Down (peak only) in the performance baseline, improve capacity 1tph Bristol Temple Meads to Severn Beach and accessibility for cross Bristol services and improve journey times. 1tph Bristol Temple Meads to Westbury (with extensions to Weymouth) The service proposition creates a pattern on top of what is there today using the December 1tph Chippenham to Salisbury. 2008 timetable as a base. It assumes With the exception of the extensions to the proposed IEP service specification Gloucester (due to a lack of available paths and includes all known enhancements under the current timetable), the study (committed, uncommitted and aspirational), proved that operationally the specification the requirements for the Portishead passenger is achievable. A business case for each service and the aspirations for a “Bristol Metro” proposal was prepared by corridor for each based upon the West of England Partnership’s of the proposed changes to service provision, aspirations. This acknowledges the medium assessing the proposed timetable and any term bid for funding by the South West infrastructure requirements against predicted Regional Development Agency (SWRDA) for demand. The specification of the option and both the Portishead and Bristol Metro schemes economic results, with BCRs, are presented for the period 2014/15 – 2018/19. below by corridor. Potentially, there are greater The revised service proposal would deliver an benefits available should the specification be enhanced local rail network of services across reviewed as a whole cross Bristol metro. the greater Bristol area. It is envisaged by 6.9.10.1 Bristol Temple Meads to the scheme promoters, the West of England Gloucester corridor Partnership, that with new infrastructure and Due to the unavailability of train paths for an rolling stock, the revised service pattern would additional service to Gloucester the option support sustainable growth along the key of providing a Bristol to Yate service was corridors of Weston-super-Mare to Yate and considered. This reviewed extending the Cardiff to Bath Spa via Bristol Parkway, Filton hourly Weston-super-Mare to Bristol Parkway Abbey Wood and Bristol Temple Meads. This service to Yate, increasing service frequency would increase patronage, reduce car use and at Yate from one train per hour to two, helping road congestion and improve reliability whilst to reduce crowding on the Gloucester to also providing additional capacity. Bristol services as well as providing additional direct services between Yate and stations south of Bristol. The timetable study showed that it would also be operationally possible to retimetable the proposed service to operate at half-hourly intervals and this pattern is assumed in the appraisal.

132 Figure 6.11 – Proposed Bristol Metro, standard hour

TO CHELTENHAM

YATE

TO SWINDON TO NEWPORT

PATCHWAY TO SWINDON

BRISTOL SEVERN BEACH PARKWAY

ST ANDREWS CHIPPENHAM ROAD FILTON AVONMOUTH ABBEY WOOD

SHIREHAMPTON

SEA MILLS CLIFTON KEYNSHAM DOWN MONTPELIER BATH OLDFIELD SPA REDLAND PARK STAPLETON ROAD

LAWRENCE HILL FRESHFORD MELKSHAM BRISTOL TEMPLE AVONCLIFF MEADS

BRADFORD- ON-AVON BEDMINSTER PARSON STREET TROWBRIDGE

PILL ASHTON WESTBURY GATE NAILSEA & PORTISHEAD BACKWELL YATTON FROME WORLE DILTON MARSH

BRUTON WARMINSTER CASTLE CARY WESTON MILTON YEOVIL PEN MILL

THORNFORD TO SALISBURY WESTON-SUPER-MARE YETMINSTER

CHETNOLE

MAIDEN NEWTON

HIGHBRIDGE & BURNHAM DORCHESTER WEST

BRIDGWATER

TO WEYMOUTH TO TAUNTON Key

IEP High Speed Cross country Inter-regional Proposed Metro service SWT Frequency hourly or greater Frequency less than hourly Peak only Service in one direction only (shown by arrow)

133 Figure 6.12 – Economic appraisal of service extension to Yate

Option Infrastructure All Costs Sensitivity 1: *Sensitivity 2: requirements No capital No capital expenditure expenditure or leasing cost Weston-super-Mare Turnback at Yate BCR 0.6 BCR 1.0 BCR 2.5 to Bristol Parkway NPV £-8.5m NPV £0.3m NPV £4.2m extension

*sensitivity 2 devised due to potential developer funding as part of the commercial development at Yate

When all costs are considered, the scheme Sensitivity tests show that if the cost of the represents poor value for money, however, the bay platform at Chippenham could be met by extension of the service to Yate when taken another funding source, the Chippenham to with third party funding (for both infrastructure Bristol Temple Meads service would provide and additional leasing costs) as per sensitivity medium value for money and meet the funding 2 provides high value for money with a BCR criteria with a BCR of 1.5 as shown in Figure of 2.5. The RUS therefore recommends this 6.13 sensitivity 1. However, further analysis option subject to the provision of third party demonstrates that the incremental BCR for funding. The results of the economic appraisal extending the recommended Bristol Temple are presented in Figure 6.12. Meads to Bath Spa service to Chippenham is 1.4 (sensitivity 2) and is therefore below the 6.9.10.2 Bristol Temple Meads to funding threshold. Analysis of the incremental Chippenham corridor BCR determines whether the additional The option reviewed an additional hourly operating cost of extending the service to service between Bristol Temple Meads and Chippenham is justified. It compares the Chippenham calling at all stations. This service additional cost and the additional benefits of would improve train frequency and reduce the Chippenham extension over and above the on-train crowding and would require the alternative option of the extension to Bath Spa. construction of a bay platform at Chippenham station and two additional rolling stock units.

Based on the economic appraisal, the additional Bristol to Chippenham service offers a poor value for money scheme and was not recommended. Due to this, an alternative option of a Bristol Temple Meads to Bath Spa shuttle was reviewed. This option would provide an additional hourly service between Bristol Temple Meads and Bath Spa calling at all stations, improving train frequency and reducing on-train crowding. This service does not require any additional infrastructure so no capital costs would be incurred. The scheme offers high value for money and therefore the RUS recommends its implementation.

134 Figure 6.13 – Economic appraisals of Bristol Temple Meads to Chippenham options

Option Infrastructure All Costs Sensitivity 1: Sensitivity 2: requirements No capital No capital expenditure expenditure Chippenham to Bay Platform BCR 1.1 BCR 1.5 Incremental Bristol Temple (Chippenham) NPV £4.2m NPV £9.5m BCR (Bath vs. Meads Chippenham) 1.4 NPV £3.7m

Bath Spa to Bristol None BCR 1.8 N/A Temple Meads NPV £7.0m Shuttle

6.9.10.3 Bristol Temple Meads to Weston- Initial economic modelling indicated that super-Mare corridor greater benefits could be achieved by This option provides an additional hourly extending the services to Bristol Parkway and service calling at all stations on the route this was included in the analysis. A further between Weston-super-Mare and Bristol option of an additional off peak hourly service Temple Meads. The option would require from Bristol Temple Meads terminating at substantial infrastructure works with the Yatton was investigated as an alternative to redoubling of Worle Jn, redoubling of the single the Weston-super-Mare to Bristol service. This line track from Worle Jn to Weston Milton option would require additional infrastructure and the reinstatement of the bay platform to enable the turn back of services at Yatton at Weston-super-Mare station. The option and would therefore incur capital costs. would also require additional rolling stock to Even though the infrastructure alterations at operate the new services. The service would Yatton have yet to be quantified, the option of increase the frequency of services operating operating additional services to Yatton provides on the corridor improving the opportunity to poor value for money. The results of the travel and providing some crowding relief. The appraisals are presented in Figure 6.14. infrastructure could also allow additional stops to be made at Weston Milton.

Figure 6.14 – Economic appraisals of Bristol Temple Meads to Weston-super- Mare options

Option Infrastructure requirements Results Weston-super-Mare to Worle Jn, redouble line to Weston-super- BCR 0.4 Bristol Temple Meads Mare and bay platform at Weston-super- NPV £-29.0m Mare Weston-super-Mare to Worle Jn, redouble line to Weston-super- BCR 0.5 Bristol Parkway Mare and bay platform at Weston-super- NPV £-25.9m Mare Yatton to Bristol Temple Signalling amendments BCR 0.7 Meads off peak NPV £-0.5m

135 Figure 6.15 – Economic appraisal of Cross Bristol options

Option Infrastructure requirements All Costs

Bath Spa to Clifton Down None BCR 2.4 NPV £11.0m

The results show that the options for operating 6.9.10.4 West Wiltshire Corridor: Salisbury additional services to Weston-super-Mare and to Chippenham Yatton would be poor value for money due to A number of options were considered for the the high level of infrastructure costs that would West Wiltshire corridor to meet demand for be required. The RUS does not therefore travel from Melksham to other urban centres support any of the options. such as Bristol, Bath Spa, Chippenham and Swindon. The options reviewed an Cross Bristol opportunities were reviewed hourly Westbury service operating to either following the analysis and results of the Chippenham or Swindon and an hourly appraisal per corridor. This involved either the Salisbury to Chippenham service. These extension of the proposed Bristol to Bath Spa options would significantly enhance the service shuttle through Bristol Temple Meads to Clifton provision on the route and offer faster journey Down or by extending the Bath Spa shuttle times to London through an interchange at through Bristol Temple Meads to Yatton. Chippenham. Should the service terminate As presented in the Weston-super-Mare at Chippenham, the construction of a bay corridor analysis, the option for extending a platform at Chippenham would be required. service to Yatton is poor value for money even Should the service be extended to Swindon, without the inclusion of the infrastructure costs. no additional infrastructure would be The review of the Bath Spa to Bristol Temple necessary. The economic appraisal results for Meads shuttle extended to Clifton Down does the options are presented in Figure 6.16. however show that the scheme would generate a high value for money ratio and as such the RUS would recommend the review of this option subject to its operational viability. The economic appraisal results are presented in Figure 6.15.

Figure 6.16 – Economic appraisal of West Wiltshire Corridor

Infrastructure Sensitivity 1: 1-car Option 2-car service requirements service Bay Platform BCR 1.3 BCR 1.9 Salisbury – Chippenham (Chippenham) NPV £14.8m NPV £30.8m Westbury – Chippenham Bay Platform BCR 2.0 BCR 2.6 (Chippenham) NPV £27.5m NPV £34.1m Westbury – Swindon BCR 1.7 BCR 2.8 None NPV £28.0m NPV £43.0m

136 The RUS recommends the further the local operations staff, FGW and freight development of the proposals by the operators the option emerged for the creation scheme promoter (Wiltshire Council) to of an island platform utilising the existing include a detailed timetable study to assess Platform 1 and constructing a new platform the operational viability of the proposals face on the down reception line. The analysis with predicted future growth. The RUS included the withdrawal of freight services recommends that any further work is from the station area by routing them around undertaken in conjunction with the West of the avoiding lines as recommended in the England Partnership as scheme promoter development of the Strategic Freight Network. for the Bristol Metro. The proposals will need The area around Westbury is the subject of more detailed modelling and operational various future proposals which all impact on verification to understand the timetable viability the capacity and ultimately performance of with the mix of passenger and freight services the station and the surrounding area. Over and any performance implications. the next five years, the Network Rail National The proposed service proposition for the Delivery Service will develop their current enhanced cross Bristol services maintains facilities at Westbury, to become one of three a freight path every hour in each direction national Track Materials Recycling Centres. (as per the current timetable) and has been The scheme will be developed further to compared with the predicted freight growth accommodate the scrap and long-welded rail using the Strategic Freight Network forecasts currently stored at Thingley Jn and the residual for the Bristol area. Further timetable work land will be developed for a Network Rail fleet will be required by the scheme promoter maintenance facility. Freight traffic is also particularly for the West Wiltshire options to expected to grow particularly with construction ensure current and future freight is viable traffic to service the Olympics infrastructure. within the service proposals. The business case for the scheme was There are potential capacity issues for the constructed using the performance data from Bristol area as a result of the introduction of the baseline analysis with a review of the IEP and the impact the potential increase in percentage reduction in reactionary delay services will have on the current network. An minutes that could be achieved through the initial review has been completed as part of the new platform. With an estimated recovery RUS analysis, with Filton Bank identified as a of 70 percent of reactionary delay minutes, constraint, and this will be further assessed as equating to 27 minutes per day, the scheme part of the timetable analysis for IEP. offers high value for money with a BCR of 2.2.

