1

1

CONTENTS

Forward Page 2

Executive Summary Page 3

1. Strategic Case Page 8

2. Economic Case Page 19

3. Financial Case Page 26

4. Commercial case Page 31

5. Management Case Page 45

Appendices

Appendix A SELRAP’S Response to the Northern Route Utilisation Strategy - Draft for Consultation Page 48

Appendix B SELRAP's Response to the Consultation on the LTP Plan 2011-2016 Draft Strategy for North Yorkshire CC Page 53

Appendix C SELRAP's Response to the Consultation on the LTP Plan 2011-2021 Draft Strategy for Lancashire CC Page 56

Appendix D JMP Report Market Assessment and Cost benefit Analysis – Module 3 Page 60

Appendix E Evidence of protection of trackbed Page 76

Appendix F Train usage patterns Page 79

Appendix G SELRAP Membership & Support Page 81

Please contact: Derek Jennings, 3 Hamilton Road, Carr Hall, Barrowford, Lancashire, BB9 6DE Tel. 01282 690411 email: [email protected] or visit the SELRAP website: www.selrap.co.uk

SELRAP wishes to thank Colne Connected, who have kindly sponsored this document 2

FOREWORD It i s quite fitting that this Funding Development Plan is being launched in SELRAP’s 10 th anniversary year. Established in 2001, SELRAP’s campaign to see the railway line between Skipton and Colne re- opened as part of a strategic inter-regional route connecting both sides of the Pennines and catalyst for a wider scheme aimed at improving rail services across East Lancashire, has achieved overwhelming support from all quarters. As part of the campaign the group has hosted a number of high profile conferences. Aimed at providing a springboard for crucial developments, each attracted speakers more routinely to be found at national events.

Our 2006 conference paved the way for commissioning JMP Consulting to carry out a study to GRIP 1/2 level. Published in November 2007, the study concluded that, with a benefit-cost ratio of up to 2.43:1, the Skipton-Colne line has a promising future. Taking a peek into the future, Network Rail stated within the Lancashire & Cumbria Route Utilisation Strategy, published in 2008, that “Should the promoters of the scheme to reopen the route from Skipton to Colne be successful in securing funding, then it is likely that this line will have been reopened.” Speaking at our 2009 conference, Shadow Transport Ministers, MPs, MEPs, Consultants, Planners and Rail Industry Senior Figures, combined to conclude that the case for reopening the rail line between Skipton and Colne was proven beyond doubt. And that the time had come to move towards delivery of this landmark project.

Mindful of that crucial outcome, in 2010 SELRAP commissioned Jonathan Roberts Consulting to examine the options available for progressing the scheme and to recommend its future direction. The report looked at the organisational requirements and the timescales involved, and identified a project development consortium as the way forward. Further to this, on the suggestion of the Rail Freight Group, and with the backing of major rail infrastructure contractors, SELRAP is exploring the notion of a package that could see the provision of road/rail freight interchange and [eventual] electrification as a full east-west route.

At SELRAP’s tenth anniversary celebratory conference, held earlier this year, Local Authority representatives, Train Operating Company Senior Figures, MPs, an MEP and a Member of the House of Lords added to the consensus that only funding stands in the way of the rebuild. And that innovative packages embracing private investors, inclusion within future franchise bids, Train and Freight Operating Companies, and more, might be the way forward.

More recently still, on the advice of none other than the Rt. Hon. Theresa Villiers, the Minister of State for Transport, who indicated that Fund “can be used to address transport issues which act as a barrier to growth, for example through tackling traffic congestion, connecting people to job opportunities and maximising agglomeration benefits”, SELRAP has submitted a bid to the Regional Growth Fund.

SELRAP’s aim is now to secure further funding, be it public or private, for further studies to GRIP 3 /4 level, and beyond, together with sufficient capital, to see the reopening of the Skipton-Colne rail line project through to an early conclusion.

I have pleasure in recommending this report to you.

Thank you, in anticipation,

Derek Jennings Chairman, SELRAP July 2011

3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

SELRAP is the Skipton East Lancashire Rail Action Partnership. It was established on 10 th April 2001 with the objective of campaigning for the reinstatement of the railway between Skipton and Colne as an important part of the national network, to form a trans-Pennine route linking North and West Yorkshire and the Leeds City Region with the towns of Pennine Lancashire and the Manchester and Liverpool City regions.

A main objective of the Partnership is to repeat the success of other recent rail re-openings in Scotland and Wales, all of which have exceeded their predicted passenger numbers. Recently SELRAP has been in dialogue with national rail industry contractors, and are developing a strategy to achieve their aims.

Vision

To build a modern electrified rail line between Skipton and Colne carrying passenger and freight traffic and thereby:

• Providing a commuter service between the towns of [eastern] Pennine Lancashire, Airedale and Leeds • Offering improved connectivity for the towns of Central and Pennine Lancashire • Allowing commuter traffic from Skipton, Keighley, Airedale, and more, into Manchester via a reinstated Todmorden Curve • Establishing access to Manchester Airport from Skipton, Keighley and Airedale • Facilitating links to Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool and the proposed high speed rail link to London and Europe • Creating a link between the East and West Coast Main Lines and Ports • Avoiding the congestion in and around Manchester • Relieving pressure on the busy Huddersfield and Calder Valley trans-Pennine routes. • Allowing for the establishment of rail freight interchange distribution facilities Implementation costs

Estimates of the cost of constructing and operating a railway between Skipton and Colne were originally made by consultants in 2003 and have been updated in 2007 by JMP Consultants in a study carried out for SELRAP. This provided options including single and double track, but not the inclusion of freight traffic. The JMP report covered the level of detail required for Network Rail GRIP (Governance to Railway Investment Projects) Stage 1, which requires a level of costing confidence of ±40%.

The trackbed is largely intact and could be restored at a relatively low cost. Construction costs taken for this document were estimated by JMP Consulting, and involve the provision of a double track

4 railway between Skipton and Gannow Junction, with two new stations, and second platforms at all the stations on the Colne branch east of Gannow Junction - £80.7 million, (at 2007 prices). Additionally, the costs of inflation [since 2007] and electrification would add a further £40m, giving a total project cost of £120m. New innovation with combined electrification and embedded rail technology could significantly reduce these costs.

A further engineering study would be required to GRIP 3 level to provide up to date costings and the feasibility to run electric freight units at W10/12 loading gauge. The study [which it is anticipated will cost ¼ to ½ % of the total project costs] would provide up to date Annual costings and show improved financial feasibility that the inclusion of Freight would bring. (For the original annual costing guides, including demand and revenue forecasts, please see the JMP Consulting report published October 2007).

Passenger Operations

There are a number of revenue streams that may be generated by passenger operations.

It is clear that Network Rail greatly underestimate the potential for passenger growth with their current methods. They openly admitted this at the recent Northern RUS feedback meetings organised by Passenger Focus. The histories of Leeds station development; the Airedale line; Stirling to Alloa; Ebbw Vale etc. over the last few years, have all heavily underlined this. Fare increases may dent that growth by driving traffic back to the roads, but the increase in demand for rail travel continues to exceed Network Rail’s current methodology.

In addition to fares, there are parking revenues; and revenues from retail, commercial and residential developments in conjunction with stations. Elsewhere, these elements have contributed to the business cases for the railways concerned. While that may not, of necessity, be the case here, a level of contribution is expected. A number of companies have been identified that might have an interest in this type of development. Investigation of the possibilities is ongoing.

In summary, while it is not expected that the fare income alone will justify the re-instatement, it forms an important part of the jigsaw. Also, there is good reason to believe that the contribution from this source has been greatly under-estimated in the past.

Freight Operations

Because the earlier studies discounted freight, the detailed analysis of the freight possibilities is not as far advanced as those for the passenger side. Passenger traffic is linked to population centres, but freight is linked to business opportunities. So it is that with freight, there is an additional difficulty in estimating likely traffic over paths that do not currently exist.

However, there is also an opportunity here, in that once the link is in place, freight operators will begin to plan their business taking this into account. This effect is well illustrated by the Settle to Carlisle line. From a position where it was going to be closed, it has now become an important freight link from Hunterston to the Yorkshire power stations. The Skipton to Colne link will provide the lowest gradient route across the Pennines, an important economic factor for freight. It will be electrified, and to at least W10 loading gauge. At the fullest extent of the project, it will provide the only electrified rail link between the east and west coasts in the north of England.

We expect that revenue generated by freight will be a major part of the final submission.

5

Finally, we know from various sources that there is a drive to establish more inter-modal distribution points across the country, with up to three in the north-west. When the Skipton to Colne railway is reopened, Pennine Lancashire would be ideally located for one, there being no existing rival within an economically competing distance; and there are available brown-field sites of suitable size and location. In addition, the strength of manufacturing in the Pennine Lancashire area makes this possibility particularly promising. We have opened discussions with interested parties, and are further investigating possible providers of this type of development.

Community Benefits

Improvements to public transport will have positive effects in reducing accidents through encouraging modal shift away from car usage to safer public transport modes. JMP Consulting, using standard accident rates predicted that re-opening of the railway would lead to a reduction in the number of accidents in the range 129 to 193 and an accident cost saving of between £6.2 million and £10.2 million. (using 2007 figures) The grip 3 study will provide updated and accurate costings which will probably be increased.

Parallel Cyclepath & Footpath

The idea of a multi user cycle path from Colne to Skipton predates SELRAP but since the early days of SELRAP the campaign has supported the idea of a Cyclepath and footpath alongside the railway as part of the scheme. Such a multi user path might have to deviate at pinchpoints and would anyway link to roads at bridges to provide access.

As an integral part of the reinstatement of the Skipton – Colne railway and redoubling of the existing line to Burnley, there should be a multi user route alongside/parallel to the reinstated railway. This should link Burnley - Brierfield - Nelson – Colne - Foulridge - Kelbrook - Earby - Thornton - Elslack - Skipton.

The multi-user path should have a smooth tarmac surface and be accessible to walkers, cyclists, cycle trailers, tricycles, the disabled and children’s buggies. A parallel track for horse riders should be considered as to affordability, space available and its suitability (e.g. risk of the horses being startled) alongside fast moving trains. It is also likely to be unsuitable for horses in urban areas. Thus it would not be practical on the existing schools cyclepath in Nelson which runs alongside the railway and would be part of the route.

It should incorporate cycle parking at all stations (including Colne, Nelson, Brierfield, and Burnley Central) - there is cycle parking at Skipton station already. It would therefore enable those using the line to regularly commute to work to have an alternative to using the car for this part of their journey.

Wider economic benefits

Restoration of the Skipton to Colne rail link would improve connectivity for the towns of the Pennine Lancashire region. The consequent improvement in accessibility will lead to links with neighbouring City Regions of Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool, which are likely to improve the economic performance of the Pennine Lancashire and Pennine Yorkshire regions.

Investment in this rail project will result in a number of quantifiable impacts:

• Direct employment arising from railway construction. • Permanent employment from operation of the railway.

6

• Indirect employment created in businesses supplying products, materials and services. • New businesses attracted to the area because of improved passenger rail links offering: o Direct train services linking Manchester and Leeds o An expanding labour market with improved commuter links between Pennine Lancashire, North and West Yorkshire, Airedale and Leeds • The potential for rail freight: o to East and West Coast ports o Jobs created in the medium and long term servicing freight transportation and the freight interchange o Positive contribution to national energy saving strategies o Reduction in cost of freight transportation at a time when fuel costs are soaring o Use of electrified road transport units for short haul freight traffic o A reduction in heavy traffic on motorway and other road transport routes • Induced employment arising from increased spend in the local area. • Net additional spend by increased numbers of visitors to the area.

JMP Consulting calculated that the impact of the railway on Gross Value Added was estimated for up to £7million and 179 FTE jobs created depending on the option chosen. Further, figures published within the Leeds City Vision point to the creation of 150,000 new jobs over the next decade within the Leeds City Region, whilst the forecast for Manchester envisages a further 166,000 by 2026. The Skipton to Colne line will provide easy accessibility to these job opportunities from within the Pennine Lancashire area. Once freight is taken into account these figures should substantially increase. The Grip 3 study will provide accurate and up to date figures.

The new link will improve access for leisure trips to the Yorkshire Dales National Park and visitor destinations across Lancashire. The net annual additional visitor spend generated was estimated to be in the range £446,000 to £670,000 giving an impact of between £38 million and £57 million over a 60 year appraisal period. (using 2007 figures)

This revised development plan will provide greater benefits, but will require a new study to quantify to a greater degree of accuracy taking into account the changes to be made and the changes in fuel and other costings.

Inclusion

The 2003 Social Exclusion Unit report Making the Connections highlighted three key issues: • people may not be able to access services as a result of social exclusion • problems with transport provision and the location of services can reinforce social exclusion • socially excluded areas and individuals suffer disproportionately from road traffic impacts (e.g. higher accident rates, above average exposure to road traffic emissions, greater community severance) Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) give an indication of the levels of deprivation experienced in all wards in the country. Of the 279 wards along the line of the railway between Shipley, Skipton and Blackburn, 148 are in the most deprived quartile at the national level. Some of these wards rank highly in terms of deprivation – 18 are in the 2.5% most deprived nationally including six in the 500 most deprived wards.

7

Restoration of the rail link between Skipton and Colne will improve access to healthcare and higher and further education. In particular, it will improve access to specialist units in hospitals and to specialised courses offered by only some universities or colleges.

Environmental impact

Reopening of the Skipton to Colne railway would result in a net reduction in emission of greenhouse gases as a result of the transfer of travel demand from road to rail. The net reduction in CO 2 emissions and the monetary value that can be attached have been determined for the base, optimistic and pessimistic demand forecasts using JMP Consulting figures in 2007.