6.9.11 Option K: Improve capacity and Based on this analysis using current performance through infrastructure performance from the baseline analysis enhancements at Westbury (2006 – 2008), the RUS recommends the Westbury was identified as a pinch-point for implementation of this scheme. However, as performance issues through the baseline performance is a moveable target and with analysis. A review of the reactionary delay the delivery of improvements to meet the data identified the loss of train paths when HLOS targets in CP4, it is imperative that the regulated for another late running train and business case is re-evaluated using the latest awaiting platform as being the main causes performance data at the time in CP5. for delays. Using this data, a review of the station area, its infrastructure and operability was undertaken in order to assess what interventions could be proposed to improve performance. Following discussions with

137 Figure 6.17 – Transport economic efficiency table for Westbury Platform

60-year appraisal £million (2002 PV)

Costs (Present value) Investment cost 9.9 Operating cost 0.0 Revenue -7.7 Other government impacts 1.7 Total costs 3.9 Benefits (Present value) Rail users’ benefits 6.8 Non-users’ benefits 1.8 Total quantified benefits 8.6 NPV 4.7 Quantified BCR 2.2

However, an additional platform at Westbury was not a congestion problem. In terms of also forms part of the mitigation plan for the train capacity, FGW commissioned a report Reading Station Area Redevelopment and in September 2008 in respect of the HLOS Crossrail works to facilitate diversionary capacity metric which identified that total services during the construction period. capacity was sufficient into and out of Exeter St This scheme could therefore be an earlier Davids during the morning and evening peak requirement than CP5 due to the need for its period with the current deployment of rolling construction to facilitate the works at Reading. stock and the HLOS capacity parameters. The Reading Station Area Redevelopment However, aware that some services across and Crossrail mitigation team are currently Exeter are overcrowded, a passenger survey reviewing this with a view to developing the at Exeter Central was undertaken to review scheme to GRIP stage 4 (Single Option the services from Exmouth. A train count Development). from Exeter St Davids to Plymouth was also 6.9.12 Option L: Increase connectivity completed, both of which showed on-train between Exeter and Plymouth crowding in the morning peak periods. The RUS therefore recommends that such Issues at Exeter and Plymouth were raised services (Barnstaple to Exmouth and Exeter to during the process of identifying gaps, these Plymouth) could benefit from train lengthening needed to be further defined to understand in peak periods and recognises that this will whether the gap related to station congestion, be reviewed as part of the FGW HLOS work. train capacity, performance or connectivity. A decision as to the number of additional Station managers confirmed that although vehicles and the services that will benefit from there were busy times at both stations, there them is awaited.

138 Figure 6.18a – Current service provision, standard hour

BARNSTAPLE

Umberleigh

Eggesford

Morchard Road Copplestone Crediton Newton St Cyres EXETER ST DAVIDS St James’ Park Exmouth Exeter St Thomas Junction Exeter Starcross Central Digby & Sowton Dawlish Warren Topsham Dawlish Key Teignmouth Each line represents one train per hour (each direction) Lympstone Village NEWTON ABBOT Barnstaple - Exmouth EXMOUTH Paignton - Exmouth

Note: Figure does not include long distance Torre high speeds services and other infrequent Torquay local services.

PAIGNTON

Figure 6.18b – Proposed service provision, standard hour

BARNSTAPLE

Umberleigh

Eggesford

Morchard Road Copplestone Yeoford Crediton

St James’ EXETER ST DAVIDS Park Exmouth Exeter St Thomas Junction Exeter Starcross Central Digby & Sowton Dawlish Warren Topsham Dawlish Key Teignmouth Each line represents one train per hour (each direction) Lympstone Village NEWTON ABBOT Barnstaple - St James’ Park EXMOUTH Paignton - Exmouth Additional Paignton - Exmouth service Torre Note: Figure does not include long distance Torquay high speeds services and other infrequent local services. PAIGNTON

139 The focus therefore remained on connectivity The option to change the current service between Exeter and Plymouth, a long provision by terminating the existing standing issue remaining from the Strategic Barnstaple to Exmouth services at St James Rail Authority’s Great Western Main Park and operating a new half-hourly Paignton Line RUS (June 2005). Following a review to Exmouth service enhances the services of previous studies and timetable outputs, on the Paignton branch. The service can be a service proposition was developed to provided on the current infrastructure, although improve connectivity. A timetable study was four trains per day during the inter-peak would completed using the December 2008 timetable need to terminate at Newton Abbot rather than (incorporating May 2009 changes) with the Paignton to allow the long distance services to following additions: continue to operate to Paignton. Figures 6.18 A and B illustrate today’s service against the current local service pattern as May 2009 proposed service. with the following proposed changes to local services - half hourly all stations The business case for this option with the Exmouth to Paignton and an hourly increased service frequency, doesn’t achieve St James Park to Barnstaple; a BCR of 1.5 until 2018. The RUS therefore recommends the implementation of this an hourly London Waterloo to Exeter St scheme in 2018. However, the appraisal has Davids service (as per December 2009) not taken into account any potential crowding proposed replacement services west on weekend services. Should passenger of Exeter counts, to be conducted over summer 2009, reflect on-train crowding issues, the aspirational half hourly service from business case can be amended to reflect this Axminster to Exeter St Davids. with the potential benefit of crowding relief This became the base timetable. With the achieved through the additional service. The exception of the “aspirational” half hourly Final RUS will present any change to this Axminster to Exeter St Davids service, recommendation. the other proposals are operationally compatible and can be accommodated on the current infrastructure.

In order to facilitate the additional Axminster service, a significant amount of infrastructure would be required either at Exeter St Davids (with a new bay platform) or throughout the route with passing loops, sidings and an element of double track. The appraisal included the impact of the new Cranbrook station. As a detailed infrastructure solution was not produced, the option was appraised without the capital cost of the infrastructure to see if there was a case for further development. The results of the economic appraisal showed that without any capital expenditure, the benefit cost ratio is 0.8 and therefore this option for an additional Axminster to Exeter St Davids service was not further developed and is not recommended.

140 Figure 6.19 – Transport economic efficiency table for Exeter local services

30-year appraisal £million (2002 PV)

Costs (Present value) Investment cost 0.0 Operating cost 14.2 Revenue -4.4 Other government impacts 1.1 Total costs 10.9 Benefits (Present value) Rail users’ benefits 14.6 Non-users’ benefits 1.8 Total quantified benefits 16.4 NPV 5.5 Quantified BCR 1.5

Three further options for extending long could introduce a standard pattern throughout distance services to Exeter St Davids the day between Bristol, Exeter, Plymouth and and/or Plymouth as a method for improving Penzance. This may enable the extension of a connectivity across the area were modelled on further IEP service to be accommodated should the above base timetable: future demand require it.

Option 1: extend the proposed London With option 2, the Manchester Piccadilly to Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads via Bristol Temple Meads service is perceived Bristol Parkway IEP service to Exeter St to be less crowded than the Edinburgh to Davids / Plymouth Plymouth service, therefore an extension to Plymouth could assist in effectively managing Option 2: extend the Manchester Piccadilly demand whilst also providing an additional to Bristol Temple Meads service to Exeter service from Bristol to Plymouth. St Davids / Plymouth The results of the timetable study for the Option 3: extend the Cardiff to Taunton potential extensions of the Manchester service to Exeter St Davids / Plymouth. Piccadilly to Bristol Temple Meads (option 2) Option 1 proved problematic due to the and the Cardiff to Taunton service (option 3) incompatibility of the current IEP service proved that either of these extensions could be specification and the December 2008 timetable. accommodated on the current infrastructure With the improved journey times for IEP, the subject to minor amendments to the timetable services did not fit into the current paths. A and calling patterns. However, the economic high-level economic appraisal proved the option appraisal of the options reviewed scenarios for to be unviable due to the high operational extending some or all of the services to Exeter St costs that would be required with the expected Davids and/or Plymouth and all generated poor level of demand. This option has therefore value for money due to the additional operating been discounted at the present time but costs. The level of benefits are therefore not recommended for review when the proposed sufficient to justify the high expenditure cost and IEP timetable has been further defined and on this basis, the RUS does not recommend the agreed. It is recognised that the IEP proposal extensions of these two services.

141 6.9.13 Option M: Improve linespeeds and a maximum of £50 million of capital changed calling patterns on interurban expenditure could be spent. The RUS journeys recommends this scheme is progressed. This option tested increasing linespeeds and / Gloucester to Severn Tunnel Jn or changing calling patterns on a number of The current linespeed on the route interurban routes in order to improve journey between Gloucester and Severn Tunnel times. The RUS scope area was divided Jn is a mix of speeds due to the high into 20 route subsections and a high level number of level crossings and the existing assessment of the benefits associated with track curvature of the route. Network Rail a one minute journey time improvement was engineers are currently reviewing the route estimated (see Appendix D). From this, the to see if any increases can be made. maximum level of capital expenditure that could be supported to achieve a good value 6.9.13.2 Change in calling patterns for money business case (a benefit cost Reading to Swindon ratio greater than 2) was quantified and is On the Reading to Swindon section of the presented in Figure 6.20. GWML, analysis into the removal of stops at Didcot Parkway on certain services The various route sections were then ranked in found that short-term and long-term order of probability as to whether a linespeed options were achievable. FGW’s proposed or change in calling pattern was deemed December 2009 timetable includes this achievable taking account of known renewal change with further work underway to and enhancement schemes. The subsections improve journey times between South were then modelled in “Route Runner” (an Wales and London Paddington. Excel-based model using infrastructure and train characteristics to calculate potential As a longer-term recommendation, the journey time benefits or disbenefits across a proposed IEP specification (January 2008) route section) and the estimated minutes that removes the stop at Didcot Parkway could be saved were calculated. This analysis from alternative services from South concluded that the route sections with the Wales, notionally improving the journey most achievable benefits that were worthy of time between London and Swansea by further review were: up to 10 minutes. A further journey time improvement may be possible with the linespeed increases: Bristol to Taunton electrification of the GWML of up to 19 and Gloucester to Severn Tunnel Jn minutes, the earliest opportunity for this change in calling patterns: Reading to is anticipated from 2018. These benefits Swindon, Oxford to Worcester, Bristol to are achieved through the change in calling Westbury and Plymouth to Penzance. pattern and through the acceleration and braking capabilities of the IEP trains. 6.9.13.1 Linespeed increases The proposed level of service at Didcot Bristol to Taunton Parkway under the IEP specification Following an initial review by Network Rail matches the level of service offered today. engineers, the scope for this linespeed The RUS therefore recommends that this improvement was reduced to Bristol element is retained in the IEP proposition. to Bridgwater due to the embankment formations across the Somerset levels. Oxford to Worcester The potential speed increase of the Following a review of this service and its Bristol to Bridgwater section to 125mph current calling pattern, it was agreed that would provide a notional saving of three due to the minimal benefits that could minutes. Based on a three-minute journey be achieved from removing stops, the time improvement analysis showed that service should remain as it currently is.

142 Figure 6.20 – Interurban journeys ON ON YLEBONE LONDON EUST DDINGT LONDON MAR LONDON PA 2 s Route ell 6 Acton W Junction Route 16 Route Route 18 d T4 Brentfor branch SOUTH RUISLIP 3 THROW THROW GREENFORD HEA HEA T1, 2 & T5 Route 18 BAA Infrastructure £129M THROW Colnbrook H HEA Route 16 R Y SLOUG ON London Paddington - Reading (ML) WINDSO & ET CENTRAL BOURNE END YLESBUR Flyover Junction Summit A Route 16 £12M Claydon L.N.E. Junction PRINCES RISBOROUGH Route 16 3 MARLOW Reading - Basingstoke Bramley Route BLETCHLEY OKE READING n e -ON-THAMES R. Junctio BASINGST W. Basingstok G. HENLEY WN BICESTER TO Route 16 £30M Y 4 Y Reading - Oxford Cowley branch WA Route BANBUR Route 17 RK Y Y DIDCOT PA t unton (East) r orcester lverco n Ta NEWBUR £24M Wo Junction £5M £54M OXFORD SALISBUR n Wilto Junction Didcot Powe Statio £4M est Long Marston Reading - Swindon Oxford - W Reading - ON-IN-MARSH 3 stbury - Salisbury SWINDON We Route MORET Dorchester W est) £5M £1M WEYMOUTH £21M £13M rminster Dorchester Junction Wa Y unton (W h Swindon - Cheltenham Ta Castle Cary - Dorchester £12M estbury Swindon - Bristol Parkway sterleig rd n d Cheltenham - Bristol Parkway n We Ya n WESTBUR E ovil Y Norto Junctio Route 17 Reading - 4 Ye Pen Mill TH A n OL Abbotswoo Junctio WA TENHAM n £7M BA SP FROM ovil y A RK Route h Ye Junctio mple Meads h mple Meads - W CHEL SP BRIST PA theringto Te Whatle Quarry Te d Ty branc h n Sharpness branc £23M Exmout Junctio Bristol Merehea Quarry EXMOUTH ON WORCESTER SHRUB HILL Castle Cary GLOUCESTER AUNT T Swindon - Bristol ON Pilning s £22M Exeter Central TEMPLE MEADS

onmouth IGNT Av Dock OL PA Route 13

Bristol Parkway - Newport

h BRIST VIDS H unton (North) unton (South) ABBOT SEVERN BEACH £18M DA

Cattewater branc Ta Ta

unnel

T YMOUT

ON unton - Exeter 1M PL ON-SUPER-MARE Ta £9M Portbury Dock h £1 £15M NEWT Severn Junction Heathfield branc WEST Alston Exeter - Plymouth EXETER ST T y emple Meads - emple Meads - Bere T T Bristol NEWPOR Bristol Meldon Quarr APLE £6M Plymouth - Penzance BARNST GUNNISLAKE

LOOE LISKEARD r h h h Moorswater branc Fowey Harbou branc Par Harbour branc Par o LMOUTH DOCKS ur Tr FA h Parkandillack branc AY NEWQU IVES ST PENZANCE £0 - £9m £10 - £49m Over £50m The coloured boxes provide an indication of the maximum level of capital expenditure that could be supported by the economic benefits generated from a one minute journey time improvement on The analysis assumes various sections of the GW RUS scope area. direction, or where that all passengers, regardless of train operator, passengers joined the route section would benefit from journey time improvement. All figures shown are in 2007/08 factor prices before optimism bias is applied Key

143 The RUS recommends a frequent review 6.9.14 Option N: Improve passenger of the requirements and usage, particularly throughput at known constrained stations following the completion of the redoubling A number of stations were identified as of the Cotswold line and any impact from experiencing station congestion as part of this in line with IEP service developments. the gaps process – London Paddington, Ealing Broadway, Windsor and Eton Central, Bristol to Westbury Reading, Oxford and Bristol Temple Meads. As part of the revised service proposition The majority of these are subject to major for the Cardiff to Portsmouth service as station enhancement schemes which will presented in 6.9.6, there will be a journey rectify existing overcrowding as well as cater time improvement of up to nine minutes for for expected levels of growth: a morning Portsmouth to Cardiff service between Westbury and Bristol Temple London Paddington – The proposed Meads and a two-minute journey time remodelling scheme will address saving on one return evening service congestion issues and future proof the area between Bristol and Westbury. for growth. Proposed for 2015

Plymouth to Penzance Reading – A pedestrian flow study confirms Initial analysis focused on local service the new station layout is sufficient to cater provision, removing various stops (with a for estimated future growth. Programmed proposal for an additional local stopping for 2016 service implemented) to improve end to Oxford – Oxfordshire Council’s station end journey times by circa 15 minutes. enhancement scheme addresses the Various tests were also completed on station area, footbridge and interchange revising the main line calling pattern with currently programmed for 2010 the journey time savings ranging from nine minutes to 18. Bristol Temple Meads – station enhancement scheme underway to However, it became evident that there address station congestion, improve were potential benefits that could be access/egress and station facilities, gained through a review of the strategy estimated 2011. of local services between Plymouth and Penzance. Due to the complexities that It was therefore agreed that these gaps could needed to be considered with the single be closed as far as the RUS is concerned; line sections, park and ride opportunities the remaining stations of Ealing Broadway and main line and branch line connections and Windsor and Eton Central are discussed it was proposed that a greater timetable further below: study should be developed to review 6.9.14.1 Ealing Broadway this. After discussing this with FGW, it The station at Ealing Broadway is due to transpired that such timetable work had be rebuilt as part of the Crossrail scheme. been undertaken and a number of service Analysis by Crossrail Limited, Network Rail changes were being introduced from May and Transport for London of ticket gate data 2009. This option was therefore closed with assumes that the new station to be built will the recommendation to continually review rectify the current issues of congestion and requirements and the calling patterns for passenger flow. However, with the rebuild journey time improvements as an ongoing programmed for 2014 it was questionable timetabling activity with the joint timetable whether current levels of overcrowding could improvement group established between be allowed to continue until then. In addition Network Rail and FGW. to a recommendation that the station rebuild

144 is brought forward, the RUS reviewed a second platform face was discounted due to short-term option of an additional entry and the ownership of the station area and land exit point. available. The other two options provide short-term and longer-term improvements; The proposal to reroute passengers and the first being the installation of ticket gates provide an additional entry and exit point is as a means to manage and direct the flow of not new and has been campaigned for by passengers alighting and boarding the train, local transport and passenger user groups, the second being to widen the existing platform other operators and supported by Network face by up to 1 metre to extend the surface Rail for several years. However, due to the area available. physical works (and cost) required to facilitate this (relocation of food outlets, retail units Due to the number of ticket gates that would and demolition of a wall) the proposal fails be required to appropriately route passengers to achieve a business case as a stand alone through the area and the additional operational scheme. The Crossrail programme team will costs of this, this option proved not to be continue to review the programme of works economically viable. The longer-term option for the station rebuild and ensure delivery is of widening the platform face by slewing the completed as early as feasibly possible. track has been appraised. Analysis shows that the benefits associated with walk time 6.9.14.2 Windsor and Eton Central improvements to passengers were not Overcrowding on the platform at Windsor and sufficient to justify the cost of construction. Eton Central station was identified through Therefore this option is not recommended in the process of gap quantification – a station the RUS. The recent introduction of three- count was completed in January 2009 with a car trains on Saturdays will assist to reduce number of issues identified. Over 1.4 million overcrowding and conflicts between alighting passengers used the station during 2007/08, and boarding passengers on the platform area with further pedestrians using the area as a by spreading passengers across the platform through walkway from the coach park to the space available. FGW are also evaluating the town centre. A fence divides the platform into business case to operate three trains per hour two routes, one for the passengers alighting on Saturdays as a alternative. and boarding the trains and the other for the through pedestrians. This severely limits the 6.9.15 Option O: Seasonal Fluctuations space available for those using the train. Seasonal fluctuations in supply and demand were identified through the baseline analysis. Although the through walkway has not As shown in Chapter 3, the demand variations acquired public footpath status, the footway to, from and within Devon and Cornwall during was first leased from to the Royal the summer and winter months are significant Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead in 1984. with up to 30 percent variations. The fence dividing the platform is erected as a duty of care in order to prevent non-railway It was proposed to review those branch lines passengers from entering the main platform where the service offered through the summer area; as such it would require a formal risk differed to that provided through the winter in assessment and review between all the parties particular assessing those branch lines where to consider whether the removal of the fence Long Distance High Speed (LDHS) services would result in a greater risk. also operated, namely Newquay and Paignton. With the focus on the mix of long distance and As part of the RUS option assessment a local services on the Newquay and Paignton number of interventions were proposed; lines, load factor analysis on these areas for the installation of ticket gates, widening the summer Saturdays was completed, the results existing platform or constructing a second of which are presented below. platform face. The option of constructing a

145 6.9.15.1 Newquay up-to-date information will be available. This The capacity analysis showed that there was data will be used to assess the current levels sufficient capacity on the Long Distance High of demand, projected to 2019 and will be Speed services on summer Saturdays from reviewed in line with the proposed service 2009 to 2019 with an estimated 35 percent under Option L (6.9.12). The results, along with passenger growth. A review of the operability any recommendations, will be provided in the of both the local service and the LDHS to Final RUS document. see what would be required to accommodate With the remaining branch lines, those with this should it be a feature in the future was self contained services, assessments will undertaken. At present, during the summer be undertaken and addressed through the timetable only the LDHS service operates non- Community Rail Route Plans. This has already stop from Par to Newquay on Saturdays, the been completed for St Ives with the Barnstaple local stopping service is withdrawn, and there branch currently underway. is no service available for the intermediate stations between Par and Newquay. Furthermore, there are a number of initiatives which will enhance the local area which Timetable analysis has identified that three Network Rail will continue to support and assist additional local stopping services could be the local council and the Community Rail team operated on a Saturday in each direction with. The completion of the new passing loop based around the summer (May 2009) High and station facilities at Penryn is an example Speed Train timetable. In order to facilitate this, of this, with the Falmouth Branch line providing a new passing loop (potentially at St Columb the improved service of two trains per hour to Road) and additional rolling stock would be meet Cornwall Council’s specifications. required. The economic appraisal of this option (without the capital costs of the new passing A Park and Ride facility at St Erth station is loop) showed the scheme offered poor value being developed by Community Rail and for money with a BCR of less than 1. Based Cornwall Council (CC) as a means to reduce on this, the RUS is not able to recommend the demand on parking and road infrastructure additional services. within St Ives, encouraging a modal shift to rail. The scheme will include station enhancements However, Cornwall Council has recently raised such as a new booking office, tourist an aspiration to review the service provision information facility, café and display areas. for Newquay relating to the confirmation of FGW have been engaging with CC with the the eco-town at St Austell. The above analysis view of enhancing the service on the St Erth is a first step in recognising what additional to St Ives branch to accommodate anticipated provision (service and infrastructure) could demand and will review lengthening the service be provided. potentially up to five cars for a longer period 6.9.15.2 Paignton than just the summer months. Capacity analysis on the local and long 6.10 Summary distance services into, and out of Paignton There are a number of key outputs from the will be completed during the RUS consultation gaps and option appraisal process which period. This is due to insufficient data currently are drawn together and presented into an available to undertake any assessment emerging strategy for the short, medium and and with passenger counts programmed in longer term. This strategy is presented in the August 2009 by both CrossCountry and FGW, following chapter.

146 147 7. Emerging strategy

7.1 Introduction – Cotswold line redoubling 7.1.1 – Westerleigh Jn to Barnt Green This chapter draws together the initial linespeed improvements conclusions from the Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy (RUS) analysis into an delivery of the HLOS performance metrics emerging strategy to 2019. This will be refined development of electrification proposals over the course of the coming months in the light of consultation responses, together with delivery of all other committed schemes further analysis and option appraisal, to form a – Southampton to West Coast gauge concluding strategy for recommendation in the enhancement and the diversionary final Great Western RUS. route via Andover and Lavistock

7.1.2 – Reading Green Park station The strategy for Control Period 4 (CP4) is – Up and Down goods loops at Oxford presented along with specific options from the RUS which can potentially be included within – Bath Spa Capacity upgrade. this timeframe. The remainder of the chapter 7.2.2 focuses on the recommendations to be taken The completion of this investment programme forward into Control Period 5 (CP5). will develop the existing rail network providing 7.2 Strategy for Control Period 4 the necessary infrastructure to operate an (2009 – 2014) increased service level and longer trains whilst 7.2.1 also improving journey times, reliability and The committed strategy for CP4 encompasses performance. The CP4 strategy also enhances the following elements from the High the capability of the railway for freight services Level Output Specification (HLOS) with with the Southampton to West Coast gauge other committed schemes as presented in enhancement scheme and the development of Chapter 4 which are summarised below; the Strategic Freight Network.

delivery of the HLOS capacity metrics 7.2.3 specifically for London and Bristol by It is also recognised that many of the means of the HLOS rolling stock allocation uncommitted third party enhancement determined in the Department for Transport schemes discussed in Chapter 4, can assist (DfT) Rolling Stock plan (expected autumn in addressing the gaps identified by the 2009) RUS bringing network and service capacity and capability that can benefit the area. delivery of the HLOS capacity programme Several of these schemes provide significant for the RUS area by means of the: interfaces with the HLOS capacity programme, – Reading Station Area Redevelopment specifically with the Cotswold line redoubling and the Westerleigh Jn to Barnt Green – Twyford and Maidenhead relief line linespeed improvements as presented below: platform enhancements1

1 Should the HLOS capacity metric for London be met by the rolling stock plan this project would not be required for HLOS purposes.