Positive policy demand forecast Central demand forecast

Net CO 2 saved (tonnes) 581 331

C saved (tonnes) 159 90

Total Value (to 2066) £1,623,000 £869,000

The transfer of freight from road to rail will greatly improve the CO 2 savings shown in the table above

National, regional and local support Lobbying by SELRAP has ensured that the alignment for a reinstated railway between Skipton and Colne has been safeguarded in development plans. The North Yorkshire and Lancashire Local Transport Plans for the period 2006 to 2011 contain statements of support in principle for the restoration of a rail link between Skipton and Colne.

There is strong support for re-opening of the railway from: • 487 individuals who are members of SELRAP’s campaign group • 65 affiliated groups • 44 UK MEPs (60% of UK MEPs) • 164 MPs • 101 Peers • 4 members of the Cabinet. • 4 members of the Scottish Parliament • 401 Councils including: o Lancashire & North Yorkshire County Councils o 24 unitary authorities o 102 town councils • 426 individual councillors • 555 Organizations • 145 businesses • 13 unions including all 3 Rail unions and the TUC • 182 non-government organizations • local and national faith leaders including: o the Archbishop of York o 19 Anglican and Catholic bishops

NB Figures correct as of 1st July 2011

8

THE STRATEGIC CASE

1. A brief introduction to the project

The Skipton East Lancashire Rail Action Partnership (“SELRAP”) was established in 2001 as a voluntary group to campaign for reinstatement of the 11.5 miles of former railway between Skipton in North Yorkshire and Colne in Lancashire. Representing a “missing link” in the national rail network, the trackbed of the former railway remains largely intact. Reinstatement of the former railway would –

• re-establish a through route of major national and regional strategic importance between the east and west sides of the Pennines; • provide an east-west freight artery linking the East and West Coast Main Lines and linking East and West Coast ports, avoiding the congestion of the Manchester Hub; • provide residents of Pennine Lancashire with access to the city region of Leeds for employment, education, leisure and other purposes; • provide residents of both Pennine Lancashire and the Aire Valley district of Yorkshire with access to the city regions of Central Lancashire, Manchester and Liverpool and to Manchester Airport for employment, education, leisure and other purposes; • secure economic growth, employment opportunities and sustainability in Pennine Lancashire and Yorkshire and • serve to regenerate the towns of Pennine Lancashire and Yorkshire, which are amongst the most deprived areas of the United Kingdom.

2. History of the railway between Skipton and Colne

Economic ties between Yorkshire and the North West were established with the construction of the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, which opened throughout in 1816 following the natural corridor through the Pennines. With links to the Mersey and Humber ports, it provided cheap and reliable transport, and was an important factor in the growth of industry across both regions.

Less than thirty years later, the Leeds and Bradford (Shipley to Colne) Extension Railway Act 1845 authorised the Leeds and Bradford Railway to build an extension of its line to Colne. The line reached Skipton in 1847, with the final section to Colne being opened on 2nd October 1848. To the west of the Pennines, the East Lancashire Railway completed the final section of its line from Manchester to Colne on 1 st February 1849. An end-on junction between the two lines created a through route linking Leeds with both Liverpool and Manchester. The Leeds and Bradford Railway was absorbed by the Midland Railway in 1852, while in 1859 the East Lancashire Railway merged with the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway.

With the benefits of rapid transport, the railway transformed the landscape of the Pennines and spawned the towns and cities we know today. The line fostered the growing ties between the communities of Leeds, Bradford, the Aire Valley and other parts of Yorkshire to the east of the Pennines with those of Pennine Lancashire, Manchester, Preston and Liverpool to the west.

3. Closure of the Colne-Skipton Line

Part of a through route linking important economic regions for over 120 years, the 11½ mile section between Skipton and Colne line was not listed for closure in the 1963 Beeching Report. Thus, at the

9 end of the 1960s the trans-Pennine route, of which it formed part, remained intact, but the section between Skipton and Colne failed to gain subsidy under the Transport Act of 1968.

Accordingly, on 31st January 1970 the passenger service between Skipton and Colne was withdrawn and that section of line closed, along with the intermediate stations at Thornton-in-Craven and Earby. [Other intermediate stations at Elslack and Foulridge had closed in 1952 and 1959 respectively, while a short branch line from Earby to Barnoldswick had closed in 1965.] The line between Skipton and Colne was later dismantled, thus severing the link between Pennine Lancashire and Yorkshire, and bringing to an end the line’s 120 year existence as part of a through route.

But that is not the end of the story. More than 40 years after its closure, the entire route from Skipton to Colne is protected against development that would prevent its re-use as a railway, the trackbed remains largely intact, and the route is widely acknowledged as a missing link between the economic regions of Yorkshire and the North West. So far as is known, there has been no abandonment order or transfer order in respect of the former railway, but it is nevertheless anticipated that it would probably be necessary to seek an order under the Transport and Works Act 1992 (as amended) to secure the necessary powers in connection with reinstatement of the railway.

4. Current rail infrastructure and services

Colne is now the terminus of a 7 mile single track branch line from Gannow Junction (Burnley), which originally formed part of the trans-Pennine route described earlier. At Gannow Junction the branch line joins the double track line from Halifax via Hebden Bridge to Blackburn and Preston.

With only one passenger train permitted on the branch line at any one time, and with no passing loops or sidings, the service provided between Colne and Burnley is limited to one train an hour in each direction. The service in question is a through service from Blackpool South via Preston and Blackburn. The single track sections of line at both ends of that route pose a risk to reliability, as the ability to recover the timetable in the event of perturbation is limited. The basic infrastructure precludes the use of the branch line for freight traffic.

Under the protective umbrella of the East Lancashire Community Rail Partnership, the profile of the Colne branch has in recent years been raised, but rail travel from parts of Pennine Lancashire to Leeds remains a non-viable option. And at double that of 100 years ago, the two hour journey time from Colne to Manchester remains an unattractive transport option. Frequent and unannounced cancellations due to late running, together with the use of antiquated and unattractive rolling stock, have added to the line’s problems.

Skipton is the principal intermediate station on the former ‘Midland’ main line from Leeds to Carlisle. The line from Skipton to Leeds and Bradford is electrified and provides commuter services to both destinations every 30 minutes, with additional trains in peak periods on weekdays. In addition to local services, there is an inter-city service from Skipton to London Kings Cross via Leeds departing in the morning peak and returning in the evening on weekdays.

West of Skipton, there are 12 passenger trains in each direction on weekdays operating on services between Leeds and Carlisle/Lancaster/Morecambe. The line through Skipton currently carries a substantial volume of freight traffic – coal trains from the port of Hunterston and the opencast mines of the Ayrshire coalfield, gypsum from Kirkby Thore and stone from the Tilcon quarry at Rylstone (Grassington) served by a freight-only branch from Skipton.

10

5. The History of SELRAP

Recognising the value of the former railway between Skipton and Colne for the reasons mentioned, SELRAP was established in 2001 as a voluntary group to campaign for its reinstatement. Ten years on, the group has over 1400 members, supporters, affiliated groups and supporting organisations. Support for SELRAP’s campaign is widespread, including members of both Houses of Parliament, UK members of the European Parliament and numerous councils across the North of England (including, crucially, both North Yorkshire and Lancashire County Councils). A full list of supporters is set out in Appendix G to this document, which can be found on page 81. Increasingly recognized, respected and known at all levels of Government and its regulatory bodies, within the rail industry and by the wider public, SELRAP's high profile campaign continues to push at the boundaries of what is achievable by a volunteer group.

6. Steer Davies Gleave Report, August 2003

Shortly after SELRAP had launched its campaign, and in connection with preparation of the Joint Lancashire Structure Plan, Lancashire County Council (in association with North Yorkshire County Council) commissioned the transport planning consultants Steer, Davies, Gleave to advise on the future of the disused rail alignment between Skipton and Colne. At that time, there were proposals by both County Councils to use significant sections of the former trackbed for the so-called A56 Villages Bypass in Lancashire and the Thornton-in-Craven Bypass in North Yorkshire. The remit for the study included a review of the options for reinstatement of the railway (either as single or double track, and either in isolation or in conjunction with the road scheme).

Steer Davies Gleave’s report, entitled “Future of the Skipton - Colne Railway Formation” was published in August 2003. In appraising the rail scheme to assess potential value-for-money, affordability and performance against a wider range of economic, social and environmental objectives, the report addressed engineering studies of both the rail and road proposals, together with the potential for local and inter-regional passenger and freight services that might use a reopened railway. The report concluded that if Lancashire County Council wished to maintain the option to reopen the Skipton- Colne railway, the alignment should be protected from development that would compromise its cost effective reinstatement, and that the most cost effective way of maintaining the rail alignment was to adopt an alternative route for the Villages Bypass proposal.

7. SELRAP Key Supporters Conference, April 2004

Almost certainly unique for a rail reopening campaign group, SELRAP has staged a series of increasingly high profile conferences, each with specific aims and objectives. The first such conference in 2004 laid down a marker for the group as a force to be reckoned with. Speakers included the late Robin Sissons, then secretary of the Rail Users’ Consultative Committee North West [now Passenger Focus], and Dr Paul Salveson, then chairman of the Association of Community Rail Partnerships, together with representatives from the world of politics. Setting the pattern for future conferences, delegates included representatives of Lancashire and North Yorkshire County Councils, local councils on both sides of the Pennines, economic partnerships, transport authorities and the rail industry.

Speakers described the Skipton to Colne line as "an infuriating missing link in the national railway system." Small wonder, therefore, that the route featured on the wish list of lines to be reopened produced by the Rail Users’ Consultative Committee North West at the request of the then Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott. Delegates heard that at stake were economic, environmental,

11 regeneration and social inclusion issues, and that SELRAP's case could only get stronger. To achieve its goal, SELRAP would need a “hard nosed case with a little emotional flourish”, the speakers concluded.

8. Joint Lancashire Structure Plan, March 2005

The Joint Lancashire Structure Plan (2001 -2016) adopted in 2005 recommended that the trackbed of the Skipton to Colne railway should be protected from development and retained for future transport use. The Plan stipulated that, before a final decision was made on the most appropriate alignment for the proposed Villages Bypass, further analysis of options would be undertaken to ensure that the potential for rail reinstatement was not precluded. Since adoption of the Plan, an alternative route for the proposed Villages Bypass that does not conflict with reinstatement of the Skipton to Colne railway has been published by Lancashire County Council. SELRAP has no view as to the merits of the Villages Bypass proposal, beyond ensuring that it does not prevent reinstatement of a double track railway.

9. Regional Transport Strategy, 2006

In 2005 the North West Regional Assembly commissioned consultants to develop a methodology for determining regional priorities for investment in transport to be included in the Regional Transport Strategy. The consultants’ report, published in February 2006, recorded that they had tested a list of regionally significant transport interventions against a set of economic, environmental and social policy criteria, including value for money and deliverability.

Schemes included in the list of ‘First Priority Interventions under Investigation or Proposed for Investigation’ included rail capacity improvements to the Central Manchester rail network, and improved links between East Lancashire and Manchester via the Blackburn to Bolton line. The improvement of rail links between the Central Lancashire and Leeds City Regions (including re-opening of the Skipton to Colne line) scored well in the prioritisation, falling into the second quartile of potential interventions and being included in the list of ‘Second Priority Interventions under Investigation or Proposed for Investigation’. Proposed improvements to the A56 road east of Colne did not perform as well in the prioritisation and were not included in the Regional Transport Strategy.

The Regional Transport Strategy was subsequently embodied in the North West of England Regional Spatial Strategy to 2021 published in September 2008. A key component of the Regional Spatial Strategy was a vision for a Central Lancashire City Region focused on the towns of Blackpool, Preston, Blackburn and Burnley, and supported by a high quality public transport network. The expectation was that economic growth in the larger towns would be a catalyst for regeneration and growth in smaller towns such as Nelson and Colne.

Improvement of the City Region’s internal and external transport links in line with the priorities for transport investment and management was seen as one of the main elements of the Regional Spatial Strategy. Emphasis was placed on improving the accessibility of key employment locations, as well as Preston which was identified as the ‘gateway’ to and the strategic public transport interchange for the City Region. The greater use of rail for freight and investment in rail freight terminals and private sidings was encouraged.

12

10. SELRAP Conference: “Reconnecting your Region .. Moving Rail Forward”, October 2006

Between them representing the rail industry, local and county councils, regional government, transport pressure groups and the media, 70 delegates heard a high profile team of speakers, which included MPs, an MEP, transport planners and rail industry senior figures offer their support for and advice on the way forward for SELRAP’s campaign to see the Skipton to Colne railway re-opened as part of the national network. The speakers concurred with the findings of the 2003 Steer Davies Gleave study, insofar as it concluded that re-instating the Skipton-Colne line as a double track railway was technically feasible and would offer the greatest amount of operational flexibility. That said, the speakers were also united in suggesting the need to challenge the business case outlined within the study.

11. The Northern Way – Strategic Direction for Transport, March 2007

In 2007 the Northern Way, a collaboration between the three northern Regional Development Agencies, submitted evidence to the Treasury and to the Department for Transport in advance of the Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review. Part of that evidence comprised the Northern Way’s Strategic Direction for Transport. Issues identified included the need for stronger transport links between the northern city regions and a focus on the trans-Pennine corridor to support growth in city region economies. It proposed that investment in rail be focused on resolving capacity constraints on the trans-Pennine routes, around Manchester and on routes to the main northern ports. It is SELRAP’s view that reinstatement of the line between Skipton and Colne would contribute to this strategy by providing an increase in overall trans-Pennine rail capacity and by improving journey times between main centres in the Leeds City Region and towns in Pennine Lancashire.

12. JMP Consulting report, November 2007

The 2006 conference was the springboard for SELRAP commissioning JMP Consulting to carry out a study to establish the feasibility of restoring the Skipton to Colne railway. Published in November 2007, the widely acclaimed report by JMP Consulting confirmed beyond doubt the local, regional and strategic value of reinstating the Skipton to Colne line, and reinforced SELRAP’s long-held belief that the Skipton to Colne railway has a promising future.

The JMP Consulting report took as its starting point the earlier Steer Davies Gleave report, with particular reference to the business case for reopening the Skipton to Colne line. It updated the earlier study’s estimates of reinstatement costs and annual operating costs, and looked at a number of possible passenger service patterns that might be provided and calculated benefit/cost ratios for the various possibilities. As detailed later in this document, the final section of the report looked at the wider environmental and social benefits that would flow from the project, and concluded that there were worthwhile benefits for both East Lancashire and North Yorkshire.

In accordance with DfT requirements, the figures used within the JMP Consulting report included loadings of 66% for capital costs and 41% for operating costs. The report also used the current method for estimating passenger flows, which Network Rail has subsequently recognised underestimates the likely flows. Even with those very conservative assumptions the report concluded that a benefit/cost ratio of up to 2.43 might be expected. [In other words, for every £1 spent on reopening the route and providing train services on it, the quantifiable benefits for doing so would be £2.43].

13

In summary, the JMP Consulting report concluded that –

• The entire trackbed is safeguarded against development that would prevent its re-use as a railway, and construction of a single or double track railway, at a cost of between £43 Million and £81 Million is feasible. [The latter figure includes the cost of re-doubling the line between Colne and Gannow Junction (Burnley) and provision of second platforms at stations on that line.] • The Skipton to Colne line has both strategic and regional value, and could be the catalyst for restoration of direct rail links between East Lancashire and Manchester. • A re-instated railway would link the city regions of Liverpool, Manchester, and Central Lancashire with Leeds, and would provide a link between the East and West Coast Main lines, and between East and West coast ports. • Double-track reinstatement would provide the greatest amount of operational flexibility, which is potentially important for longer-distance services that might have to be pathed through constrained areas elsewhere. • Reopening the Skipton to Colne route would offer an opportunity to serve areas within the corridor both by express services and local services. • The towns of the Aire Valley corridor have a strong rail market (with over 7 million passengers per annum), yet those of the East Lancashire Line corridor offer a still larger catchment area. • Passenger figures for the line could be as high as 750,000 by 2024. • The introduction of a congestion charge in city centres would trigger a modal shift from car to public transport for commuting to the benefit of all railways within commuting distance. • The scheme enjoys strong local, regional and national support, and offers value for money.

13. Lancashire & Cumbria Route Utilisation Strategy, August 2008

As part of its statutory obligations, Network Rail is required to produce Route Utilisation Strategies for the various regions of the rail network, considering issues affecting the region’s railways over a ten year period from the date of publication and giving a view on longer term issues in the years beyond that period. The purpose of the process is to provide a basis for the development and delivery of timetables, infrastructure maintenance and renewals. The process focuses on issues of line capacity, making best use of the available capacity and identifying capacity enhancement schemes that provide value for money by addressing capacity constraints in an affordable way. Drafts of the Route Utilisation Strategies are issued by Network Rail for consultation, before the final document is published.

The most directly relevant Route Utilisation Strategy is that for Lancashire & Cumbria, the geographical area of which covers the lines from Skipton to Carlisle, Farrington Curve Junction (near Preston) to Hall Royd Junction (near Todmorden), Gannow Junction to Colne, and Hellifield to Blackburn. SELRAP took part in the consultation process preceding publication of the final document in August 2008. Relevant extracts from that document are as follows:

The line between Skipton and Colne is closed and has been completely out of service since 1970. As a consequence it is not possible to travel by rail between conurbations on the route, and between most of the route and Leeds. A number of communities on the route between Nelson and Skipton suffer from deprivation and would benefit from improved links to Leeds. In addition, the Leeds – Hebden Bridge – Blackburn – Preston route currently has a service frequency of one train per hour and to access it passengers from Nelson and Colne would either have to interchange at Accrington or walk

14 across Burnley town centre to reach Manchester Road station on the Copy Pit line, having alighted Burnley Central. For passengers in Burnley this service via Skipton and Colne would be 10 minutes faster than the existing one via the Calder Valley. The line may be a suitable alternative to routeing existing and additional trains through the Calder Valley, especially freight due to the gentler gradients.

• A study commissioned on behalf of local stakeholders has identified a potential high-level case for reinstatement of the line and services between Skipton and Colne. The most significant issue now is how the scheme could be funded. It is recommended that the alignment is protected to give stakeholders time to identify potential sources of funding and commission a more detailed feasibility study. • In a scenario of high mode-shift from road to rail, additional sources of investment funds could become available, in which case the route between Colne and Skipton could be a candidate for addition to the network. As long as doing so is affordable, the alignment should be protected for future railway use. • In the longer term, should the promoters of the scheme to reopen the route from Skipton to Colne be successful in securing funding, then it is likely that this line will have been reopened.

14. SELRAP Conference: “The Skipton to Colne Railway - The Key to Unlocking a Strategic National Transport Corridor”, November 2009

The Report by JMP Consulting and publication of the Lancashire & Cumbria Route Utilisation Strategy formed the backdrop to SELRAP’s 2009 conference. With the parallel aims of raising still further the profile of its ongoing campaign to see the Skipton to Colne railway reopened as part of the national network, and offering embryonic pointers towards the formation of a funding partnership for restoration of the route as England’s first rail reopening for more than 10 years, this was SELRAP’s most ambitious event ever. Between them representing Parliament, local authorities, the rail industry, political parties, passenger transport authorities, the media, national parks, the world of business and commerce, trade unions and SELRAP membership, 100 delegates heard a robust line-up of high profile speakers, many of them being more routinely associated with national rail conferences: • David Curry, then Conservative Member of Parliament for Skipton & Ripon • Gordon Prentice, then Labour Member of Parliament for Pendle • Stephen Hammond MP, then Conservative Shadow Transport Minister • Chris Davies, Liberal-Democrat MEP North West • Norman Baker MP, then Liberal Democrat Shadow Secretary of State for Transport and now Transport Minister in the Coalition Government • Alan Beswick, Director of JMP Consulting • Dr Paul Salveson, then Head of Government and Community Strategies, Northern Rail • Adrian Shooter, Chairman, Chiltern Railways • Peter Frost, Managing Director, Kilbride Group • Steven Cochrane, Head of Strategy PLLACE (Pennine Lancashire Leaders and Chief Executives Group) and architect of the Mid Pennine Multi Area Agreement

All the speakers praised SELRAP for its professional approach, and went on to offer their support for reinstatement of the Skipton to Colne railway as part of a new trans-Pennine route linking the city regions of Liverpool, Manchester, Central Lancashire and Leeds, together with their suggestions for progressing the scheme to reality. The combined view of the high profile speakers was that the

15 case for reopening the rail line between Skipton and Colne is proven beyond doubt, and that the time had come to move towards delivery of this landmark project.

Summing up the speakers’ comments in his closing remarks, Conference Chairman Colin Speakman said: “At the national level, we need to change the Department for Transport and Treasury methods of appraisal. At the regional level, we need to understand the city region concept. And at local level, we need to start the delivery process.” Mindful of the views expressed at this landmark event, SELRAP has since moved to the next phase of seeking funding for rebuilding the railway between Skipton and Colne.

15. Jonathan Roberts Consulting, 2010

Following the successful conference in November 2009, there was a strong consensus that SELRAP’s focus should move from campaigning to project delivery. Accordingly, in February 2010 SELRAP commissioned Jonathan Roberts Consulting to examine the options and to recommend future direction. The principal conclusion of the resulting report was that the two tasks of achieving political acceptance and preparing a finalised business case should be undertaken in parallel, rather than sequentially. The report looked at the organisational requirements and the timescales involved, identified the need for a project development consortium and identified the likely stakeholders who should form part of such a consortium, and recommended that the consortium’s remit should be wider than simply the Skipton to Colne line.

16. Draft Local Transport Plan, North Yorkshire County Council, July 2010

In July 2010, North Yorkshire County Council issued a consultation document as a precursor to producing its Local Transport Plan for the period 2011 – 2016. SELRAP participated in that consultation, and a copy of its response (based the Vision, 5 Objectives [Part 1] & Delivery [Part 2] is set out in Appendix B to this document, which can be found on page 53.

17. Draft Local Transport Plan, Lancashire County Council, November 2010

In November 2010 Lancashire County Council issued a consultation document as a precursor to producing its Local Transport Plan for the period 2011 – 2021. SELRAP participated in that consultation, and a copy of its response (based on the questions listed on the Response Form) is set out in Appendix C to this document, which can be found on page 56.

18. 10 th Anniversary Celebrations, April 2011

A well attended conference with high profile speakers was held in Skipton to mark the tenth anniversary of SELRAP’s campaign to secure reinstatement of the Skipton to Colne railway. Current Chairman Derek Jennings, founding Chairman Steve Broadbent, and executive member David Walsh outlined SELRAP’s ultimate vision of a modern double track electrified railway linking the city region of Leeds via Pennine Lancashire to the city regions of Central Lancashire, Manchester and Liverpool. Those who attended to congratulate SELRAP on its achievements to date and to promise their future support included: • Andrew Stephenson, Conservative Member of Parliament for Pendle • Julian Smith, Conservative Member of Parliament for Skipton and Ripon • Lord Tony Greaves (Liberal Democrat) • Brian Simpson, Labour MEP with responsibility for transport

16

• Tim Ashton, Cabinet Member for Transport, Lancashire County Council • Richard Owens, Assistant Director (Integrated Passenger Transport), North Yorkshire County Council • Drew Haley of Northern Rail • Alan Dare of Chiltern Railways The following day there were two very successful walks along the trackbed of the former railway, one starting from Colne and the other from Thornton-in-Craven. Over 50 people participated in the walks, which met at Café Cargo in Foulridge where the anniversary celebrations continued. All who attended the events over the two days agreed that SELRAP’s campaign continues to go from strength to strength, and that it can only be a question of time before it reaches a successful conclusion.

18. Northern Route Utilisation Strategy, May 2011

Network Rail has now embarked upon a second generation of Route Utilisation Strategies, one of which covers the whole of the North of England. As in the case of the earlier Route Utilisation Strategies, a draft of the proposed Northern Route Utilisation Strategy was first issued for consultation. A copy of the submissions made on behalf of SELRAP as part of that consultation is set out in Appendix A to this document, which can be found on page 48. The final version of the Northern Route Utilisation Strategy was published in May 2011. Although no specific reference is made to the line between Skipton and Colne, the Foreword to the document makes clear that the recommendations made in the underlying first generation Route Utilisation Strategies continue to apply and form part of the strategy. Accordingly, the position remains as set out in the final version of the Route Utilisation Strategy for Lancashire & Cumbria published in August 2008.

19. The proposed infrastructure of the project

The initial objective would be to reinstate a double track railway between Skipton and Colne. The whole of that route is protected for transport use by the relevant county and district councils. There has been little encroachment onto the trackbed of the former railway, save that it is crossed by the Skipton by-pass and by Vivary Way in Colne. It is proposed that the route should be constructed to at least W10 gauge.

It would as a minimum also be necessary to upgrade the existing single track branch line between Colne and Gannow Junction (Burnley). It is proposed that double track should be restored over that section, and that it too should be enhanced to at least W10 gauge. It would be logical to extend gauge enhancement to include the existing double track railway between Gannow Junction and Preston/Farrington Junction on the West Coast main line, and the existing Aire Valley railway between Skipton and Leeds.

It may also be appropriate that the whole route from Skipton via Colne and Gannow Junction (Burnley) to Preston/Farrington Junction should be electrified as a direct extension of the existing Aire Valley electrification. Not only would that provide an electrified route connecting the East and West Coast main lines, but it would connect at Preston with “the Lancashire triangle” recently approved for electrification.

A major component of the proposal is to utilise the route’s natural advantages (the easiest gradients of any trans-Pennine route and the absence of tunnels of any significant length) to afford a gauge enhanced route for freight traffic. With that in mind, it is proposed to establish one or more freight

17 interchange facilities within the line of the route. In conjunction with the introduction of passenger services on the route, it is anticipated that a number of intermediate stations would be required.

It would be desirable for the project to be carried out in conjunction with other parallel proposals, such as the Todmorden curve to facilitate commuter traffic to Manchester, and the reinstatement of double track and electrification of the Blackburn to Bolton line to connect with the recently announced electrification of “the Lancashire triangle” and to provide enhanced access to Manchester and Manchester Airport.

The details of the proposal in relation to infrastructure, including the location of the proposed inland freight interchange facilities and passenger stations, are necessarily far from finalised at this stage. It is anticipated that these will be developed as the project moves forward through the GRIP process.

20. The proposed operation

It is anticipated that the re-established trans-Pennine route created by the reinstatement of the line between Skipton and Colne could provide both passenger and freight services – not only over the section of railway to be reinstated between Skipton and Colne, but also over such adjacent sections of railway as might conveniently be operated in conjunction with that section.