148 Cotswold line redoubling: stations in the RUS area benefit from these programmes as discussed in Chapter 4 – the Didcot to Oxford capacity enhancement redeveloping the station there are also third party enhancement area and providing a four track section proposals for a number of stations as between Radley and Wolvercot Jn presented in Chapter 6 which include London Paddington, Ealing Broadway (as – Oxford to Bletchley strategic route part of the Crossrail programme), Reading, development for passenger and freight Oxford and Bristol Temple Meads. These – East West Rail upgrading the line schemes will address current pedestrian between Oxford and Milton Keynes congestion as well as provide sufficient – Evergreen III infrastructure works capacity and capability to accommodate to facilitate a new Oxford to London future growth. Marylebone service via 7.2.5 Westerleigh Jn to Barnt Green Linespeed A number of options identified through the improvements: Great Western RUS are recommended, where possible, to be completed during CP4. This is – interaction with the station due to their ability to be combined with current relocation project schemes during this timeframe aiding the – interaction with Bromsgrove development and potential implementation of electrification and branch the options.

improvement Infrastructure schemes – interaction with Birmingham Gateway Construction of an additional platform face at Westbury station for capacity and – cross Bristol service increases with the performance benefits. Although the RUS proposed ‘Bristol Metro’ recommends this as a stand alone scheme 7.2.4 Station enhancements from CP5 onwards (subject to business In the initial period to 2014, there are also case evaluation), there are benefits from a number of programmes and initiatives implementing this scheme as part of the proposed to address and improve the general mitigation plan for Crossrail and the Reading station environment at various locations across Station Area Redevelopment works as it the RUS area: provides a viable diversionary route. Under this proposal, the platform needs to be the National Stations Improvement operational by early 2011. The business case Programme (NSIP) seeks to improve for the scheme would be enhanced to include station facilities. In addition, the performance, capacity and diversionary continuation of the Access for All benefits but is subject to funding programme aims to improve the accessibility of stations by providing step- to improve capacity and performance on free access to platforms. A number of the Swindon to Gloucester route, the RUS

149 supports the development of the Swindon to 7.3.2 Kemble redoubling scheme recommending Such capacity improvements can also create the inclusion of the incremental enhancement improvements in connectivity and journey to signalling headways between Kemble times. Options to improve performance at the and Standish Jn (subject to business case known pinch-points are also recommended evaluation). along with a view on their ability to further enhance the capacity and capability of the Timetable changes network, which may be required over the The RUS recommends a continual review longer term. The options can also offer of existing timetables as an ongoing greater benefit when incorporated with future measure. This forms part of the Joint timetable changes. Timetable Improvement Group with 7.3.3 Network Rail and First Great Western. The proposals, where applicable, also align This should include a review of the with the Seven Day Railway initiative to timetable for the Oxford to Worcester improve network availability for both passenger services following the implementation and freight. of the Cotswold line redoubling scheme during CP4, in view of the emerging 7.3.4 changes to the service provision expected The recommendations for the emerging to be introduced with the Intercity Express strategy for CP5 are presented below; Programme (IEP) firstly by committed schemes followed by recommendations from the Great The RUS recommends a continual review Western RUS. of existing timetables as an ongoing measure with CrossCountry. 7.3.5 The committed strategy for CP5 encompasses 7.2.6 the following elements as part of the CP4 When drawn together, these initiatives will HLOS along with other commitments: result in significant changes to the capacity, capability and operation of the railway, delivery of electrification on the Great substantially improving the current network Western Main Line over the next five years. The predominant delivery of the Intercity Express focus of this strategy is capacity improvements Programme through infrastructure, station change and rolling stock. This strategy is the first step delivery of the European Rail Traffic to achieving the transformation of today’s Management System railway, when combined with the strategic Crossrail (to Heathrow Airport and elements for CP5 the transformation will be Maidenhead). significantly greater. 7.3.6 7.3 Strategy for Control Period 5 IEP and Crossrail are both expected to (2014 – 2019) introduce a significant increase in capacity, 7.3.1 through longer trains and an increase in To accommodate the predicted levels of service provision benefiting passengers growth, the RUS strategy identifies changes to travelling into London as well as those service provision, including train lengthening, travelling throughout the RUS area. The along with infrastructure enhancements implementation of both electrification and the required to facilitate such growth for both the European Rail Traffic Management System passenger and freight markets. will modify the existing railway system and generate significant advances in track capacity

150 and enhanced capabilities. Together, these – hourly Bristol Temple Meads to Bath can also deliver considerable improvements to calling all stations journey times and connectivity. – hourly Westbury to Chippenham 7.3.7 or Swindon The emerging strategy as recommended a revised local service pattern from 2018 by the Great Western RUS is presented for cross Exeter services improving below by the generic RUS gaps of Capacity, connectivity and providing additional Connectivity, Journey times and Performance. capacity: A number of schemes offer combined interventions when brought together; this – half hourly Paignton to Exmouth is particularly significant for capacity and – hourly Barnstaple to St James Park performance where many of the options will provide opportunities to address both 7.3.9 Performance gaps, which in turn, can assist in journey The following options are recommended to time savings and support the Seven Day address performance (subject to business Railway initiative. case evaluation in CP5) and also deliver extra capacity: 7.3.8 Capacity and connectivity Recommendations to address capacity are: an additional platform at Westbury station (subject to inclusion within the Crossrail four additional vehicles to deliver capacity and Reading Station Area Redevelopment improvements on the Reading to Gatwick mitigation plan in CP4) Airport service for two morning and two evening peak services an extension of the carriage line from Bristol Temple Meads to Bedminster nine additional vehicles (over and above and onto Parson Street to provide a four the HLOS proposal of 12 vehicles) for track section. services into and out of Bristol Temple Meads in particular to address crowding on 7.3.10 Journey times the following corridors: Options recommended to improve journey times are: – Cardiff to Portsmouth: five additional vehicles to enhance two morning peak revised calling patterns at principal stations services and three evening peak services for one morning and one evening Cardiff to Portsmouth service which reduces – Cardiff to Taunton: three additional journey times by up to nine minutes. vehicles to enhance two morning and two Intermediate station calls are catered for evening peak services; and by an additional stopping service between – Gloucester to Weymouth: one Westbury and Bristol Temple Meads additional vehicle to enhance one morning linespeed improvements between Bristol and one evening peak service. Temple Meads and Bridgwater. an enhanced cross Bristol service improving connectivity as well as supplying additional capacity through the provision of the following additional services throughout the day:

– hourly Bristol Temple Meads to Yate (subject to third party funding);

151 7.3.11 7.3.15 When brought together, the elements of Figure 7.1 provides a visual representation the draft strategy will deliver substantial of the emerging strategy from the Great improvements to capacity, connectivity, Western RUS. performance and journey times whilst 7.3.16 supporting the Seven Day Railway initiative The RUS strategy may include emerging across the entire RUS area. The delivery of recommendations regarding the gaps below this strategy can enhance the capability of rail, following the consultation period: increasing the attractiveness and potentially increasing rail’s market share. When combined Gap 9: West Midlands to South Coast with the electrification of the Great Western connectivity from the North and all Main Line, the benefits from these initiatives day capacity will be extensive. Gap 12: West Midlands to South West 7.3.12 connectivity from the North and all It is recognised that substantial freight growth day capacity is forecast and in order to accommodate Gap 20: Seasonal Fluctuations at Paignton this additional infrastructure will be required. The RUS analysis has included the growth These will be presented in the final Great forecasts from the Strategic Freight Network Western RUS, and where feasible included in and presents the infrastructure schemes in the the recommendations for the future strategy. draft emerging strategy as a means to address Consultation respondees are welcome to this growth whilst maintaining performance. comment on these gaps.

7.3.13 7.4 Future strategy Recommendations for additional vehicles 7.4.1 for train lengthening are dependent on the In addition to the above RUS availability of rolling stock. The revised rolling recommendations, the current HLOS stock plan is expected to be published in the and third party schemes underway will autumn. An update will therefore be provided significantly contribute to the future CP5 in the Final RUS. strategy and beyond. Predominantly within the Thames Valley region, these schemes will 7.3.14 fundamentally change the current capacity The following options are proposed for and capability of the railway. When brought development during the consultation together, and completed, such schemes will period of the Great Western RUS to enable transform the railway, addressing current greater definition and confirmation of the issues whilst providing a railway that meets the business case: requirements of the 21st century. enhancements to Didcot North Jn 7.4.2 three or four tracking between Dr Days Jn The completion of the Reading Station and Filton Abbey Wood (Filton Bank) Area Redevelopment in 2016 and the implementation of electrification and Crossrail linespeed improvements between from 2017 will deliver major enhancements Gloucester and Severn Tunnel Jn providing essential capacity and connectivity the results of which will be presented in the improvements into and across London and final Great Western RUS, and where feasible throughout the route. Crossrail, together included in the recommendations for the with the Thameslink programme, will enable future strategy. Consultation respondees are passengers to use services across and through welcome to comment on these options. the capital – north, south, east and west.

152 Figure 7.1 – Recommendations for emerging strategy ON ON YLEBONE LONDON EUST DDINGT LONDON MAR LONDON PA 2 Route ells 6 Acton W Junction Route 16 Route Route 18 T4 Brentford branch SOUTH RUISLIP 3 THROW THROW GREENFORD HEA HEA T1, 2 & T5 Route 18 BAA k Infrastructure THROW Colnbroo H HEA Route 16 R Y SLOUG ON WINDSO & ET CENTRAL BOURNE END YLESBUR Flyover Junction Summit A train lengthening Reading - Gatwick Route 16 Claydon L.N.E. Junction PRINCES RISBOROUGH Route 16 3 MARLOW Bramley Route OKE BLETCHLEY READING n olvercot Jn - Charlbury -ON-THAMES R. Junctio BASINGST W. Basingstoke G. Didcot - Oxford new Oxford station layout WN HENLEY Oxford area redevelopment BICESTER TO four track Radley - Kennington Jn Route 16 two track W Didcot North Jn enhancement Y 4 Y Cowley branch WA Route BANBUR Route 17 RK Y Y DIDCOT PA estbury r n lvercot n n NEWBUR Wo Junction OXFORD SALISBUR n Wilto Junctio Didcot Powe Statio est Long Marsto estbury ON-IN-MARSH 3 W service change emple Meads - W SWINDON T Route additional platform additional hourly service MORET additional signals Kemble - Standish Jn estbury - Chippenham/Swindon Dorchester W (Seven Day Railway) Bristol W n WEYMOUTH rminster Dorchester Junctio Wa Y sterleigh rd n n We Ya n WESTBUR E ovil Y Norto Junctio Route 17 4 Ye Pen Mill TH A n OL Abbotswood Junctio WA TENHAM BA SP FROM ovil RK A Route Ye Junctio BRIST PA CHEL SP therington Whatley Quarry Ty branch h n Sharpness branch Exmout Junctio Merehead Quarry est/South Coast Paignton EXMOUTH ON Castle Cary WORCESTER SHRUB HILL GLOUCESTER capacity analysis AUNT T h ON Pilning s Exeter Central nnel Jn TEMPLE MEADS onmout

IGNT Av Dock Tu connectivity and capacity OL PA Route 13 r SEVERN BEACH VIDS BRIST est Midlands - South W ABBOT W DA unnel Cattewate branch

T te

ON YMOUTH PSR review Ya PL ON-SUPER-MARE Portbury Dock Severn Junction NEWT Heathfield branch WEST Alston EXETER ST Gloucester - Severn T Bere emple Meads - NEWPOR T Park Meldon Quarry an hourly extension APLE Bristol Filton Bank three/four tracking BARNST GUNNISLAKE LOOE aunton emple Meads LISKEARD T Exeter local service pattern r half hourly Paignton - Exmouth hourly Barnstaple - St James’ four tracking Moorswater branch train lengthening emple Meads - Bath emple Meads - Parson Street emple Meads - Bridgwater linespeed increase Fowey Harbou branch T T T Par Harbour branch train lengthening f - Portsmouth/T an hourly shuttle Par Cardif Bristol Bristol Bristol Gloucester - Bristol o LMOUTH DOCKS ur Tr FA Parkandillack branch RUS recommendation to be developed during consultation period AY NEWQU IVES Key ST PENZANCE

153 7.4.3 When these schemes are combined with the introduction of the Intercity Express Programme, further benefits are achieved through additional capacity, connectivity and journey time improvements from London to South Wales, the Thames Valley and the West of England. With the addition of electrification, these benefits are amplified. The opportunity to implement these schemes together provides further benefits and enables a complete package of developments to be delivered cohesively.

7.4.4 The following chapter expands on this, with the delivery and implications of these major schemes incorporated with a longer-term view looking at a 30-year planning horizon.

7.4.5 Figure 7.2 below presents the current picture of committed schemes for the RUS area along with the draft recommendations from the emerging strategy of the Great Western RUS to provide a view of what the future will potentially look like.