Map illustrating the fit within the s trategic network for the Skipton -Colne line as part of a new east -west route One aspect of this would be the operation of freight services to and from the proposed freight interchange facilities referred to above. To that end, paths would be required for freight services between the proposed freight interchange facilities and other freight terminals, whether at ports (for example, Hull, Immingham and Liverpool) or at other inland freight terminals (for example, Trafford Park). The other aspect would be the operation of passenger services over the reinstated section of railway between Skipton and Colne and over adjacent sections of railway, including in particular the sections affording the towns of Pennine Lancashire access to the city regions of Leeds, Manchester and Central

18

Lancashire. To that end, it would seem logical for passenger services to be integrated with: • the existing Aire Valley service between Leeds and Skipton, • the existing service between Colne and Preston, and • new services between Pennine Lancashire and Manchester – either via Blackburn and Bolton to Manchester Piccadilly and Airport, or [after reinstatement of the Todmorden curve] via Todmorden and Rochdale, to Manchester Victoria. As in the case of the infrastructure, the details of the proposal in relation to the services to be operated are necessarily far from finalised at this stage. It is anticipated that these will be developed as the project proceeds, both as part of the GRIP process and in discussion with the Department for Transport and/or Network Rail in relation to future franchising arrangements. The possibility of incorporating other adjacent routes into the proposal, where this would make strategic and operational sense, is not discounted. 21. Perceived transport benefits

At this stage it is only possible to outline the perceived transport benefits of the proposal in generalised terms, but the proposal would: • provide the only electrified link from the East Coast main line to the West Coast main line between the North London line and the Edinburgh / Glasgow corridor; • provide a convenient route (electrified through much of its length) between the ports of the West Coast and the ports of the East Coast, avoiding the congested Manchester Hub; • provide the most easily graded trans-Pennine route that would be ideally suited to freight traffic and, by virtue of the absence of any significant tunnels, could accordingly be easily enhanced to at least W10 gauge; • meet the strong demand for trans-Pennine freight movements, restricted at present by the shortage of paths on the existing trans-Pennine routes, which are not only congested but also in need of gauge enhancement; • provide an alternative to the Stalybridge route avoiding the congestion of the Manchester Hub and constituting a useful diversionary route; • provide residents of Pennine Lancashire with access to the city region of Leeds, for business, employment, education, leisure and other purposes; • provide residents of Pennine Lancashire and the Aire Valley district of Yorkshire with access to the city regions of Central Lancashire, Manchester and Liverpool, and to Manchester Airport, for business, employment, education, leisure and other purposes; • secure a major reduction in road congestion on trans-Pennine routes (including in particular the M62), which hinders travel between Pennine Lancashire and the conurbations mentioned; • provide an ideal test bed for innovation to achieve a reduction in rail infrastructure costs in line with the recent report by Sir Roy McNulty.

22. Conclusion

SELRAP believes that this proposal offers the potential of a major improvement to the existing rail network and the services which it provides at minimal cost by seeking to transfer significant volumes of freight traffic from road to rail, and by creating an environment for new and enhanced passenger services. The proposal has the potential for unlocking private funding, while the emergence of freight is a significant component means that the position is now even more favourable than was anticipated in the JMP Consulting report. Now is the time to move forward.

19

THE ECONOMIC CASE

In evaluating the whole scheme it is vital to address all angles that offer added value. Thus, the inclusion within this section of the economic, social and environmental benefits of the Skipton-Colne rail reopening project. Included within this section is evidence from: 1. JMP Consulting Study Report , commissioned by SELRAP: “ Re-opening of the Skipton to Colne Railway ” (October 2007) - Modules 4, 5 and 6: “Wider Economic, Environmental and Social Case” 2. Pennine Lancashire Quarterly Intelligence Report - Housing and Economic Situation (January 2011) 3. Pennine Lancashire: a transformational agenda – a SELRAP analysis 4. Local Transport Plan 2011 - 2021 – Draft Strategy for Lancashire – Response to Consultation (See Appendix B)

Report: Wider Economic Benefits JMP Consulting Study 1. Additional benefits The relationship between the economic performance of the wider corridor of the project and the improved accessibility to/from the area that would result from re-opening the Skipton-Colne rail line is recognised to be extremely difficult to adequately quantify. That said, there are more direct and potentially quantifiable impacts from the investment: i) Additional employment in the region. ii) Additional visitor spend within the local economy. Employment benefits comprise five elements:

• Direct employment arising from railway construction followed by permanent employment during the operational phase.

• Indirect employment arising from employment created in business supplying products, materials and services both during the construction and operational phase.

• Employment gained from businesses relocating to the area as a result of the improved accessibility

• Induced employment arising from persons employed directly and indirectly spending part of their income in the local area leading to further local employment.

• Induced employment resulting from business relocating to the area as a result of the new railway

Direct employment benefits during construction of the railway were estimated by division of the value for gross output per employee for the construction industry into the overall estimate of construction costs to give the total number of person years of employment. Using Treasury conventions, this figure was then adjusted to give a total of 62 full time equivalent (FTE) jobs created on completion of the project.

Gross output figures within the construction industry (Annual Business Inquiry, 2005) were assumed. Adjusted to 2007 levels, this represents an increase in GDP of £129,300 per head.

20

Using figures extracted from “Lancashire County Council, Lancashire Profile, Sector Profiles, Construction” [which uses employment data from The Office of National Statistics combined with that from the 2004 Annual Business Inquiry], Gross Value Added [adjusted to 2007 levels] for the construction sector in the region was £44,200 per employee.

An assessment of the direct employment benefits during operation can be made through application of the value for gross output per employee for the transport sector for each additional full time person employed. Adjusted to 2007 levels, a value of £51,300 for the transport sector was assumed (source: Lancashire County Council, Lancashire Profile, Sector Profiles, Transport, Storage and Communication).

The operational benefits associated with the reopening of the Skipton-Colne rail line were illustrated with a number of service options. The direct result of these would be the creation of up to 22 new full time rail-based jobs ….. with a GVA of up to £1.1 million

Indirect and induced employment and output benefits during the construction and operational phase:

The ripple effects of major new construction projects also impact on local economies. Input-output multipliers recognised within the rail industry suggest the creation of up to 56 full time equivalent jobs would be created during construction of the Skipton-Colne line ….. with a GVA of up to £2.2 million. And up to 39 full time equivalent jobs operation ….. with a GVA of up to £1.1 million.

Summary: • Up to 179 jobs created during construction & operational phase • Up to £7 million GVA pa. • Up to £138 million economic benefits over 60 year appraisal period NB Clearly, as the project has now widened to include a preference for double track throughout, together with an option for the provision for freight facilities, and electrification, the above figures are set to increase dramatically

2. Additional Visitor Spend (Tourism)

Reopening the Skipton-Colne railway would improve accessibility [and tourism-spend] to the tourist destinations in North & West Yorkshire for residents of the wider North West, and vice versa. Further tourist-spend could also result through direct rail related activities. Figures drawn from readily available tourist data for both Lancashire and Yorkshire point to average spends [@2007 prices] of £171 for overnight stays (16%) and £26.50 (84%) for day visitors. Allied to demand forecasts for induced travel made possible by reopening the Skipton-Colne line, taking displaced expenditure into account, gross additional annual visitor expenditure within the local economy of up to £1.54 million could be expected.

Summary: Reopening the Skipton-Colne rail line could result in gross additional annual visitor expenditure within the local economy of up to £2 million

21

3. Environmental and Safety Impacts

Improvements to public transport can have positive impacts on local air quality and climate change, through modal shift from private car and corresponding reduction in pollutants such as CO2 and particulate. Research has shown that taking the equivalent journey by train rather than by car reduces emissions by around a factor of five.

Summary: • Up to 4.7 million vehicle kilometres saved annually

• Up to 753 tonnes vehicle CO2 (Greenhouse gas) saved annually

• Social value [2066] of greenhouse gas saving: up to £1.6 million

• Provision of the rail service could be expected to have a key role in limiting future growth of car traffic

4. Accident Benefits Improvements to public transport will also have positive effects in reducing congestion and in reducing accidents through encouraging modal shift away from car usage to safer public transport modes. Reinstatement of the railway between Skipton and Colne would reduce the total distance travelled by car by up to 4.7million kilometres in the opening year.

Using standard accident rates derived from the DfT it is possible to estimate the reduction on the total number of [road] accidents and consequently the number of fatalities and severe injuries that would be avoided by reopening the Skipton-Colne rail line. Thus, over the [60 year] appraisal period, it is estimated that up to 193 casualties (fatalities, severe injuries and slight injuries) would be avoided. Further, by applying standard DfT valuations it is estimated that cost savings [re those casualties] of up to £10 million would be attributed to reopening the Skipton-Colne line.

Summary: Over appraisal period: • Up to 193 casualties (fatalities and severe injuries) would be avoided by reopening Skipton-Colne line

• Actual cost savings re above casualties of up to £10 million made by reopening Skipton-Colne line NB Above figures apply only to 11.5 miles of line between Skipton & Colne. Taking into account the total modal shift [from road to rail] over the wider corridor of the new route that would be created by reopening the line, further [casualty & cost] savings can be expected .....

5. Social Inclusion

A report by the Social Exclusion Unit (SEU) report “Making the Connections” outlines the fact that transport issues are often a common denominator for the exclusion of many disadvantaged groups and communities.

Poor [or lack of] transport provision means that individuals can become cut off from employment, education and training opportunities, thus perpetuating their low skills base and inability to secure a

22 living wage. People can become isolated from social networks and services, thus undermining quality of life ….. leading to social exclusion / deprivation / alienation ….. and undermining social cohesion.

It is also a fact that socially deprived areas suffer most from the effects of road traffic ….. with higher than average accident rates and exposure to exhaust emissions.

The Central Lancashire City Region Development Programme states that “ By 2020 Central Lancashire will be a globally competitive and sustainable City Region distinguished by its quality of life, connectivity, and access to opportunities ”.

The Draft Regional Economic Strategy for the region identifies a number of key challenges if the ambitions outlined above are to be achieved. Towards this end, flagged up within the Lancashire Economic Strategy is the need for employment generation and entrepreneurship, together with the requirement to address barriers (poor / lack of transport) to work if marginalisation of individuals & communities is to be avoided.

The need for investment in improving key sustainable transport links both within the Central Lancashire City Region, and to neighbouring City Regions (inc. economic drivers Manchester & Leeds) is identified as a significant challenge if the above is to be achieved.

Summary: • Poor [or lack of] transport provision can reinforce social exclusion • Socially deprived areas suffer most from the effects of road traffic • Poor [or lack of] transport provision means that individuals can become cut off from employment, education and training opportunities • Investment in improving key transport [rail] links between Central Lancashire City Region, Manchester & Leeds cited if the above is to be addressed

6. Access to further education

In order to close the ‘skills gap’ and develop a ‘knowledge economy’, a priority for the North West is to address the region’s relatively low levels of educational attainment compared with its competitors.

The availability and cost of transport are important factors in accessing educational opportunities and the high cost and poor availability of public transport can deter people from taking up educational opportunities. Better access to all these opportunities and facilities is essential if skills are to be improved and social exclusion in the regions is to be reduced. More effective public transport networks have a key role to play in providing that access.

Reinstating the Skipton to Colne railway service will improve accessibility to higher and further education opportunities in Accrington, Nelson, Colne, Burnley, Blackburn, Preston, Skipton, Keighley, Bingley, Shipley and Leeds.

Summary • Need to close ‘skills gap’ & develop ‘knowledge economy’ in North West • Effective & affordable transport provision an important factor for accessing educational opportunities • Reopening Skipton-Colne line will improve accessibility

23

7. Access to healthcare & other services

The Social Exclusion Unit states that, over a 12-month period, 1.4 million people miss, turn down or choose not to seek medical help because of transport problems.

But analysis by Lancashire County Council shows that it is not just access to education and health but actually to a range of services that is particularly poor in the most rural areas of the county.

The re-instatement of the Skipton-Colne railway will improve access to healthcare and other services throughout the wider corridor of the route ….. including sites in Skipton, Airedale, Bradford, Nelson, Burnley, Accrington, Blackburn, Leeds and Manchester. These accessibility benefits apply equally to

Summary • Poor, or lack of effective transport provision an issue for access to healthcare & other services • Reopening Skipton-Colne line will improve accessibility re above staff as well as to users.

8. Indices of Multiple Deprivation

Indices of Multiple Deprivation are another way of looking at the issue of social exclusion, and give an indication of the levels of deprivation experienced in each ward. These are scored for deprivation, and then ranked on that score. The higher the score, the more deprived.

Showing areas of deprivation throughout the wider corridor of the Skipton -Colne line.

Wards within one kilometre of the route were selected. Research indicates that, of the 279 wards along the line of the railway between Shipley, Skipton and Blackburn, 148 are in the most deprived quartile at the national level.

Some of these wards rank very highly in terms of deprivation – 18 are in the top 2.5% nationally, of which six are in the top 1.25% (i.e. the top 500) meaning that they are amongst the most deprived wards in Britain. Many of these wards have a high minority ethnic group population, and there are understood to be strong connections between the ethnic communities of Pennine Lancashire and West Yorkshire.

24

9. Car ownership

Most of the UK population is able to benefit from the opportunities obtainable from car ownership. That said, many young and elderly people ..... and those from minority ethnic groups [typically, those outlined previously] do not have access to a car. Whilst it is true that, nationally, 70% of households either own or have access to a car, in some parts of the wider corridor that would be created by re- opening of the Skipton to Colne railway that figure is just 50%. Low car ownership tends to be highest in more deprived urban areas. And is likely to impact on access to jobs and services in the region and have acute implications for social inclusion.

NB Adequate public transport provision is essential, even in areas with higher car ownership levels, since all family members will not necessarily have access to a vehicle, and thus travel when they need to. Deprivation is not the exclusive preserve of urban areas. Rural areas dependent on agriculture and tourism are all also often the subject of minimum wages and limited access to low cost housing, compounded by poor access to employment, shops, education, health facilities et al.

10. Summary of Social Inclusion Benefits

The potential social inclusion benefits for re-opening the railway are wide ranging. The area around the railway includes some of the most socially excluded communities in the country as witnessed by the Indices of Multiple Deprivation which measure all the aspects of inclusion, including access to employment, education and training opportunities and healthcare.