154 Figure 7.2 – Recommendations for emerging strategy plus committed schemes ON ON YLEBONE LONDON EUST DDINGT LONDON MAR LONDON PA 2 Route ells 6 Acton W Junction Route 16 Route Route 18 st Ealing We bay platform T4 Brentford branch SOUTH RUISLIP 3 THROW THROW GREENFORD HEA HEA T1, 2 & T5 Route 18 BAA k Infrastructure wyford THROW T Crossrail Colnbroo H HEA Route 16 R Y SLOUG ON WINDSO & ET CENTRAL platform extensions train lengthening BOURNE END Reading - Gatwick YLESBUR Reading station area redevelopment Maidenhead and Flyover Junction Summit A Route 16 Claydon L.N.E. Junction PRINCES RISBOROUGH Route 16 3 MARLOW Bramley Route new station OKE BLETCHLEY READING n Reading Green Park gauge enhancement Southampton - WCML -ON-THAMES olvercot Jn - Charlbury R. Junctio BASINGST W. Didcot - Oxford Basingstoke G. new Oxford station layout WN HENLEY Oxford area redevelopment BICESTER TO Oxford loops four track Radley - Kennington Jn two track W Route 16 Didcot North Jn enhancement Andover) passengerisation Y 4 Y Cowley branch WA Route BANBUR Route 17 RK Y Y DIDCOT PA diversionary route estbury Southampton - WCML r n lvercot n n (via Laverstock and NEWBUR Wo Junction OXFORD SALISBUR n Wilto Junctio Didcot Powe Statio est Long Marsto estbury ON-IN-MARSH 3 W service change emple Meads - W SWINDON T Route additional platform additional hourly service MORET estbury - Chippenham/Swindon Dorchester W Bristol W n WEYMOUTH redoubling rminster Cotswold Line Dorchester Junctio additional signals Wa Y (Seven Day Railway) Kemble - Standish Jn sterleigh rd n n We Ya n WESTBUR E ovil Y Norto Junctio Route 17 4 Ye Pen Mill TH A n OL Abbotswood Junctio WA TENHAM BA SP FROM ovil RK A Route Bath Spa Ye Junctio BRIST PA CHEL SP therington Whatley Quarry capacity upgrade Ty branch h n Sharpness branch Exmout Junctio Merehead Quarry Paignton EXMOUTH ON Castle Cary WORCESTER SHRUB HILL GLOUCESTER capacity analysis AUNT T h ON est/South Coast Pilning s Exeter Central nnel Jn TEMPLE MEADS onmout

IGNT Tu Av Dock OL PA Route 13 r SEVERN BEACH VIDS BRIST ABBOT DA unnel Cattewate branch

T te PSR review YMOUTH ON

connectivity and capacity Ya PL ON-SUPER-MARE Portbury Dock linespeed increase Severn Junction NEWT sterleigh Jn - Barnt Green Heathfield branch est Midlands - South W WEST Alston EXETER ST W Gloucester - Severn We T Bere emple Meads - NEWPOR T Park Meldon Quarry an hourly extension APLE Bristol Filton Bank three/four tracking BARNST GUNNISLAKE LOOE aunton emple Meads LISKEARD T Exeter local service pattern r half hourly Paignton - Exmouth hourly Barnstaple - St James’ four tracking Moorswater branch train lengthening emple Meads - Bath emple Meads - Parson Street emple Meads - Bridgwater linespeed increase Fowey Harbou branch T T T Par Harbour branch train lengthening f - Portsmouth/T an hourly shuttle Par Cardif Bristol Bristol Bristol Gloucester - Bristol o LMOUTH DOCKS ur Tr FA Parkandillack branch AY NEWQU IVES ST RUS recommendation be developed To Committed schemes Electrified routes electric routes IEP bi-mode routes IEP PENZANCE ERTMS Seven Day Railway All Access for NSIP National schemes Key

155 8. A longer-term view

8.1 Introduction 8.2 Developments up to 2019 8.1.1 The greatest concentration of traffic on the The previous sections have provided the GWML is on the initial 36-mile section between results of initial analysis regarding potential London Paddington and Reading, after options for implementation within the first which flows diverge to the South Midlands, 10 years of the Great Western Route Bristol, the South West and South Wales. Utilisation Strategy (RUS) up to 2019. This The strategic direction for this section of chapter provides further detail on a number the RUS area has been established for the of the major developments proposed within next 10 years with the funding allocation for this time period, predominantly in the Thames the delivery of major enhancement works, Valley, which will significantly impact on the principally under the High Level Output current capacity and capability of the network Specification (HLOS) with other third party influencing the future strategy of the route. funding commitments. This includes the remodelling of the Reading station area to 8.1.2 address performance and provide necessary This is followed by a longer-term view of how capacity for current and future growth; the proposed developments up to 2019 can electrification and the Intercity Express help shape the future. Also presented are other Programme (IEP) which could provide further potential enhancements that could be required increases in capacity, service frequency and over the next 20 years, which would contribute improved journey time opportunities along with to the development of the Great Western RUS the installation of in-cab signalling through area over the 30-year planning horizon. the European Rail Traffic Management 8.1.3 System (ERTMS). When taken together this The Great Western Main Line (GWML) has programme of enhancements significantly experienced sustained compound growth changes the dimensions of the railway and over the last 15 years which is expected meets projected increases in demand and to continue, despite the recent recession. promotes a modal shift from other modes Although the focus to date has mostly been of transport. on the London and Thames Valley areas, The GWML is the longest non-electrified which continues with the major investments intercity route in Britain, of vital strategic programmed over the next 10 years, it is importance to both England and Wales. recognised that in the longer term the radial Electrification has a central role in the routes from London and those in the regional modernisation of the railway and can locations will need significant investment to significantly improve rail’s product offering develop the network to make it consistent with to its customers. The Great Western the GWML. electrification project will be complemented by the £16 billion construction of Crossrail, which will extend electric train services from

156 Essex and the new east-west tunnel through well as being a staging point for multi-portion central London to Slough, Heathrow and aggregates trains across London (via the North Maidenhead by 2017. With electrification now London Line) to the East and the South East. to be extended beyond Maidenhead, it would The Crossrail enhancements to the current be possible for Crossrail to operate to Reading four track railway assist with addressing and beyond rather than Maidenhead from these continuing freight requirements as the outset. Electrification could also facilitate well as the expected growth in both freight improvements for rail access to Heathrow and passenger services. Some sections of Airport from the west. five tracks will be provided, with reversible Major changes to the overall pattern of signalling capability on the additional track to operation at London Paddington will be enable fluidity of movements. The two most triggered by the construction, below street- significant enhancements will be completed level, of two new low level platforms for at Acton (West) and Airport/Stockley Jns. Crossrail. Additional works below ground Enhancements to Acton West Jn will permit will enable passengers to interchange westbound freight services to depart from between these new platforms and the Acton Yard without conflicting with eastbound London Underground lines. In this way, Crossrail services. The upgrade of Airport/ passenger circulation will be improved, and Stockley Jns will permit more frequent platform capacity will be released at London Heathrow stopping services to operate Paddington surface level for main line use, in directly between the airport and the relief line with projected improvements as IEP trains lines without being in conflict with Heathrow are progressively introduced. Express and the Long Distance High Speed (LDHS) services on the main lines. This will Figure 8.1 illustrates the volume of growth in also secure robust freight train paths on the the medium term on the main lines, where relief lines. additional frequencies are expected to be provided on certain of the interurban and long Electrification will enable the current outer distance routes following the introduction suburban services between Oxford, Reading of IEP. and London Paddington to be operated with vehicles redeployed from the Thameslink Between London Paddington and Reading, the programme by the end of 2016. From 2017, more intense utilisation of the relief lines as a inner suburban services currently operating result of the increased suburban frequencies into and out of London Paddington will from Crossrail will be achieved through operate through the new Crossrail tunnel to infrastructure enhancements, which include central London and destinations to the east platform lengthening at most stations in order of London. This change will release much to accommodate the longer 10-car trains. The needed capacity at Paddington station for long extra passenger movements generated by distance services to meet forecast demand. the increase in Crossrail services will place added pressure on freight capacity particularly Figure 8.2 illustrates the volume of growth in between Reading and Acton. Acton Yard offers the medium term on the relief lines, where a dual role for local aggregate deliveries as additional suburban services will be provided

157 Figure 8.1 – GWML London Paddington to Reading and beyond (tph): proposed IEP (cross country not shown) ON DDINGT LONDON (MAIN LINE) PA T5 THROW HEA READING Y WA RK DIDCOT Y PA NEWBUR orcester) OXFORD (to W SWINDON (to the south west) (to Gloucester) Y OL WA RK (to Bristol) BRIST PA les) Wa Current IC125, future IEP IEP/growth Heathrow Express (to South Key

158 in the peak hours following the opening of the east-west Crossrail tunnel and with the introduction of standard 10-car formations. Freight traffic will normally share the relief lines with electrified Crossrail services and utilise additional, reversibly-signalled sections of the new five track railway.

The redevelopment of Reading, as presented in Figure 8.3, and the adjacent complex of junctions will enable significantly greater volumes to be carried on the east-west section of the GWML between London Paddington and Reading. This will benefit both the main lines, following the introduction of IEP, and the relief lines, in order to address a combination of increased services as a result of Crossrail and continuing freight growth to and from London and the South East. Electrification proposals for the GWML, would result in these Crossrail services (originally proposed to operate from the east and South East of London to Maidenhead) being able to be extended to Reading and beyond. There will also be major capacity benefits on the north to south cross-country route, which crosses the GWML at Reading, as a result of grade separation for freight movements and for long distance services to the South West via Castle Cary. This will continue to provide performance benefits throughout the route by reducing the need for any further conflicting movements.

159 Figure 8.2 – GWML London Paddington to Reading (tph): relief lines ON DDINGT LONDON (LOW LEVEL) PA Acton diveunder Airport Jn T4 ON YT THROW WEST DRA HEA READING Crossrail Freight (up to 3 tph) Freight ( 4 th tph) Key

160 Figure 8.3 – Reading remodelling – proposed layout okingham) (to W (to London Paddington) Grade separation READING Doubled platform capacity (to Basingstoke) Grade separation est) est/North) GWML ML GWML RL GWML Local passenger Freight (to the W Key (to the South W

161 8.3 Heathrow Airport This proposal would necessitate substantial Whilst Heathrow Airport primarily serves the upgrading of a central section of the relief lines South East of England, with rail links to and between London Paddington and Reading. from London by Heathrow Express, Heathrow It potentially has a good strategic fit with the Connect services and London Underground Crossrail works to the west of West Drayton, services, rail access to the airport from the which allow for GWML five tracking to Iver, west is presently by means of road services by utilising railway land towards Langley from Reading, or by interchange from Thames and Slough without significant further land Valley stopping services at Hayes and take, although some bridge reconstruction Harlington and then via the Heathrow Connect would be necessary. An opportunity to services to Heathrow Terminal 4. progress this further could possibly be linked with the development of a third runway at The proposed AirTrack scheme would improve Heathrow Airport. this through the construction of a new section of railway line from Heathrow Terminal 5 to Figure 8.4 illustrates the overall linkages the South Western “inner” lines at Staines, between the GWML between London over which it is intended, in the medium term, Paddington and Reading, the AirTrack that a new train service could link Heathrow scheme, and a possible western access to and Reading via Ascot and Wokingham. the airport. The Reading Station Area Redevelopment incorporates additional platform capacity for this future service, and thus improved additional interchange potential with all GWML services. There is also the potential for other AirTrack services to link Heathrow Terminal 5 to the inner South Western lines for Staines and London Waterloo, plus Guildford, subject to further capacity and operational evaluation.

In addition to the AirTrack scheme, the alternative of a more direct link to Heathrow Airport via Slough on the GWML has been identified as a longer-term option. This envisages a south to west chord from the existing Colnbrook freight-only line (which runs to the west of Heathrow Terminal 5, intertwined with the ) joining the GWML west of West Drayton. Fast electric services (calling Slough and Maidenhead) could link Heathrow Terminal 5 with Reading, and share the relief lines with Crossrail stopping services.

162 Figure 8.4 – GWML: proposed London Paddington to Reading linkages ON TERLOO DDINGT LONDON LONDON WA PA ON & YES HA HARLINGT T5 THROW AINES ON HEA ST YT (to Surbiton) WEST DRA & R TE WINDSOR ON RIVERSIDE WA ET VIRGINIA SLOUGH (to Guildford) Gatwick) (to Guildford, WOKINGHAM READING GWML SWML/AirTrack New section Heathrow “western access” Key

163 8.4 Gatwick Airport Restoration of a substantially four track railway Like Heathrow, Gatwick Airport primarily serves from the south of Oxford (at Kennington Jn) the South East of England. Direct rail links to through Oxford station towards the north of and from Reading via Guildford (and principal Oxford (at Wolvercot Jn where the Cotswold intermediate stations) are well-established Line diverges) could achieve greater capacity and provide interchange with all GWML for passenger trains, whilst opening up more services from the West of England. In addition, long distance freight paths, by addressing connections with CrossCountry services from the pinch-point that the current Oxford layout the Midlands and North are also possible. represents. The inadequate capacity here Reading to Gatwick services utilise the South is exacerbated by the substantial number of Western inner route platforms 4a/4b at Reading passenger train turnback movements which without directly running on the GWML tracks. are necessary. As presented in Chapter 6, The future remodelling of Redhill station, and the combination of these enhancements infrastructure enhancements at Gatwick, which with a redevelopment of the Oxford station are currently being appraised would enable area can generate significant improvements the achievement of a more standard order of for the future capacity and performance for service, operating two through trains per hour both passenger and freight services. The from Reading to Gatwick Airport. commitment of electrification could offer a significant change to the current operation The completion of the Reading Station Area of the station. Redevelopment will also incorporate a new, grade-separated underpass to the east of 8.6 Bristol Reading station. This will permit the linkage Development of the proposed ‘Bristol Metro’ of train services from west of Reading (on services, as presented in Chapter 6, on the the relief lines) with the Gatwick route. One cross Bristol axis of Bristol Parkway/Filton such linkage might be to connect the Oxford Abbey Wood through Bristol Temple Meads, to Reading local services with those between and with the proposed restoration of four track Reading with Gatwick, providing greater capability from Bristol Temple Meads through opportunities to improve connectivity. The new to Parson Street (on the route to Weston- underpass would also permit through operation super-Mare and Taunton), could enable the of (additional) long distance services. segregation of faster LDHS services from more frequent stopping services, such as those 8.5 Oxford linking Severn Beach and Avonmouth with As well as being an important route for long Bristol on Filton Bank, north of Bristol Temple distance services linking the South with the Meads. The introduction of these schemes Midlands and North, the completion of gauge will deliver additional capacity to support the enhancement works on the Southampton to exceptional growth experienced in Bristol. West Coast Main Line during Control Period 4 (CP4) is expected to stimulate significant With the proposed increase of services under growth in freight, particularly for deep sea the current IEP service specification, along intermodal traffic. This will increase the with projected growth in freight, the already pressure on route capacity at Oxford, (as constrained section between Bristol Temple discussed in Chapter 6) and it is anticipated Meads and Bristol Parkway is expected to that the signalling renewal (early in Control exceed its capacity utilisation. The impact Period 5 (CP5)) will provide the potential to will be significantly greater with the proposed integrate enhancements in order to create IEP depot at Stoke Gifford Yard which may additional platform capacity, consistent with determine the requirement, and support planned frequency improvements linked to the the business case, for the fourth platform at introduction of IEP later in CP5. Bristol Parkway.

164 An additional local passenger service between 8.7 Beyond 2019 Bristol and Portishead (on the existing Portbury The combination of the major works outlined freight only line) would share the Taunton route above is expected to cater for predicted with the faster, long distance services and growth in the medium to long term, through would likely necessitate the enhancements a combination of higher capacity trains and, south of Bristol with the additional fourth track on certain routes, increased frequencies. from Bristol Temple Meads to Parson Street This is presented within the context of the to accommodate the increase in services. Government’s target in the “Delivering a Such local service upgrades in the greater Sustainable Railway” White Paper (2007) to Bristol area are dependent on a successful provide a reliable network capable of handling outcome of business case evaluation and double the number of passengers over the regional funding bids for rail enhancements next 30 years as an overall framework for the in CP4 with construction anticipated for future development of the railway. CP5. The proposed Portishead and Bristol The Network RUS: Electrification strategy Metro schemes form part of the recent bid published in May 2009 for consultation by the South West Regional Development identified a number of gaps between today’s Agency (SWRDA) for medium-term funding railway and a future railway which could exploit commitments for the period 2014 to 2019. The the benefits of electrification. In addition to land adjacent to the existing Bristol Parkway the electrification of the GWML, the strategy to Parson Street two track corridor (north provided a “Western” package of schemes for and south of Bristol Temple Meads) would be which business cases should be developed required and is designated accordingly. further to review the benefits of electrification Other regional housing and economic which could be achieved following completion developments around the surrounding area, of the main line electrification. The key areas with aspirations for potential new stations, will identified are: also contribute to the necessity of increasing Swindon to Cheltenham enabling electric the capacity and capability of the area south operation from London Paddington to of Bristol Temple Meads. With the area due Cheltenham for resignalling in CP5, opportunities exist to combine these interventions to produce an cross country routes south of Birmingham all-encompassing development of the area – via Coventry to Reading and maximising capacity, reducing journey times Basingstoke (enabling Bournemouth to and improving performance. This could include Birmingham and Manchester services the potential redesignation of the main and to be operated by electric traction) relief lines for long distance and stopping – the Birmingham , services to match that provided on the route Bromsgrove to Cheltenham and towards London Paddington. Furthermore, Westerleigh Jn (Bristol Parkway) and with the implementation of electrification Bristol to Plymouth and Paignton and ERTMS, the benefits of an area review are magnified. Severn Tunnel Jn to Gloucester enabling Cardiff to Birmingham and Nottingham services to run on electric traction and providing a diversionary route from Swindon to South Wales avoiding Severn Tunnel

the Berks and Hants line (from Reading to Taunton)

165 Basingstoke to Exeter enabling electric In the longer term a number of further traction on services from London Waterloo measures are likely to be needed. These could to Salisbury and Exeter involve timetable alterations, or more physical upgrade works to further increase capacity. In West London infill schemes (bridging a gap the former case, Crossrail tunnel construction between the GWML, the together with provision for very high service and the West London Line) for traffic to the frequencies (ie. close headway capability) and south of London and the Channel Tunnel. the Westbourne Park turnback facility means These schemes will be further developed there will be some potential east of London from the initial review undertaken as part of Paddington (at Low Level) for running more the Network RUS: Electrification strategy trains through the tunnel and on to the GWML to assess the business case and value instead of as turnback services at Westbourne for money. Park from Shenfield/Abbey Wood. One possibility would be to switch the Heathrow With the commitment of electrification on Express services from terminating at London the GWML, the opportunity arises in the Paddington to become “fast Crossrail” services longer-term to complete a major service instead, which would in turn release more recast across the Great Western RUS platform capacity at Paddington. Such a switch area. This would enable improvements in would exploit more systematic use of the six capacity, connectivity and journey times to be track section east of Ladbroke Grove, together recognised and achieved to their full potential. with some comparatively minor alterations to When integrated with the other programme of track and signalling. enhancements across the area, and potential electrification on other routes, there could be Electrification of the Thames Valley branch a revolutionary change in the entire service lines (Greenford, Windsor, Bourne End provision of the rail network within the Great and Henley-on-Thames) could also provide Western area which could positively impact on additional benefits with through services adjoining areas. to London Paddington. Under Crossrail proposals, these services operate only as The enhancements programmed result in branch line shuttles. the capacity utilisation on both the main and relief lines, specifically on the London The electrification of some short sections Paddington to Reading corridor, being pushed of route in West London could also provide towards its practical limit. Whereas on the connectivity for freight routes. This would main lines trains typically operate non-stop include Willesden Acton Branch and SW between London Paddington and Reading, the sidings to Acton Wells Jn and Acton Wells Jn comparatively large number of intermediate to Acton West Jn. stations on the relief lines dictates that the Further west, development of the relief lines number of paths that can be made available between London Paddington and Reading is lower. could enable greater utilisation to be achieved HS2 is a new company established to review for a mix of stopping and semi-fast passenger the development of potential high-speed lines trains alongside freight. Construction of a and Network Rail has commissioned a New longer section of five track railway, between Lines Programme to investigate the provision Slough and West Drayton, suitably fitted with of new lines as additions to the network to reversible signalling, would enable peak hour provide such additional capacity. Various semi-fast passenger services to overtake options for new lines are being reviewed. stopping services (whilst these called at Langley, Iver and West Drayton stations) and then remain on the relief lines, thus avoiding

166 the necessity to switch the semi-fasts onto the from the Badminton line (to Bristol Parkway main lines. At present this causes performance and South Wales). Depending on the risks and uses scarce main line paths sub- exact mix of station calls specified on the optimally. In the off-peak hours the additional three service groups west of Didcot (to relief line capacity provided could then be Bath and Bristol, to Bristol Parkway and used to handle the expected freight growth South Wales, and the Stroud Valley from once the Crossrail service pattern has been Swindon to Gloucester) additional platforms fully established. at Didcot and Swindon could create further journey time improvements, by permitting In this manner, such semi-fast services (for better segregation of non-stop high speed example Reading/Maidenhead/Slough) running services from those requiring to call at through the Crossrail tunnel direct to the intermediate stations. west end, city, and Canary Wharf would offer an attractive alternative to an underground On the Berks and Hants route to the South interchange at London Paddington. The West, significant journey time reductions slightly longer relief line journey time between could be achieved for the Plymouth and Reading and London Paddington, with the Cornwall services through the provision potential two intermediate calls, would be of faster services calling only at principal offset by the fact that passengers would no stations between Reading and Taunton. The longer incur an interchange time penalty from principal intermediate stations in Wiltshire and a main line journey. It would also reduce the Somerset can be catered for by another group risk of the main lines becoming overloaded of trains, duly flighted to enable exploitation and reduce crowding on other London of the maximum linespeeds (between 100 Underground services. – 110mph) which are expected to remain on this more curved route. 8.7.1 Beyond the Thames Valley (east to west) Routes with diversionary capability for electric The GWML west of Reading is essentially a traction also need to be considered following flat and reasonably straight route to Bristol the commitment to the electrification of the running at 125mph. The route is a mixed-traffic GWML. In some cases the availability of an railway in that the mostly two track section electrified diversionary route may ease the west of Didcot used by existing interurban provision of access for maintenance, enabling and long distance services is shared with further benefits to be achieved through the freight trains of lower speed capability. The Seven Day Railway initiative. absence of intermediate stations (apart from 8.7.2 Beyond the Thames Valley (north Didcot and Swindon) gives faster journey time to south) potential, which is of benefit to through trains On the long distance corridor linking the to Wales via the Severn Tunnel. This can be North and Midlands with Bristol and the further enhanced through the completion of South West via Cheltenham Spa, and South electrification on the GWML. Wales via Chepstow, linespeed improvements Higher speed potential over the western are envisaged between Bromsgrove and portion of the main line through Swindon Westerleigh Jn (where the cross country could be achieved through a combination route joins the GWML to the east of Bristol of additional tracks to enable improved Parkway). This forms part of the HLOS segregation of high speed passenger and commitment for the current control period as other, slower-moving traffic, and grade discussed in Chapter 4. In the period up to separation at Wootton Bassett Jn, to the 2014, Network Rail is also funded to deliver west of Swindon where the Box line (to electrification from Barnt Green to Bromsgrove Chippenham, Bath and Bristol) diverges in the West Midlands. Further benefits

167 could be delivered through the extension of electrification through to Bristol.

With the increased number of trains anticipated through Standish Jn, to the south of Gloucester, there are potential future conflicts which may only be resolved through further enhancements at Standish Jn with grade separation or a double junction. As a longer-term proposal the review of Standish Jn and its potential developments would be required to facilitate potential service increases between Swindon and Gloucester.

As the route moves towards the west, increases in capacity and capability will be achieved with the introduction of IEP and resignalling, (either conventional or in-cab signalling (ERTMS)), scheduled for the latter part of CP5 and early CP6. This will present opportunities to reduce headways on several of the longer route sections particularly between Newton Abbot and Plymouth, significantly increasing capacity and reducing journey times on key interurban routes. Opportunities also arise for extending electrification through to Plymouth.

For services on the Devon and Cornwall branch lines it is envisaged that train lengthening opportunities will cater for future growth in the longer term. It is recognised that the area has physical and capacity constraints which may need a further review with infrastructure improvements for increasing capacity, connectivity and journey times.

168 169 9. Stakeholder consultation

9.1 Purpose 9.2 Process 9.1.1 9.2.1 Consultation with stakeholders within and In order to fulfil Network Rail’s obligation outside the rail industry is essential to the in an effective and consistent manner, two successful development of a Route Utilisation consultative groups were established for the Strategy (RUS). Close involvement of Great Western RUS: stakeholders helps to ensure that: Industry Stakeholder Management knowledge and experience is maximised Group (SMG) and shared Wider Stakeholder Group (WSG). the correct gaps are identified 9.2.2 the widest range of options is considered The SMG consists of representatives from and the most appropriate solutions passenger and freight train operators, recommended Association of Train Operators (ATOC), Department for Transport (DfT), Transport it is an industry approach to a long for London (TfL), The Welsh Assembly term strategy. Government, Passenger Focus and London 9.1.2 Travelwatch and the Office of Rail Regulation According to the Office of Rail Regulation (as an observer). (ORR) guidelines on RUSs: 9.2.3 This group acts as a steering group for the Network Rail should develop RUS, meeting on a regular basis throughout a first draft RUS in conjunction the process as required. The group reviews with relevant stakeholders. It progress and discusses the way forward. should then publish this draft Detailed analysis is completed through RUS, specifying a reasonable subgroups which are established to focus and consultation period within which discuss specific issues such as passenger representations can be made. demand and option generation and appraisal Network Rail should also establish with the relevant representatives, presenting governance arrangements back the findings to the SMG. for individual RUSs to include stakeholders affected by any particular RUS.