When coupled with below-average car ownership levels and/or access to a car within the wider corridor of the route, re-opening of the Skipton-Colne railway could make significant improvements to the quality of life for its residents.

11. Additional Comment: Passenger

Since publication of the JMP report [in 2007], two new lines have been opened in Scotland and Wales, both of which now carry 150 % of the volume of traffic projected.

It is clear that, using current methods of appraisal, the potential for passenger growth is greatly underestimated.

The ATOC report “Connecting Communities”, published in 2009 recommends that trip rates from similar rail served settlements (obtained from data on station entries and population) be compared.

We have therefore included an appendix E, covering passenger usage figures and projections in greater detail.

12. Additional Comment: Freight

The brief and terms of reference of the JMP Report did not cover the impact of freight services in terms of Social, Economic and Environmental Benefits. The SELRAP rail scheme involves restoring both passenger and freight services. Freight is a central component of its Plan. The ultimate aim is to provide a double track electrified railway by enhancing the existing East Lancashire line to Colne and by reopening the Colne to Skipton Railway to link up with electrified Aire Valley Railway to Leeds and Bradford. This would give greater Accessibility and Connectivity between Pennine Lancashire and the City Regions of Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and beyond.

25

Such a scheme would enable freight to be transported between the West Coast Ports of Liverpool/Merseyside, Heysham/Fleetwood and the East Coast Ports of Hull/Humber. This would create another route connecting the Irish Ports to European Ports and take pressure off the existing congested Northern Hub rail route between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Hull.

This rail freight scheme would generate a number of added value social, economic and environmental benefits:

• Take freight traffic off roads and onto rail, which would reduce environmental damage (CO2 emissions), limit road traffic accidents and improve public health and well being. • Increase the number of businesses and jobs along the rail corridor, particularly with the provision of freight interchange facilities within the corridor of the new rail route, including distribution and business centres. • Contribute towards the Regeneration of deprived areas along the route of the railway by attracting inward investment, improving the housing market and services in both urban and rural communities.

13. Conclusions

It is considered that the reopening of the Skipton-Colne railway could generate worthwhile economic and environmental benefits, whilst increasing the level of access and the number of social and economic opportunities for people within the wider corridor created by reopening the route ..... that would link Lancashire & the wider North West of England with Skipton, the Yorkshire Dales and wider Yorkshire region, including the Leeds City Region. Coupled with other initiatives such as the Todmorden Curve reopening and upgrading the Blackburn-Bolton route, it would offer significant improvements in access to the Manchester City Region and Manchester Airport for people living in Pennine Lancashire and large areas of North and West Yorkshire.

26

THE FINANCIAL CASE

1. Background

The development of the case for rebuilding of the Pennine Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway has been advanced over the past ten years by the Skipton-East Lancashire Rail Action Partnership (SELRAP). This organisation consists of a group of individuals with a variety of skills, coming together to lobby and develop the case for the rebuilding of what had been known as “The Missing Link”. This piece of line is now accepted by experts and specialists in the field of transport as being a crucial part of Network Rail’s transport infrastructure, with the potential for linking up some of the key Cities and Regions in the North-West of England and beyond.

SELRAP’s journey has taken it from being a local lobbying organisation to becoming a group known and recognised in some of the highest places in the United Kingdom and Europe, including the Houses of Parliament and the European Parliament with MPs Lords and MEPs joining their cause. County and Local Councils have added their names to SELRAP’s cause, as have businesses, Education and other establishments far and near. The support for its cause is widespread.1 Now the time is getting close when the organisation will take on a different and a greater role than it has so far, with its In a symbolic reconnection of Lancashire & Yorkshire , David Curry MP for application for funding to enable the Skipton& Ripon and Gordon Prentice MP for Pendle share a handshake over commissioning of a further study, which the county boundary line on the Skipton to Colne trackbed Photo by courtesy of The Craven Herald will lead to engineering work on building the new line being started. This search for finance begins with a Regional Growth Fund (RGF) 2 application. This funding will enable an Engineering Study to GRIP 3 3 level to be carried out and provide seed corn for further finance to be sought, enabling the project to move towards the building stage, should the study make the case that it is a feasible prospect.

2. Project Development Group/Consortium

When funding for the GRIP 3 study is approved this will enable SELRAP to move forward, passing the work into the hands of the Project Development Group/Consortium 4. The first task for this body will be to appoint a Chairman, who will need to be a respected individual with the skills and knowledge of railway development and a good understanding of new railway technology and operations. To assist the work of the Chairman and SELRAP, a consultant will need to be appointed, for which included in the Regional Growth Fund application to enable an appointment to be made. This individual will require the expertise and knowledge of recent railway developments to enable the work of the group to progress and for the end result to be acknowledged as a fine example of engineering and railway technology. SELRAP will continue to have an important role within the Project Development Group/Consortium.

1 See Appendix G, - Page 81. 2 Regional Growth Fund (RGF) - a £1.4bn fund operating across England from 2011 to 2014. It supports projects and programmes that lever private sector investment creating economic growth and sustainable employment. It aims particularly to help those areas and communities currently dependent on the public sector to make the transition to sustainable private sector-led growth and prosperity. 3 GRIP3 = Guide to Rail Investment Projects - Output Selection 4 See Pennine Lancashire Development Group - Page 45

27

3. Appointment of Railway Engineering Company

On receipt of funding to carry out the GRIP 3 study, the Project Development Group/Consortium will produce a tender document. This document will need to comply with all relevant and up to date requirements of tendering and contract law and public, together with private sector policy. In doing so the Project Development Group/Consortium will need to decide on what needs are required to be fulfilled and clearly outline the bidding process. They will also need to appoint a sub-group to administer the tendering process leading to recommendations being made to the full body to enable a contract to be placed with the successful tenderer. Organisations invited to bid will be asked about their finances and experience of similar projects. It will be imperative that such information is provided at the time of tendering to allow contracts to be placed with the successful bidder within an agreed period.

The Project Development Group/Consortium will oversee the GRIP 3 Process and once this has been carried through to the report stage, a meeting to decide on the preferred modules to be included within the contract for the rebuilding of the line will be based upon. These modules are set out in the proposed development stages as follows:

Stage 1 a: Double track Skipton to Gannow Junction, and [on existing double track] to Rose Grove]. The service at this stage would again probably be an extension of the existing Blackpool South to Colne service through to Skipton, but the route would become available for inter-regional passenger and freight services, with the possibility of a freight terminal at some point on the route [see stage 5 below]. or b: Single track Skipton to Colne, with dynamic passing loop(s) as appropriate between Skipton and Colne and/or between Colne and Gannow Junction, and [on existing double track] to Rose Grove], but all designed so as to avoid subsequent stages involving unnecessary 'corrective' expenditure. The service at this stage would probably be an extension of the existing Blackpool South to Colne service through to Skipton.

Stage 2 Electrification from Skipton to Rose Grove, with restoration of the bay platform at Rose Grove. The service at this stage would probably be an extension of the existing electric service from Leeds/Bradford to Skipton through to Rose Grove, where it could connect with other existing or new services - e.g. a bi-directional circular service from Manchester - Bolton - Blackburn - Burnley - Todmorden - Manchester. [We are working on the assumption that restoration of the Todmorden curve will have been completed by that time, and that there is no need for us to include that work as one of the modules.] In addition, the route would remain available for inter-regional passenger and freight services, again with the possibility of a freight terminal at some point on the route.

Stage 3 Extend electrification from Rose Grove to Preston. At this stage it would be possible to operate an electric service between Leeds/Bradford and Preston. Not only would the route remain available for inter-regional passenger and freight services, with the possibility of a freight terminal at some point on the route, but it would also acquire considerable value as a diversionary route between the East and West Coast main lines.

28

Stage 4 Extend electrification from Blackburn to Bolton to link up with the recently approved electrification of "the Lancashire triangle", with re-doubling between Blackburn and Bolton where necessary and appropriate. This would enable operation of an additional electric service between Leeds/Bradford and Manchester, and would also enhance the value of the route for diversionary purposes.

Stage 5 Creation of a freight interchange terminal at some point within the curtilage of the Skipton to Rose Grove route. This would not necessarily be the last stage to be completed, but could be slotted in at any time from stage 2 onwards, as and when appropriate.

Once the GRIP 3 process has been completed and the costings for each of the above modules are known, the funding streams which will be identified by the Project Development Group/Consortium and funding applied for. It is likely that a number of sources of funding will be approached, including:

o Network Rail o The DfT o HM Treasury o Private investors and venture capitalists o Local Authorities - Possibly in kind donations of trackbed currently in their possession plus other funding if available o Trains Operating Companies (TOC’s) o Property, Housing & Station developing companies o Freight operators o Supermarket and major retail chains. The JMP Consulting study carried out in 2007 to GRIP 1/2 level established the estimated costs for rebuilding the Skipton to Colne line. Accurate estimates will not be available until the GRIP 3 study has been completed. That said, SELRAP has sought advice from reliable sources that include major rail contractors. This has enabled current approximate costings to be identified for the purposes of this document. Thus, in advance of the GRIP 3 study, SELRAP anticipates that the total finance needed will be as follows:

Using Module 1a

Module £m

1a. Double track Skipton to Rose Grove 90

1. Electrification from Skipton to Rose Grove, with restoration of the bay 30 platform at Rose Grove.

2. Extend electrification from Rose Grove to Preston N/A

3. Extend electrification from Blackburn to Bolton to link up with the N/A recently approved electrification of "the Lancashire triangle", with re- doubling between Blackburn and Bolton where necessary and appropriate

4. Creation of a freight interchange terminal at some point on the route. 300

Total 426

29

Using Module 1b

Module £m

1b. Single track Skipton to Colne, with dynamic passing loop(s) as appropriate 46 between Skipton and Colne and/or between Colne and Rose Grove

5. Electrification from Skipton to Rose Grove, with restoration of the bay 30 platform at Rose Grove.

6. Extend electrification from Rose Grove to Preston N/A

7. Extend electrification from Blackburn to Bolton to link up with the recently N/A approved electrification of "the Lancashire triangle", with re-doubling between Blackburn and Bolton where necessary and appropriate

8. Creation of a freight interchange terminal at some point on the route. 300

Total 376

4. Electrification of lines beyond Burnley Rose Grove

There is potential for electrification of the lines beyond Burnley Rose Grove to become extension to the extensive electrification works in the North-West by Network Rail. These currently include the following which are out for tender in the period May to August 2011:

• Electrification of Great Western Main Line • Electrification of Liverpool to Manchester • Electrification of Huyton to Springs Branch, Preston to Blackpool North and Manchester to Euxton • North West Electrification Phase 2 Liverpool – Manchester The inclusion of the above would enable the improved use of electrically powered units currently in use between Skipton to Leeds, with the potential of extending routes from Leeds to Blackpool North and Leeds to Liverpool. Electrification of the Liverpool – Blackpool - Manchester triangle is scheduled for completion in 2016. Extension of this scheme, to include the short stretch between Blackburn to Bolton, would offer the potential for the services outlined above to be extended to Manchester. 5. Creation of a freight interchange terminal

Included in the plans are electric freight services, to enable East - West rail freight transport services to help reduce the weight of traffic using the already overloaded road network. This would provide a coast to coast service on a cross country route which has the lowest gradient [and summit] of all trans- Pennine routes, with very few tunnels.

The opportunities for the development of Inland Port facilities would provide business opportunities for freight logistics operators to develop freight transfer sites.

6. Finance

Please note that, in advance of the GRIP 3 study, accurate estimates of the funding requirements are difficult to assess. The figures below must be regarded purely as a guide:

30

GRIP 3 Engineering Study £250,000 - £500,000

Support of Project Development Group £200,000 - £300.000

Reinstatement of Skipton to Colne Railway Line £90 million double track redoubled to Burnley Rose Grove (N.B. £46 million single track Skipton to Colne only)

Electrification from Skipton to Burnley Rose Grove £30 million

Inland Port Development £300 million

Other developments ancillary to main rail £300 million reconnection (e.g., retail, office, hotel and car parking developments at stations

Residential developments within reasonable access £300 million + to stations

31

THE COMMERCIAL CASE 1. Introduction Building on the conclusions of two studies that have already been carried out [by Steer, Davies, Gleave in 2003, and JMP Consulting in 2007] into proposals to reopen the Skipton-Colne rail line, this section further explores the potential for its use [as part of a new trans-Pennine route] by passengers, and for freight traffic. It is suggested that this section is read in conjunction with Module 3 - Market Assessment & Cost Benefit Analysis ..... which can be found in Appendix C of this report. That said, the reader must understand that whilst SELRAP is committed to reinstatement of the Skipton-Colne line, it looks to professionals to demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt the business case for, [and technical feasibility of] so doing. Thus, the aim of this document is to unlock funding for the GRIP 3 study that will firm up those figures and civil engineering practicalities, and also establish fit within the remit of the national network. 1. Steer, Davies, Gleave A study commissioned jointly by Lancashire and North Yorkshire County Councils in 2003, and carried out by [Consultants] Steer Davies Gleave, states that within the catchment area of a financially viable railway facility, the market profile of its population has to reflect strong demand. The study concluded that:

• Within both the Aire valley corridor and towns of East Lancashire the market profile of their respective population(s) does, indeed, reflect that strong demand. * • Taking into account the strategic value of long distance movements, a viable future for a re opened Skipton-Colne rail line exists. • There is a [long term] need for 2 or 3 freight interchanges in the North West. * It should be noted that, whilst the population of the Aire valley makes full [and increasing] use of its first class rail services, within Pennine Lancashire, strong demand for effective and accessible rail connectivity has yet to translate into its provision. 2. JMP Consulting A study commissioned by SELRAP, and carried out to GRIP 1/2 level by [Consultants] JMP, concluded that: • Reopening the Skipton-Colne line is technically feasible. • Total annual demand for travel on the reopened Skipton-Colne line could be as high as 565,000 passengers within 2 years of completion, and up to 760,000 10 years later. • Dependent on the reinstated track format and service pattern, even taking into account optimism bias penalties of over 60% on capital costs, and 40% on operating costs, reopening the Skipton-Colne rail line would yield a BCR of up to 2.43. * • “You appear to have a business case, even based on some deliberately conservative assumptions.” ….. Alan Beswick, Director JMP Consulting

* For those unfamiliar with the concept, Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) is a complicated formula that applies mathematics to benefits within a given community, and balances this [monetary figure] against costs involved in [say] time spent in traffic jams, journey time saved, savings to industry, safety issues, and more ..... thus, for every £1 spent on rebuilding the Skipton-Colne line and operating [passenger] services on it, JMP Consulting state that it will create up to £2.43 worth of benefits within the wider community.

32

3. A Significant Gap

Effectively a geographical "corridor" through the Pennine Hills between Yorkshire and Lancashire, the Aire Gap has been, and remains, of considerable strategic importance. One of the lowest crossing points in the Pennine chain, the Aire Gap was also the obvious choice for the route of the Leeds - Liverpool canal, which passes through Nelson, Colne, and Skipton, and was constructed in the eighteenth century to provide navigable transport between the port of Liverpool (on the west coast of the Irish Sea) and the industrial centres of Leeds and Bradford in the heart of West Yorkshire.

Remarkably similar terrain on both the Lancashire and Yorkshire sides of the corridor, boosted by the availability of effective transport, enabled the development of the textile industry throughout both regions.

The Skipton-Colne rail line completed a through route linking Liverpool and Manchester with Leeds. Closely following the route of the Leeds & Liverpool canal, the availability of rail transport, facilitated parallel developments throughout the corridor, from major industrial towns to upland farming communities and the exchange of labour. Thus, economic and cultural ties were further supported, consolidated and accelerated.

Today, with the textile industry mostly a distant memory, those economic and cultural ties remain. For Liverpool and the wider North West of England, and the Yorkshire & Humber regions still have much in common. From upland farming communities and villages, to industrial towns with the full suite of housing. From exclusive detached properties to densely packed terraced housing close to modern business parks, and all ranks in between. With high tech manufacturing, heavy industry, service industry et al, parallel developments mean that, in many ways, the Airedale and Pennine Lancashire corridors remain remarkably similar.

The surprise, then, has to be the significant gap in patronage of rail services currently available within the Airedale and Pennine (East) Lancashire corridors, as the diagram to the left clearly shows.

NB. 2008/09 figures used

33

4. Passenger Growth

Figures reveal a 37% increase from 975 million passenger journeys made on the UK rail network in 2003, to, 1.34 billion in the year ending March 2011 ..... and representing a 6.6% rise on the previous 12-month period. Whilst those for the Airedale line linking Skipton with Leeds show growth figures of up to 62%. That figure continues to grow year on year. In the last two years the number of rail journeys within the corridor has increased by 33%. And the number of rail journeys [within that corridor] per head of population is 35.8, with up to 75% of its commuter traffic travelling by rail.

Significantly, the Airedale line is said to be one of the most heavily used commuter lines outside London. And is a clear demonstration of the relationship between targeted investment in infrastructure, and its contribution to economic well-being within the wider corridor of its route. Together with a raft of spin offs that include environmental benefits, the avoidance of traffic congestion, accessibility, social inclusion. And more ..... 5. Regional discrepancies

Despite monumental & ongoing efforts by the East Lancashire Community Rail Partnership, and Lancashire County Council, and [TOC] Northern Rail, poor quality, slow, infrequent, and unreliable services on the East Lancashire Line that currently terminates as the single line branch to Colne route mean that the route remains an unattractive transport option.

Journey times on the route are unacceptably long. At roughly double that of a hundred years ago, typically, the journey time from Colne to Manchester is almost 2 hours, and includes a change [and long wait] in Blackburn. Effectively this means that, for much of the population of Pennine Lancashire, working in Manchester is not a viable option. Access for commuting purposes to Leeds is similarly not a viable option.

That said, over the last two years, the route has seen a 10% increase in passenger traffic. But, to put that increase into perspective, in Pendle District, the number of rail journeys per head of population per annum is just 1.8 *. Whilst less than a dozen miles away, as stated earlier, the figure for the Airedale corridor is 35.8 *. Nationally, for non-Metropolitan counties away from London the figure is 10.5.

The [2003] Steer Davies, Gleave study concluded that the market profile of the population(s) of both the Airedale and East Lancashire corridors reflect strong demand for effective rail services. This, perhaps, goes some way towards explaining modest increase in the use of services within the latter.

But the gulf between standards of service in Airedale and Pennine Lancashire, and their availability and uptake, remains. 6. Rebalancing regional discrepancies

The aim of the following section is to demonstrate that by reopening the Skipton-Colne rail line as the part of a new route from the north west of England to North and West Yorkshire, the considerable benefits [outlined earlier] that the Airedale line brings to the population of its wider corridor will be extended to that within Pennine Lancashire. And beyond ..... 7. Manufacturing

Manufacturing is vital to the UK economy, and contributes over £130 billion a year to that economy. Nationally, manufacturing accounts for 13% of total UK output, or Gross Domestic Product (GDP). It generates more than 50% of UK exports and employs around 2.7 million people.

* 08/09 figures used. For later figu res see Appendix E - Page 79

34

Figures for the north west of England show manufacturing is a major generator of wealth for the region, being responsible for 20% of its GDP, and contributing £20 billion to the regional economy ..... being equal to that of the South East of England.

Manufacturing employs 400,000 people in the North West, and generates more Gross Value Added (GVA) per employee than the national average. It also makes a considerable contribution towards the region’s balance of trade.

A number of strengths and assets, including a high proportion of knowledge intensive businesses, strong skills in chemicals and aerospace, and the presence of global businesses, are amongst the factors which place the region in prime position to take advantage of the opportunities that globalisation presents.

However, whereas figures for the North West region show GVA per head of population to be above national average, within the context of that wider region, those for Pennine Lancashire show considerable under-performance. Indeed, GVA per head of population for Pennine Lancashire is just 75% of the national average, with a “gap” of over £2 billion per annum of output notionally “missing” from the area’s economy. A greater proportion of the sector faces significant challenges brought about by factors such as increasing competition, off-shoring and rising energy costs, as well as the current economic downturn. And growth in public sector employment within the region over recent years makes Pennine Lancashire increasingly susceptible to Government cutbacks.

Thus, whilst much of the North West region punches well above its weight in economic terms, in many ways, Pennine Lancashire’s profile can be described as a region within a region.

8. Region within a region

Pennine Lancashire consists of the following authorities: Blackburn with Darwen (unitary authority), Burnley, Hyndburn, Pendle, Ribble Valley and Rossendale; as well as being within the area of responsibility of Lancashire County Council. Historically, Pennine Lancashire has relied heavily on the manufacturing industry. But between 1995 and 2005, more than 20,000 jobs [in the region] were lost in manufacturing.

As a result of continued decline of its staple industries, Pennine Lancashire has seen a period of economic diversification. Today the region remains a strong manufacturing area, with many examples of leading edge businesses. Aerospace, advanced manufacturing, advanced flexible materials, digital and creative industries all feature strongly in the make up of the area’s economy. These are now real assets for the area and provide a growing economy and the opportunities of higher income jobs for residents of Pennine Lancashire.

However, all of the key economic indicators for Pennine Lancashire show that the area is underperforming, despite a number of inherent strengths. This is mostly relative to neighbouring areas, the Central Lancashire City Region and the wider North West. But in some parts, particularly in the most deprived wards, absolute decline is occurring. The area has high levels of benefit dependency and, with the exception of the Ribble Valley, wage levels lag behind the national average. Figures also show that, within Pennine Lancashire, more than 25% of the 312,500 working age population is ‘economically inactive’, and that only 22% of the working age population is qualified to NVQ4 (degree) level or above.

Pennine Lancashire’s performance has steadily improved in recent years, and the number of VAT registered businesses has grown. That growth is, however, smaller than that of other northern

35 economies. And, today, much of the output of Pennine Lancashire is founded on relatively low wage, low added value, low skilled employment, with gross weekly pay often well below regional and national levels.

It is also noted that within Pennine Lancashire, half of housing stock is 2-up, 2-down terraced (owner- occupied and private rented). And that house prices well below regional average ..... with a high proportion of long-term vacant property. Property values have long been regarded as a rough and ready barometer of economic well-being. Thus, it is interesting to note that, in the most easterly part of Pennine Lancashire, in the Borough of Pendle, the average house price is £110,000 ..... being well below the national average of £165,000. Whereas, just a dozen miles away in the neighbouring Craven District of North Yorkshire, it is £210,000.

9. Unlocking potential

Coincidentally, Pendle Borough and Craven District would be directly linked by the reopening of the Skipton-Colne rail line ..... thus opening up new journey opportunities between Pennine Lancashire and Leeds, between North & West Yorkshire and Manchester [and its airport] ..... and more.

Geographically, Pennine Lancashire is positioned well to benefit from the job growth in neighbouring city regions, and an opportunity exists for the area to supply a pool of skilled workforce. Employment in Leeds city region is set to rise by 150,000 over the next ten years. With that for the Manchester city region expected to increase by 166,000 by 2026. A high proportion of those jobs [in both city regions] are expected to be in the high value employment sectors. In contrast only 22,000 additional jobs are forecast for Lancashire.

Yet, despite a notional wide travel to work area, that includes Manchester, Leeds, Liverpool and the rest of Lancashire, Pennine Lancashire remains relatively self-contained in terms of travel to work patterns. Just 16% of its employee residents travel to work outside the sub-region, with 8% commuting to Greater Manchester. And still less choosing to work in Leeds, despite its relatively close proximity to more easterly parts of that sub region. To explain this phenomenon, it is necessary to examine current transport provision to, from, and within Pennine Lancashire ..... as an integral component within a national strategic context.

But, in order to appreciate the role of transport as a regional facilitator, it is necessary to examine, the role of transport within a still-wider global context of developed economies that society has come to demand and expect. Indeed, as outlined below, poor, and/or ineffective transport facilities, or lack of them risk the phenomenon of economic islands.

10. Economic Islands

Following recent electoral success of the Scottish National Party, public attention is, naturally, currently focused on the economy of that country. It is widely accepted that, in an age of increasing globalisation, the amount of goods transported is a function of economic activity and is linked to economic prosperity and growth.

Thus, ferry services that transport everyone/everything that moves to/from Scotland’s many offshore islands are the lifeblood of their economies. Interdependent [and increasingly more-so in an age of globalisation] on external economies, without ferry services, those islands would rapidly become economic islands.

36

But economic islands are not confined to offshore locations. For, as outlined earlier, transport is known to be the key to economic prosperity and regional growth. Indeed effective and accessible transport links are the hallmark of successful economies the world over. Conversely, there is clear evidence that ties poor transport links to stagnant & failing economies. This is reflected in the rough and ready barometer of property prices [referred to earlier] ..... where the availability of effective transport is unfailingly cited within sales pitch. And [property] values adjusted accordingly.

The advent of mass motoring during the latter part of the last century, and wholesale development of the road network, led transport commentators to describe the period as the motorway age. Parallel prolonged shrinkage, rationalisation and destruction of the nation’s once-extensive rail network, led to the [flawed] notion that economic well being & growth was tied solely to road transport.

However, history has shown that opportunity is a major driver of demand. New journey opportunities presented by development of the road & motorway network have metamorphosed both expectation and reality within the transport industry and its infrastructure providers. And, as driver & facilitator for economic growth, ongoing demands for its further development.

But commentators now accept that road transport has become a victim of its own success. Described loosely as “marginal external costs”, symptoms are commonly acknowledged and readily identifiable. With employees arriving late for work, unpredictable delivery times for commerce, industry, and more, increasing road congestion is costing the nation economy dearly. The Confederation of British Industry has stated that the costs to the UK economy of road congestion are in excess of £20 billion per year. Road traffic accidents add a further £10 billion per year to true costs. And, added into the equation are well-founded concerns for the environment, accessibility, sustainability, and more.

11. Transport: the Key

Despite technological developments that make working from home increasingly a possibility, as the above makes abundantly clear, it remains a fact that effective transport [for goods and personnel] is the key to economic activity. Economic activity, prosperity and growth are a direct function of the amount of goods transported. Whilst increasing the cost, and difficulty of freight movements has a significant negative impact on industry. It is, therefore, important that operators, government and network managers work together to optimize the movement of goods.

12. Rail Services

Despite the fifty year period of shrinkage, rationalisation and destruction of the nation’s once- extensive rail network referred to above, it nevertheless remains a fact that the availability of effective rail transport is synonymous with vibrant economies, and their consequent effect on [the “economic barometer” of] property values. There are many areas of the country where, for a raft of sound reasons, rail is the transport of choice. Where service provision and fare pattern are sufficiently attractive for its routine use not only travel to work, but for shopping and leisure purposes, attendance at school or college et al. Where rail services are part and parcel of the society they were designed and built to serve. Where, in modern idiom, their routine use can be said to be a no brainer.

The south east of England is a prime example of the above. Mindful of the nation’s seven passenger transport authorities (PTAs), and other imaginative initiatives, the reader will, doubtless, be aware of further examples worth noting.

37

13. Network consolidation

The reader will be aware that rail services in some parts of the country remained largely untouched by the era of shrinkage and rationalisation. Whilst, in transport terms, despite development of the road network, others were disconnected from their regional economic drivers by the removal of their rail services. And remain so. It is significant that those regions known to be [and accepted as] “prosperous” are also those that currently enjoy the benefit of effective rail links to their regional economic drivers.