Extract from ORR guidelines on Route Utilisation Strategies (April 2009)

170 9.2.4 9.3 How you can contribute The SMG has formally agreed the gaps, 9.3.1 options and strategy presented within this On behalf of the Great Western RUS SMG, document, and SMG members have been Network Rail welcomes contributions to involved in its drafting. assist us in developing this RUS. Specific consultation questions have not been set as 9.2.5 The WSG is a larger group containing we would appreciate comments on the content representatives from: of the document as a whole. 9.3.2 Regional Transport Partnerships This RUS will have a formal consultation Regional Development Agencies period of 12 weeks. The deadline for receiving responses is therefore 27 November 2009. Local Authorities However, earlier responses would be Rail User Groups. appreciated in order to maximise the time 9.2.6 available to consider and respond in the This group exists to ensure that stakeholders final RUS. beyond the rail industry have the opportunity 9.3.3 to contribute to the RUS and ensure they are Consultation responses can be submitted briefed and prepared to make best use of the either electronically or by post to the formal consultation period. addresses below:

9.2.7 [email protected] A WSG briefing will take place in conjunction Great Western RUS Consultation Response with the publication of this draft document RUS Programme Manager where the draft strategy, recommendations Network Rail and other findings will be briefed enabling Floor 4 wider stakeholders to contribute to the final Kings Place document. A further WSG briefing will be 90 Way convened for the final publication of the Great London Western RUS. N1 9AG

Please note that all consultation responses will be published on our website.

171 Appendices

Appendix A Station facilities Airport N N N N N N N Metro N N N N N N N Cycle Y N N Y N Y Y Transport interchange Transport Bus Y N Y Y Y Y Y Taxi N N N N N N Y Disabled access to platforms Y N Partial Y N Partial Y N/A N/A N/A 50 N/A N/A N/A LA owned LA /operated Utilisation (%) 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Non- chargeable Fee charging Free N/A N/A N/A N/A Free 40 Disabled car park spaces Y N N Y N N Y No of car park spaces 29 N N 60 N 6 87 Total Total in GW RUS area 2 1 3 20 19 35 112 0 0 Cat F F F F F F E Category A A( MS) B C D E F P Y Operator FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW Key National hub National hub (major station) Regional hub Important feeder Medium, staffed Small, staffed Small, unstaffed Facilities exist in part only Facility exists Station Aldermaston Appleford Ascott-under- Wychwood Ashchurch Avoncliff Avonmouth Barnstaple

172 N N N N N N N N N N N Y N N N N N N Airport N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Metro Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Cycle Transport Interchange Transport Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N N Bus Y N N N N N Y Y N Y Y Y N N Y N N N Taxi Y Partial Partial Y Partial Y Partial Y Y Partial Y Y Partial N N Y Y Y Disabled Access to Platforms N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 90 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y 95 N/A LA Owned LA /Operated Utilisation (%) N/A N/A 80 Y Y 75 N/A N/A N/A 75 N/A N/A 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Non- Chargeable 100 N/A Free Free Free Free Free 40 N/A Free 100 100 Free N/A 80 Free N/A Free Fee Charging Y N Y Y Y N N Y Y N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Disabled Car Park Spaces 359 N 11 13 9 29 70 61 200 50 1140 446 18 N 61 22 120 10 No of Car Park Spaces C F F F F F D E E E B A F F E F F E Cat FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW Operator Bath Spa Bedminster Bedwyn Alston Bere Bere Ferrers Town Bicester Bodmin Parkway Bourne End Bradford-on- Avon Bridgwater Bristol Parkway Temple Bristol Meads Bruton Bugle Burnham Calstock Cam Dursley Camborne Station

173 Airport N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Metro N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Cycle N N Y Y N Y Y N Y Y N N N N N Y N Y Transport Interchange Transport Bus N N N N N N N N Y N N N N N N N N N Taxi N N Y N N N Y N Y N N N N N N N Y N Disabled Access to Platforms Partial Partial Partial Partial Partial Y Y N Partial N Y Y Y Partial Y Partial Partial Y N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A LA Owned LA /Operated Utilisation (%) 75 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 85 90 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Non- Chargeable Fee Charging Free N/A 90 N/A Free 90 100 N/A 95 80 Free N/A N/A Free Free Free 90 Free Disabled Car Park Spaces N N Y N N Y Y N Y Y N N N N Y Y Y Y No of Car Park Spaces 20 N 120 N 4 158 200 N 663 60 35 76 N 4 13 8 98 5 Cat E E D F F E C F C E F E F F F F F D Operator FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW Station Cardis Bay Castle Bar Park Castle Cary Causeland Chapelton Charlbury Cheltenham Spa Chetnole Chippenham Cholsey Clifton Down Cookham Coombe Copplestone Credition Culham Dawlish Dawlish Warren

174 Airport N N N N N N N Y N N N N N N N N N Metro N N N N N N N Y N N N N N N N N N Cycle N Y N N N Y N N N Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Transport Interchange Transport Bus N N N N N N N N N N N Y N N N N N Taxi N Y N N N N N N N Y N Y N N N N N Disabled Access to Platforms Y Partial Y Y N Partial N N Y Partial Partial Y N Y Partial Y Y LA Owned LA /Operated N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 75 N/A N/A Y Utilisation (%) Non- Chargeable N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 70 N/A Fee Charging Free 85 Free N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Free 50 75 88 N/A N/A Free Free N/A Disabled Car Park Spaces Y Y Y N N N N N N Y Y Y N Y Y Y N No of Car Park Spaces 10 1088 250 N N N N N 5 84 70 399 N 200 8 40 60 Cat E B F F F F F C F E C C F D F F F Operator FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW Station Devonport Didcot Parkway Digby & Sowton Dilton Marsh Dockyard Dorchester West Drayton Green Ealing Broadway Eggesford Evesham Exeter Central Exeter St Davids Exeter St Thomas Exmouth Exton Falmouth Docks Town Falmouth

175 Airport N N N N N N N N N N Y Y N N N N N N Metro N N N N N N N Y N N N N N N N N N N Cycle Y N N Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y N Y Y Transport Interchange Transport Bus N Y N N Y N Y Y N Y Y N N Y Y Y N Y Taxi N N N N N Y N N N N N N N N N N N N Disabled Access to Platforms Y N N Y Y Partial Partial N Y Y N N Y Y Partial Y Partial Y N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 85 N/A N/A N/A LA Owned LA /Operated Utilisation (%) Non- Chargeable N/A N/A N/A 80 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 85 N/A N/A 70 N/A N/A 70 80 60 Fee Charging Free N/A N/A Free N/A 100 80 NCP Free Free N/A 70 Free 45 Free Free N/A N/A Disabled Car Park Spaces Y N N Y N Y Y N Y Y N Y N Y Y Y N N No of Car Park Spaces 30 N 9 11 N 231 152 36 22 37 N 122 25 267 20 26 68 32 Cat F F F D E C E E F F E D F E F F F F Operator FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW LUL FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW Station Abbey Filton Wood Finstock Freshford Frome Furze Platt Gloucester Goring & Streatley Greenford Gunnislake Hanborough Hanwell Hayes & Harlington Hayle Henley-on- Thames Highbridge & Burnham Honeybourne Hungerford Islip

176 Airport Y N N N N N N N N N N N N Y N N N N Metro N N N N N N N N N N N N N Y N N N N Cycle Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y N N N Y Y Y N Y N Transport Interchange Transport Bus Y N N N N Y N Y Y N N N N Y N N N N Taxi N N Y N N N N N Y N N N N Y N N N N Disabled Access to Platforms N Y Y N N Partial Y Y Partial Partial Partial Y Partial Y Y Y Partial Partial N/A 75 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A LA Owned LA /Operated Utilisation (%) Non- Chargeable N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 65 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Fee Charging N/A Free 95 N/A 50 85 Free Free 90 N/A N/A N/A N/A NCP 75 Free Free N/A Disabled Car Park Spaces N Y Y N Y Y Y N Y N N Yes N Y Y Y Y N No of Car Park Spaces N 206 336 N 53 134 5 10 62 2 N 130 60 152 14 20 10 N Cat E F D F F E F F E F F F D A (MS) F F F F Operator FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW NR FGW FGW FGW FGW Station Iver Ivybridge Kemble Keyham Keynsham Kingham Kings Nympton Kintbury Langley Lapford Lawrence Hill Lelant Saltings Liskeard London Paddington Looe Lostwithiel Luxulyan Lympstone Commando

177 Airport N N Y N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Metro N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Cycle Y N Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y N Transport Interchange Transport Bus N N Y Y N N Y N N Y Y N Y Y N Y N Taxi N N Y N N N N N N N N N Y N Y Y N Disabled Access to Platforms Y Partial Y Y Y Partial Partial Partial Y Partial Partial N Partial N Y Y Partial LA Owned LA /Operated N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 100 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Utilisation (%) Non- Chargeable N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Fee Charging Free Free 90 N/A Free Free Y N/A Free 50 90 N/A 100 N/A 75 50 Free Disabled Car Park Spaces Y Y Y N Y N Y N N Y N Y Y N Y Y Y No of Car Park Spaces 15 12 389 N 10 20 11 N 5 153 51 105 222 N 49 261 5 Cat F F C F F F F F F E E F C F F C F Operator FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW Station Lympstone Lympstone Village Maiden Newton Maidenhead Marlow Melksham Menheniot Midgham Montpelier Morchard Road Moreton-in- Marsh Mortimer Nailsea & Backwell Newbury Newbury Racecourse Newquay Abbot Newton Newton St Cyres

178 Airport N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Metro N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Cycle N Y Y Y N N N Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y N N N Transport Interchange Transport Bus N Y N Y N N N N N N N Y Y N Y N N N Taxi N Y Y N N N N N N Y N N N N Y N N N Disabled Access to Platforms Partial Y Y Partial Partial N Partial Y Y Y Y Y Partial Partial Y N Partial Partial LA Owned LA /Operated N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Utilisation (%) N/A N/A N/A N/A 90 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 65 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Non- Chargeable N/A 60 75 80 Free N/A Free Free Free 75 Free N/A 90 Free 80 N/A Free N/A Fee Charging Disabled Car Park Spaces N Y Y Y Y N Y N N Y Y N Y Y Y N Y N No of Car Park Spaces N 518 87 92 25 N 15 5 N 129 20 40 79 10 352 N 3 N Cat F B C E E F F F F C F F D F C F F F Operator FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW Station Oldfield Park Oxford Paignton Pangbourne Par Parson Street Patchway Penmere Penryn Penzance Perranwell Pershore Pewsey Pilning Plymouth Polsloe Bridge Portsmouth Arms Quintrel Downs

179 Airport N Y N N N N N N N N N N N N N Y N N Metro N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Y N N N Cycle Y Y Y Y Y N N N Y Y N Y Y N Y N Y Y Transport Interchange Transport Bus Y Y N N N N N N N Y Y N Y Y Y Y N N Taxi N Y N N Y N N N N N N N Y N Y N N Y Disabled Access to Platforms Partial Y Partial Y Y Partial Y Y Partial Y Partial Y Partial Partial N N N Y LA Owned LA /Operated N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Utilisation (%) 45 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 95 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Non- Chargeable N/A 60 N/A N/A 80 N/A Free N/A N/A N/A Y Free 90 N/A N/A N/A Free 70 Fee Charging Disabled Car Park Spaces N Y N N Y N Y N N Y N Y Y N N N N Y No of Car Park Spaces 35 1650 N N 38 N 20 N N 50 20 8 626 N N N 8 157 Cat F A F F D F F F F F F F C F F D F C Operator FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW Chiltern FGW FGW FGW Station Radley Reading Reading West Redland Redruth Roche Saltash Sandplace Sea Mills Shiplake Shipton Shirehampton Slough South Greenford South Ruislip Southall Andrews St Road Austell St