It is also significant that, following a recent period of consolidation of the rail network, there has been a spectacular turn around in the fortunes of specific regions that have been the subject of substantial rail investment. Experience has shown that the simple expedient of reopening a formerly closed station can have significant advantages for a specific area. The re-doubling of a singled line makes for increased reliability and frequency of services throughout an entire corridor ..... together with an increased uptake of those services, and consequent reduction in road traffic.

14. Rail reopening in Scotland and Wales

In Scotland and Wales, the recent reopening of long-closed rail lines has proven to be a milestone in the stimulation of economic growth..... with social and environmental advantages. The Governments of those countries cite the following as the rationale behind the recent reopening of four formerly- closed rail lines, [with a fifth project ongoing]:

• An alternative to congested roads • Direct access to major cities for communities served • Widening the prospective labour market for existing and new businesses • Giving job-seekers access to geographically wider employment options • Providing easier access to education and leisure facilities • Making a wider range of shopping and leisure facilities easier to access • Increasing housing development and residency options through better access • A raft of environmental benefits

Without exception, passenger uptake for those reopened lines exceeds [by up to 150%] the most optimistic consultants’ estimates. No rail line has been reopened in England for in excess of thirteen years. But in the event, there is no reason to suppose that passenger uptake would be other than that experienced in Scotland and Wales.

15. The reasons for Rail

Critics would be right to question the need for substantial investment in new rail projects as opposed to the more traditional option of providing more roads in response to the need for economic stimulation. However, the facts speak for themselves.

Characteristically, the graph of regional economic growth following major new road projects rises steeply ..... in tandem with a consequent reduction in local road congestion, and the further stimulation of businesses and employment opportunities.

A similar pattern follows the reopening of a formerly-closed rail line.

38

But, whereas the graph for economic growth following major road investment falls away over the years [as congestion returns with stimulated increases in traffic] ..... that following substantial rail investment continues to climb steadily.

Taken in tandem with a raft of reasons referred to earlier in this discussion document, there is now wide acceptance that, far from the marginal role envisaged by generations of transport planners fixated with road-only ..... rail transport has an increasingly important role to play as an engine of economic growth.

16. The Rail Network

At its zenith the UK was served by a rail network in excess of 20,000 miles. And served by 7,000 stations. All regions of the country were served by that comprehensive network. And few were more than three miles from a station and/or goods facility. Commentators would be right to point out that, built on the back of no other reason than that of commercial rivalry, many should not have been built. Add to that, the cessation of industry some lines were built to serve, together with the increasing use of motor transport, and it is unsurprising that, by the beginning of the 1960s, the UK network had shrunk to 17,000 miles ..... served by 5,000 stations.

Few can be unaware of what happened to the UK rail network over the course of the following decade. Suffice to say that, by the end of it, just half of the original [20,000 miles +] network remained. Despite further recommendations [contained within the Serpell report of 1983] that the network be further reduced to just 3,000 miles of main lines, it remains stabilised at roughly 10,000 miles ..... served by 2,500 stations. That said, much of that remaining was later simplified and rationalised, some would say, to the point where it is no longer fit for purpose. Doubtless, the reader will be familiar with examples of the latter. Where former double tracked main lines have been reduced to single lines capable of supporting only marginalised services that make little contribution to the economies they were designed to serve. And few find attractive. Commentators have observed that the ultimate aim of this once-common practice was to secure the case for total closure of those rationalised and / or truncated routes.

Effectively reduced to a long siding with just a single passenger train allowed to use the line at any one time and no facilities for handling freight ..... formerly part of a double tracked trans-Pennine route ..... the current Colne branch is a classic example of that outlined above. 17. Rail in the North West Observers will note that, across the UK, approximately 50% of the rail network has been lost to line closures. But regional variations mean that, whereas some parts of the country have retained all but a minority of little-used branch lines, others were the subject of wholesale losses. The map shown to the left illustrates the extent of rail line losses in the north west of England. To the east of the region, [within the red outline] Pennine Lancashire was particularly hard hit by line closures. Within that outline just 30 [out of 70] miles of operational rail lines remain. As a result of those higher than [national] average losses, regional links between Pennine Lancashire and

Lines in use Closed lines Manchester & Leeds were downgraded and/or lost.

39

Traditional ties for business, social & leisure purposes between the towns of Pennine Lancashire and the Craven district of North Yorkshire were lost with the closure of the Skipton-Colne line.

18. Airedale, Leeds, and Pennine Lancashire

As has been made clear earlier, less than a dozen miles from Pennine Lancashire’s rationalised rail connections, the Airedale line that links Skipton with Leeds goes from strength to strength. Well-used commuter and inter-regional passenger trains share the route with frequent long distance heavy freight flows that use the once-scheduled for closure Settle to Carlisle line. Passenger traffic continues to grow on the Airedale line, to the extent that extra carriages are to be provided, enabling [service providers] Northern Rail to provide an extra 600,000 seats every year for passengers on peak-time services.

Travel to work patterns are not the whole picture for rail services in Airedale. Tourism is a growth industry that can make a valuable contribution to regional economies. Figures show that 26 million visit North Yorkshire annually. That figure breaks down into 12 million day visitors, the overwhelming majority of whom travel less than 40 miles to reach their destination. And 14 million visitors who stay in the county. Of that 14 million, 11% currently travel there by rail. NB See diagram on page 32 for more on passenger footfalls.

19. Tourism: North Yorkshire

Travel to work patterns are not the whole picture for rail services in Airedale. Tourism is a growth industry that can make a valuable contribution to regional economies. Figures show that 26 million visit North Yorkshire annually. That figure breaks down into 12 million day visitors, the overwhelming majority of whom travel less than 40 miles to reach their destination. And 14 million visitors who stay in the county. Of that 14 million, 11% currently travel there by rail.

Almost 6 million visit the Craven (Skipton & Dales) area of North Yorkshire annually. Their total spend in the region exceeds £240 million ..... supporting 4,800 jobs there. Superimposed on to Craven’s visitor numbers, statistics in the previous paragraph point to 3.2 million visitors who stay in the region annually ..... with 11% (350,000) of them travelling there by rail.

Figures for those travelling to Craven from the North West are unavailable. But using the fact that most of North Yorkshire’s day visitors travel less than 40 miles to reach their destination as a baseline, it is to be assumed that most day visitors also travel less than 40 miles. Which places Skipton and the Yorkshire Dales firmly within the day visitor destination profile for residents of Pennine Lancashire, and beyond. However, since there is currently no rail link between the Craven District of North Yorkshire and Pennine Lancashire, it is also to be assumed that the number of visitors arriving in Skipton by rail from the North West is nil.

Bolton Abbey and Grassington are major tourist attractions in the Craven area ..... hosting a combined total of 750,000 visitors annually. 90% of those visitors currently travel there by car ..... together with their attendant and well documented problems. But help is at hand in the form of the Embsay & Bolton Abbey Steam Railway. Who plan, within three years, to restore the missing rail link between Bolton Abbey and Skipton.

A Network Rail feasibility study has established that the link could be restored relatively simply, thus providing a tourist link to Embsay and Bolton Abbey for trains from Bradford, Leeds and Carlisle. The

40

Yorkshire Dales National Park also has long-term ambitions for the reinstatement of passenger services on the Rylstone (for Grassington) branch line currently used exclusively by aggregate trains. And, further down the valley, the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway would also welcome additional visitors by rail from Lancashire.

It is clear, however, that unless & until the rail link between Skipton and Colne is restored, visitors from Pennine Lancashire and the wider North West would be unable to take advantage of services outlined above.

20. Tourism: Pennine Lancashire

Tourism is also a growth industry within Pennine Lancashire. Increasingly a destination for cultural tourism, the region is also renowned for dense woodland, canalside walks, and trails in open countryside that surrounds each of the area’s settlements.

Visitor numbers to the area are difficult to assess, with the exception of that for Boundary Mill Stores, situated in Colne. 2.6 million visit the outlet store annually. And, despite the fact that it is situated within 5 minutes walk from Colne rail station, the overwhelming number of visitors currently arrive by car and coach.

Pennine Lancashire has huge potential to develop as an asset to attract visitors from adjoining city regions. Tourist information describes the area as situated “40 minutes north of Manchester.” And that it is “easy to get around the area, with great rail and bus links.”

That said, the lack of viable rail connections to both Leeds and Manchester means the relative isolation [in transport terms] of the region, as discussed earlier. For those city dwellers [and others] without access to a car, this is hard to ignore. And has to be a factor in the development of Pennine Lancashire as a tourist destination.

Reinstating the Skipton-Colne rail line would address the issue of connectivity [for Pennine Lancashire] with the Leeds City Region. It would also act as a catalyst for improved links to Manchester, and Manchester Airport, not only for residents of Pennine Lancashire, but also those of North and West Yorkshire, and beyond.

21. Leeds City Region Transport Vision

Ambitions for better connectivity with Manchester and its airport is not confined to Pennine Lancashire. Indeed, further evidence of the need for [and objective of] establishing new trans-Pennine rail links is to be found within the Leeds City Region Transport Vision, published in 2006.

Alongside only-to be expected Leeds-centric aims and objectives, within the Leeds City Region Transport Vision are ambitions to:

• Connect the core centres to other city regions in the UK - most importantly Sheffield, Manchester and London • Connect the core centres to international airports and ports serving the city region • Provide choice and ensure that the growth in car use is minimized • Meet the movement needs of the city region , its residents, its workers, and its visitors • Supporting growth and delivering agglomeration and other wider economic benefits

41

Acknowledging that its effective catchment of the Leeds City Region already extends into Lancashire, the document concludes that new rail services facilitated by the creation of a direct railway service via Skipton-Colne between Pennine Lancashire to Leeds will be faster than off-peak car, and even more competitive in peak times.

Reproduced from the Leeds City Transport Vision, the map above clearly shows the intended heavy rail linkage between Leeds and Central Lancashire city regions via both Skipton [and Halifax]. This strategic support for Skipton-Colne reopening is underpinned by proposed improvements to the Airedale Line capacity ..... much of which was formerly four tracked.

This need for the new rail link [via Skipton] between Leeds and Central Lancashire City regions is echoed within a recent report published by Pennine Lancashire Leaders & Chief Executives group. Entitled “An Integrated Economic Strategy for Pennine Lancashire”, within the vision for the region in 2020, the report cites the need to promote links with neighbouring economies ..... “which can act as an additional employment destination for Pennine Lancashire residents, increasing their access to higher paid employment.”

22. Employment benefits

Whilst figures in the table on the following page must be regarded, to an extent, as conjectural, SELRAP believes that increased accessibility to employment opportunities afforded by reopening the Skipton to Colne railway line means that they are potentially achievable. It is worth remembering at this point that, as stated earlier, over the next ten years, in order to sustain economic growth, Leeds will need a extra 150,000 workers, many of them being employed in highly skilled, well paid jobs.

42

Jobs Created by Additional jobs 2014 created 2014 - 21 Engineering Study 50 Pennine Lancashire & Yorkshire Project Management & contingencies 10 Rail Development Group Rail Construction Track preparation & laying 179 Maintenance - 6 Overhead power lines & gantries 50 Maintenance - 6 Footpath & Cyclepath 20 Maintenance - 6 Stations - Construction New - 1 Incl. above Staffing - 4 - Reconstruction Existing - 5 Incl. above Staffing - 12 Additional services at Stations Transport interchange 6 12 Dedicated Taxi services (electric 48 48 vehicles) Additional bus services 12 12 2 new Supermarkets 100 200 Business start-up units - 40 80 80 Cafes & newsagents, etc - initially 12 24 24 Passenger Services Increased & improved train services 48 48 providing passenger links to Manchester, Leeds & Preston and linking into East and West Coast main line services and the proposed HS2 Rail freight New Services providing East and 20 20 West Coast link to major ports Inland Port - construction 100 - Staffing 100 100 - Onward delivery of 40 40 goods by road Additional tourism infrastructure 2 New Hotels 100 160 25 B&B’s 100 75 Improvements & Additional staffing 50 90 to 6 public houses, 12 Coffee/ Tea bars Improved access to work By local people - Within Skipton to 3,000 9,000 Burnley area T raveling to Leeds, ,Manchester, etc 2,000 7,000 6,137 16,943

22. National context

Reopening the Skipton-Colne rail line would open up a new route linking the East and West Coast Main Lines. The eastern part of the route, to Skipton, is already electrified. The option for electrification of the Skipton-Colne line, to be included within the remit for reopening the route, together with further extension [of electrification] to Preston, has been discussed. This would create the only electrified link between the East & West Coast Main Lines between London and Scotland. And, in addition to the option for electric freight services, could form a useful diversionary route.

23.NB. See Freight map on page 17 , which puts the Skipton -Colne rail reopening project in a national context:

23. Freight

Earlier studies discounted freight, but sources of private investment have emphasised that the potential for freight operations via the Skipton-Colne line might, to advantage, be considered within the business case for reinstating the route.

That said, it has been noted that freight traffic does not generate routes. New routes generate freight. An example of this is the Settle to Carlisle line that was scheduled for closure. But, having been

43

“rescued”, it has now become an important freight link from Hunterston, on the Clyde estuary, to the Yorkshire power stations.

Clearly, the Benefit/Cost ratio of a given route will increase as the cost of providing that route is shared by both passenger & freight operators. Thus, given that freight operators are unlikely to commit to use of a new route, once it becomes available, the “chicken & egg” dilemma of how to factor that potential use into figures that investors can rely on.