180 Airport N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Metro N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Cycle N N N N N N N N Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Transport Interchange Transport Bus N N N N N N N N N N N N Y Y Y N Y Y Taxi N N N N N N N N N N N Y Y N Y N N N Disabled Access to Platforms Partial Partial Y Partial Y Y Partial Y Partial N Y Y Y Partial Partial Partial Partial N LA Owned LA /Operated N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Utilisation (%) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 90 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Non- Chargeable N/A N/A Free 30 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Free 80 90 40 95 75 60 60 Fee Charging Disabled Car Park Spaces N N N Y N Y N N N N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y No of Car Park Spaces N N 10 60 N 200 N N N N 25 181 607 51 309 92 61 219 Cat F F F E F F F F F F E D C E C D E E Operator FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW Station St Budeaux Ferry Road St Budeaux Road Victoria St Columb Road St Erth St Germans St Ives St James Park St Keyne Stapleton Road Starcross Stonehouse Stroud Swindon Taunton Teignmouth Thatcham Theale

181 Airport N N N N N N N N N N N N N Y Y N N N N N Metro N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Cycle N Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Transport Interchange Transport Bus N Y Y N N N Y N N Y N Y N Y Y N N Y N N Taxi N N Y N Y N Y Y Y Y N N N Y N Y N Y N N Disabled Access to Platforms N N Y Y Partial Partial Partial Y Y Partial Y Y Y N N N Y Y Y Y LA Owned LA /Operated N/A N/A N/A Y N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Utilisation (%) Non- Chargeable N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 45 N/A N/A N/A N/A 75 N/A N/A 90 Fee Charging N/A 80 100 N/A 75 Free 100 100 60 82 Free N/A 80 90 N/A 85 Free 95 N/A N/A Disabled Car Park Spaces N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y N Y Y Y N Y No of Car Park Spaces N 111 193 4 91 5 122 258 144 426 11 30 98 15 N 207 36 158 N 150 Cat F E D F C F D D C D F F F E E D F C D F Operator FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW Station Thornford Tilehurst Tiverton Parkway Topsham Torquay Torre Totnes Trowbridge Truro Twyford Umberleigh Wargrave Warminster Drayton West Ealing West Westbury Milton Weston Weston-super- Mare Windsor & Eton Central Worle

182 Airport N N N N N Metro N N N N N Cycle Y Y N Y N Transport Interchange Transport Bus N N N N N Taxi N N N N N Disabled Access to Platforms Partial Y Y Partial Y LA Owned LA /Operated N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Utilisation (%) N/A N/A N/A 80 75 Non- Chargeable 90 60 N/A Free Free Fee Charging Disabled Car Park Spaces Y Y N Y Y No of Car Park Spaces 77 99 N 37 7 Cat F E F E F Operator FGW FGW FGW FGW FGW Station Yate Yatton Yeoford Pen Mill Yeovil Yetminster Data Source: National Rail E nquiries and FGW

183 Appendix B Reactionary delay minutes – top 15 locations

Passenger

Delay Minutes Trains Section Summary area per train delay affected affected

1 Moreton-in-Marsh Oxfordshire and North Cotswolds 10380 1094 9.49

Ascott-under- 2 Oxfordshire and North Cotswolds 27264 3006 9.30 Wychwood Bristol Temple 3 Greater Bristol and Westbury 49757 6050 8.22 Meads

4 Plymouth Cogload Jn – Penzance 13902 1694 8.21

5 Gloucester Bristol – Birmingham line 13481 1656 8.14

6 Bedwyn Reading – Cogload Jn 12273 1644 7.47

7 London Paddington Paddington – Didcot 150084 20604 7.28

8 Westbury Greater Bristol and Westbury 23534 3249 7.24

9 Evesham Oxfordshire and North Cotswolds 24536 3397 7.22

10 Taunton Cogload Jn – Penzance 12858 1873 6.86

11 Oxford Oxfordshire and North Cotswolds 62469 9120 6.85

12 Swindon – Challow Didcot – Pilning (via Badminton) 31526 4668 6.75

13 Eggesford Devon and Cornwall Branches 7498 1118 6.71

14 Swindon Didcot – Pilning (via Badminton) 16228 2423 6.70

15 Swindon – Kemble Greater Bristol and Westbury 9972 1522 6.55

184 Freight

Delay Minutes Trains Section Summary area per train delay affected affected

1 Newport Docks Wales 38717 387 100.04

2 Westerleigh Murco Bristol – Birmingham line 12305 139 88.53

3 Portbury Coal terminal Greater Bristol and Westbury 29391 399 73.66

4 Theale Reading – Cogload Jn 12397 180 68.87

5 Didcot Power Station Didcot – Pilning (via Badminton) 46402 702 66.10

6 Avonmouth Greater Bristol and Westbury 12111 220 55.05

7 Llanwern Sidings Wales 28938 572 50.59

8 Wentloog Wales 14238 304 46.84

9 East Usk Jn Wales 9460 204 46.37

10 Alexandra Dock Jn Wales 14670 331 44.32

11 Acton Paddington – Didcot 49671 1193 41.64

12 Merehead Quarry Reading – Cogload Jn 14353 361 39.76

13 Cardiff Tidal Wales 6956 226 30.78

14 Whatley Quarry Reading – Cogload Jn 8380 316 26.52

15 Westbury Down Greater Bristol and Westbury 11497 446 25.78

185 Appendix C Oxford station – theoretical layout OXFORD STATION - THEORETICAL LAYOUT

CURRENT PROPOSED

186 Appendix D Interurban route sections These figures are indicative of the overall maximum levels of capital expenditure that could be spent if all passengers benefit from the journey time improvement over the described sections.

Infrastructure cost which could be supported for Route Section Benefits calculated between: each minute of journey time saving – BCR of 2

Paddington – Reading Paddington – Acton, mainline only £129m

Reading – Swindon Swindon – Didcot £54m

Reading – Oxford Oxford – Radley £30m

Reading – Taunton (Westbury) Reading West – Theale £24m

Swindon – Bristol Temple Meads Swindon – Chippenham £23m

Bristol Parkway – Newport Pilning – Patchway £22m

Swindon – Bristol Parkway Swindon – Bristol Parkway £21m

Taunton – Exeter Taunton – Tiverton Parkway £18m

Bristol Temple Meads – Taunton Nailsea & Blackwell – Yatton £15m

Cheltenham – Bristol Parkway Yate and Cam & Dursley £13m

Reading – Basingstoke Reading West – Mortimer £12m

Westbury – Taunton Castle Cary – Taunton £12m

Bristol Temple Meads – Taunton Bridgwater – Highbridge & Burnham £11m

Exeter – Plymouth Totnes – Ivybridge £9m

Bristol Temple Meads – Westbury Avoncliff – Freshford £7m

Plymouth – Penzance St Germans – Menheniot £6m

Cardiff Central – Birmingham New Cardiff Central – Newport £6m Street Swindon – Cheltenham Swindon – Kemble £5m

Oxford – Worcester Oxford – Hanborough £5m

Westbury – Salisbury Dilton Marsh – Warminster £4m

Castle Cary – Dorchester Castle Cary – Yeovil Pen Mill £1m

187 Glossary

Term Meaning

ATOC Association of Train Operating Companies

BCR Benefit Cost Ratio

Capacity (of rolling Capacity is deemed to be the number of standard class seats and standing spaces stock) available on a train.

Capacity (of The capacity of a given piece of railway infrastructure is an assessment of the infrastructure) maximum number or mix of trains which could operate over it. This is quantified more formally through a Capacity Utilisation Index

Capacity (of The pedestrian capacity of a station is an assessment of the maximum number of stations) passengers it can acceptably handle, given the station layout at the site concerned

Connectivity The ability to travel between two stations or conurbations within an acceptable journey time or frequency options compared to other modes of transport

Control Period 4 The five-year period between 2009 and 2014 (CP4)

Control Period 5 The five-year period between 2014 and 2019 (CP5)

CUI Capacity Utilisation Index

DfT Department for Transport

DOO Driver-Only Operation, i.e. trains which operate without carrying a guard

Down Where referred to as a direction, ie. Down direction, Down peak, Down line, Down train, this generally refers to the direction that leads away from London

Dwell time The time a train is stationary at a station

ERTMS European Rail Traffic Management System. A future system, with equipment located in the driver’s cab, rather than at the lineside

FOC Freight Operating Company

Gap Where the network does not meet the specification or demand required of it, now or in the future

GRIP Guide to Railway Investment Projects – Network Rail’s process for project management of schemes through development and implementation

Headway The minimum interval possible between trains on a particular section of track

188 Term Meaning

HLOS High Level Output Specification – the DfT’s High Level Output Specification, which has specified to Network Rail the outputs that need to be delivered within a Control Period.

HST High Speed Train

Intermodal Trains freight trains which convey traffic which could be conveyed by road, rail or sea (eg. containerised traffic)

IEP Intercity Express Programme, the name given to the project to replace the existing High Speed Train fleet

JPIP Joint Performance Improvement Plans

Junction margin The minimum interval possible between trains operating over the same junction in conflicting directions

LDHS Long Distance High Speed

LENNON An industry database recording ticket sales: Latest Earnings Networked Nationally Over Night

Load Factor Load factor (relative to seats) is calculated as the passenger demand divided by the (relative to seats) number of standard class seats, expressed as a percentage.

Load Factor Total capacity includes both standard class seats and standing allowance. For (relative to total intercity-rolling stock, total capacity has been estimated at a ratio of 1.2 times capacity) the number of standard class seats as per HLOS, unless specific information is available. For the commuter rolling stock, it has generally been calculated on the basis of the total number of passengers that can be accommodated, allowing 0.45 square metre of space per person. When this information is not available for some of the commuter rolling stocks, total capacity has been estimated at a ratio of 1.4 times the number of standard class seats.

Load factor (relative to total capacity) is calculated as the passenger demand divided by total capacity as defined above, expressed as a percentage.

Loading Gauge The loading gauge is the profile for a particular route within which all vehicles or loads must remain to ensure that sufficient clearance is available at all structures

MOIRA Industry standard demand forecasting model

NPV Net Present Value

Option The options as identified in this document are aimed at addressing the highlighted gaps

ORR Office of Rail Regulation

PDFH Passenger Demand Forecasting Handbook. An industry document that summarises the effects of service quality, fares and external factors on rail demand

189 Term Meaning

Perturbation Describes disruption to the planned train service pattern

PIXC Passengers in excess of Capacity – This only applies to weekday commuter trains arriving in London between 07:00 and 09:59 and those departing between 16:00 and 18:59.

The PIXC measure for a (TOC) as a whole is derived from the number of passengers travelling in excess of capacity on all services divided by the total number of people travelling, expressed as a percentage. PIXC counts are carried out in autumn each year, either by means of a manual count on a typical weekday, or (increasingly commonly) by the calculation of average loads derived from automatic passenger counting equipment fitted on trains

The DfT has set limits on the level of acceptable PIXC at 4.5 percent on one peak (morning or afternoon) and three percent across both peaks. The DfT monitors the level of PIXC across peaks (both individually and combined)

Possession Where part of the infrastructure is closed to services to carry out maintenance, renewal or enhancement works

PPM Public Performance Measure, expressed as a percentage of trains running on time compared to those scheduled to run

Railsys A simulation modelling tool utilising proposed infrastructure with service provisions used to measure performance/reliability benefits

RES Regional Economic Strategy

RIFF Rail Industry Forecasting Framework

RPA Regional Planning Assessment

Route Availability the system which determines which types of locomotive and rolling stock can travel over any particular route. The main criteria for establishing RA usually concerns the strength of underline bridges in relation to axle loads and speed, although certain routes have abnormal clearance problems (eg. very tight tunnels). A locomotive of RA8 is not permitted on a route of RA6 for example

RSS Regional Spatial Strategy

RUS Route Utilisation Strategy

S&C Switch and Crossings

SDO Selective Door Opening – a means of ensuring that only selected doors open when a train is stopped at a station, leaving closed any doors which overhang short platforms. Not all rolling stock is fitted with this facility; those types of rolling stock which are so fitted vary in the permutations of doors which can be kept closed in this way

Seven Day Railway Network Rail initiative implementing techniques which will minimise the impact on passengers and freight of engineering work for maintenance, renewal and enhancements

190 Term Meaning

SMG Stakeholder Management Group

TEE Transport Economic Efficiency

TfL Transport for London

TEMPRO Trip End Model Presentation Program. Software application used by the DfT to provide detailed analysis of trip end, journey mileage, car ownership and population/ workforce planning data throughout the country

TOC Train Operating Company tph trains per hour

Train path A slot in a timetable for running an individual train

TWA Transport and Works Act

Up Where referred to as a direction, ie. Up direction, Up peak, Up line, Up train, this generally but not always refers to the direction that leads towards London

W10 The loading gauge which enables 9" 6"containers to be conveyed on conventional wagons

WCML West Coast Main Line

WSG Wider Stakeholder Group

WTT Working Timetable

191 Tel: 0203356 9595 London N19AG 90 York Way Kings Place Network Rail www.networkrail.co.uk

RUS132/September 2009