Plainly, the easier option is to discount freight operations from BCR calculations, as with the JMP report of 2007. However, commentators would be right to point out that railways were conceived for the carriage of goods. Until the advent of the motor age, freight traffic was the mainstay of the UK rail network and, to an extent, offset some of the costs of providing passenger services. It is interesting to note that, despite the operation of high profile express trains such as the “Flying Scotsman” the London & North Eastern Railway made almost all of its money from freight operations. More recently, with the industry back in private hands, the [former LNER] East Coast Main Line has seen the recent failure of two Train Operating Companies who have sought [in common with others] to cover all their overheads via passenger operations alone. The writer of this report is of the view that this might go some way towards explaining the UK’s extraordinary fare structure that is tasked with offsetting an ever-increasing proportion of providing rail services and infrastructure.

However, it remains a fact that much less effort has traditionally been devoted to freight forecasting than to passenger demand modelling. Factors responsible for this include the lack of sufficiently comprehensive conceptual models of the freight industry and a paucity of suitable data. For this reason, models have usually involved gathering data only on vehicle movement, creating observed traffic flow matrices and then using growth factors for future projections. The results have been unsatisfactory because the vehicle trip volumes show little correlation with land use data. In addition the matrices are usually poor, having little or no behavioural basis, and with no sensitivity for tests of policy issues or forecasting variables.

Mindful of the above, and the further economic, social and environmental advantages known to follow rail freight operations [when compared to road freight], it maybe the time has come to develop a recognised means of factoring potential [freight] use of proposed new rail infrastructure into BCR calculations. It is interesting to note that the latest figures show that between 2006 and 2009 there was a 21.2 % increase in rail freight traffic nationally. This upwards trend has been shown to continue, spurred on by dramatic increases in fuel costs and road congestion.

More specifically, and with reference to the potential impact of freight operations on the BCR for reopening the Skipton-Colne line:

• The Skipton to Colne link will provide the lowest gradient route across the Pennines, a cheaper path for freight.

• It will provide the only electrified rail link between the east and west coasts in the north of England.

• Revenue generated by freight will be an important part of the final submission.

• Three inter-modal distribution points are planned for the north-west, and Pennine Lancashire is well located for one.

• There is no other existing within 30 miles, and it is the ideal distance from Immingham.

44

• There are available brown-field sites of suitable size and location.

• The strength of manufacturing in the Pennine Lancashire area makes this freight even more promising. SELRAP has opened discussions with interested parties, and are further investigating possible providers of this type of development.

24. Parallel Cycleway and Footpath

The idea of a multi user cycle path from Colne to Skipton predates SELRAP but since the early days of SELRAP the campaign has supported the idea of a Cyclepath and footpath alongside the railway as part of the scheme. Such a multi user path might have to deviate at pinchpoints and would anyway link to roads at bridges to provide access.

As an integral part of the reinstatement of the Skipton – Colne railway and redoubling of the existing line to Burnley, there should be a multi user route alongside/parallel to the reinstated railway. This should link Burnley - Brierfield - Nelson – Colne - Foulridge - Kelbrook - Earby - Thornton - Elslack - Skipton.

The multi-user path should have a smooth tarmac surface and be accessible to walkers, cyclists, cycle trailers, tricycles, the disabled and children’s buggies. A parallel track for horse riders should be considered as to affordability, space available and its suitability (e.g. risk of the horses being startled) alongside fast moving trains. It is also likely to be unsuitable for horses in urban areas. Thus it would not be practical on the existing schools cyclepath in Nelson which runs alongside the railway and would be part of the route.

It should incorporate cycle parking at all stations (including Colne, Nelson, Brierfield, Burnley Central) - there is cycle parking at Skipton station already. It would therefore enable those using the line to regularly commute to work to have an alternative to using the car for this part of their journey.

25. Summary & Conclusions

The economies of Pennine Lancashire [within the context of the wider North West of England] and those of North and West Yorkshire developed along parallel lines as a result of rail connectivity.

The development of high tech manufacturing, heavy industry and service industry, following the loss of the traditional textile industry ensures that, in many ways the Airedale and Pennine Lancashire corridors remain remarkably similar. But considerable differences currently exist between the economic expectations and realities of those corridors.

Within Pennine Lancashire the loss of traditional industry was paralled by the loss and/or downgrading of rail connectivity with the regional economic drivers of Leeds and Manchester. To the east, within the Skipton-Leeds [Airedale] corridor, services survived, and more recently have been the subject of considerable investment and improvement.

It is hard to ignore the connection between the differential in rail connectivity and service provision for the Pennine Lancashire and Airedale corridor. Thus, the conclusion that, by reopening the Skipton- Colne rail line, the economic benefits enjoyed by residents of the vibrant Airedale corridor would be extended to Pennine Lancashire, and beyond.

Thus, as is stated at the beginning of this section, the aim of this document is to unlock funding for the GRIP 3 study that will firm up those figures and civil engineering practicalities, and also establish fit [for the Skipton-Colne line] within the remit of the national network.

45

THE MANAGEMENT CASE

1. Pennine Lancashire Development Group The SELRAP Conference which was held on 6 th November 2009, was entitled, “The Skipton to Colne Railway - The Key to Unlocking a Strategic National Transport Corridor.” It was seen as being an important step in the progress in meeting the SELRAP purpose of the reinstatement of this important piece of railway. As a result of the Conference success, Jonathan Roberts, a consultant was commissioned to produce a report to provide the direction. This work was funded by a grant from Colne Connected and was entitled “Next steps for SELRAP: creating a Project Development Group.” At the time that this report was being written, the main thinking on how new rail projects would be funded, was focused on public funding being the key to financing the planning and rebuilding work. The dramatic cuts in public expenditure changed this.

The make up of the proposed Project Development Group membership, which in the report focused so much on public bodies has been widened by the introduction of private companies and investors. As we move forward in 2011 our proposed Project Development Group/Consortium will owe more to the pioneers of early railway building, than of the late 20 th Century.

The Group/Consortium will also have more powers in its constitution (see below). It will be empowered to make decisions on a range of key issues: • Design and engineering issues • The extent of the work to be carried out • The tendering process • Agreeing prices and placing contacts

2. Possible Project Development Group/Consortium membership a) Private Sector i. Engineering and transport consultants ii. Engineering Contractors commissioned to carry out the major works of reinstatement of the rail line iii. Representatives of companies contracted to invest and build ancillary infrastructure (e.g. rail stations, supermarkets, inland ports, etc.) iv. Private investors b) Governmental bodies i. HM Treasury ii. Department for Transport (DfT) iii. Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) iv. Network Rail v. The Highways Agency c) Train and Freight Operating Companies with an interest in operating trains over the completed track d) Local Authorities i. Lancashire County Council ii. North Yorkshire County Council iii. Bradford Metropolitan District Council

46

iv. The Pennine Lancashire Leaders and Chief Executives (PLLACE) v. Pendle Borough Council vi. Burnley Borough Council vii. Craven District Council e) Representative(s) appointed by SELRAP f) Other organizations - All of the above will form the core Consortium membership. Other groups will be invited to attend to contribute. The following groups may also be invited to contribute: i. Rail & Transport interest groups ii. High level regional organizations i. Integrated Transport Authorities (ITAs) ii. Passenger Transport Executives (PTEs) iii. East Lancashire railway catchment: i. Blackburn with Darwen Council (unitary) ii. Hyndburn Borough Council iii. Ribble Valley Borough Council iv. Rossendale Borough Council iv. Other Councils with an interest in the rail development including: i. Leeds City Council ii. Manchester City Council g) Project Development Group Powers - This Group will be set up by a working party, following the completion of the GRIP 3 process, and its responsibilities and powers will be: a. To make decisions on the core and subsidiary membership of the group b. To take forward the optioneering process to a final selection of an agreed design for rebuilding of the Pennine Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway c. To liaise with Network Rail and other relevant bodies on all issues relating to design and planning processes of the works and the ultimate services to be operated over the route d. To receive grants and other funds for the development of the Pennine Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway and associated developments e. To develop a tendering process and contract engineering and other contractors to carry out the building of the new rail line and associated infrastructure f. To co-ordinate the efficient and effective working schedules of the works g. To liaise with Network Rail on the acceptance and signing over the completed works to the appropriate infrastructure operator on completion of the works h. To co-ordinate additional infrastructure works which will be carried out as a consequence of the rebuilding i. To organise the reopening of the Pennine Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway

47 h) Project Development Group operating & reporting structure, and launch process A Project Development Group will require: • A Constitution with terms of reference to provide a framework for working procedures. • Objectives to achieve – Jonathan Roberts in his report lists four objectives: o take account of the Pennine Lancashire MAA proposals, neighbouring City Region strategies, and other relevant social, economic, environmental, accessibility and transport factors o oversee project development on proposals for railway re-instatement including Skipton-Colne, the Pennine Lancashire MAA rail schemes, and initiatives on existing railways in East Lancashire o finalise a first and subsequent Pennine Lancashire rail packages which are fit for purpose, value for money, deliverable and which provide timely intervention through transport projects to support the desired regional objectives and outcomes o identify budget options to fund the finalised rail packages. • Agreement on chairing and secretariat. Since Pennine Lancashire is the hub of these rail schemes, it could be PLLACE or a borough within Pennine Lancashire which provides a secretariat. • Basis for membership of each organisation, whether observer or executive role. • Agreement on funding the organisation (possibly budget allocations from members), employment of any specialist advisers or full or part-time officers (or their secondment), and on the basis for procuring suppliers such as technical and engineering consultants. • Extent of public scrutiny, openness of meetings (e.g. Part 2 agendas where necessary), media and reportage processes. • Basis for funding project development work. • A provisional timetable to be agreed against which actions will be undertaken – this should take account of external deadlines for inputs to transport policy and budget formulation.

48

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A Northern Route Utilisation Strategy - Draft for consultation - Response on behalf of SELRAP (Skipton East Lancashire Rail Action Partnership)

1. This response to the consultation draft (“Consultation Draft”) of the Northern Route Utilisation Strategy (“Northern RUS”) is made on behalf of the Skipton East Lancashire Rail Action Partnership (“SELRAP”), which has for a number of years been campaigning for the re-opening of the former railway between Skipton in North Yorkshire and Colne in Lancashire.

2. This response should be read in conjunction with –

(A) the preliminary observations dated 18 July 2007 submitted on behalf of SELRAP prior to publication of the consultation drafts of the route utilisation strategies referred to in sub-paragraphs (D) and (F) below;

(B) a report entitled “Re-opening of the Skipton to Colne Railway” commissioned by SELRAP from JMP Consulting and published in October 2007 (“the JMP Report”);

(C) the response to the consultation draft of the route utilisation strategy referred to in sub-paragraph (D) below submitted on behalf of SELRAP and dated 11 July 2008;

(D) the route utilisation strategy for Lancashire and Cumbria (“L&C-RUS”) published by Network Rail in August 2008;

(E) the response to the consultation draft of the route utilisation strategy referred to in sub-paragraph (F) below submitted on behalf of SELRAP and dated 16 December 2008; and

(F) the route utilisation strategy for Yorkshire & Humber (“Y&H-RUS”) published by Network Rail in July 2009.

3. This response is confined to those sections of the Consultation Draft relevant to SELRAP’s campaign for re-opening of the railway between Skipton and Colne as part of a strategic route between Leeds and Manchester/Preston and the operation of passenger and freight services over that route.

The Context of the Consultation Draft

4. The Foreword to the Consultation Draft correctly identifies that investment in infrastructure is key to sustainable economic growth, and that investment in infrastructure should be based on the contribution which it can make to economic growth, jobs and private sector investment, as well as people’s quality of life and the environment. For the reasons set out in this response, those are objectives which SELRAP believes would be achieved by re-opening the railway between Skipton and Colne as part of a strategic route between Leeds and Manchester/Preston.

5. The Consultation Draft indicates (paragraph 6.1) that one of the purposes of the consultation process is to ensure that the widest range of options is considered, and that the most appropriate solutions are recommended. Accordingly, it is disappointing to find that the Consultation Draft makes no more than passing reference (Executive Summary page 13; paragraph 5.5) to the possibility of re-opening currently disused lines. This is particularly so, given that the L&C-RUS described the absence of a direct rail link between the conurbations in Airedale and those in Pennine and Central Lancashire as a “missing link”, and concluded that the route between Colne and Skipton could be a candidate for addition to the network.

6. Notwithstanding the stated objective of ensuring that the widest range of options is considered and that the most appropriate solutions are recommended, the Consultation Draft is almost exclusively limited to consideration of the most effective and efficient way to use the capacity available across the existing network. Even with the limitation of that constraint, it is disappointing to find that the Consultation Draft gives no consideration as to how better use could be made of the under-utilised capacity of the existing infrastructure between Colne and Gannow Junction (and to a lesser extent the existing infrastructure between Gannow Junction and Preston), namely by re-opening the railway between Skipton and Colne so as to form part of an additional and (in SELRAP’s opinion) much-needed cross-Pennine route.

7. The Consultation Draft proceeds on the basis of identifying perceived “gaps” between the current and future capability of the rail network and the provision of rail services, analysing the possible solutions to those gaps, and recommending the course of action to be taken. In SELRAP’s opinion, there are three specific gaps that the Consultation Draft fails to identify, namely –

49

(A) the gap that is the need for the provision of adequate rail services in Pennine Lancashire;

(B) the gap that is the need for an additional cross-Pennine rail route; and

(C) the gap that is the need for a diversionary cross-Pennine rail route.

The following sections of this response seek to address each of those unidentified gaps in turn.

The unidentified gap that is the need for the provision of adequate rail services in Pennine Lancashire

8. The Consultation Draft sets out (section 3) a forecast of the increase in peak passenger demand into the five cities of Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle and Sheffield. SELRAP agrees that there is likely to be a rapid and substantial growth in the market for travel on cross-Pennine routes, predominantly as a result of increased demand for business, commuter and leisure travel stimulated by the economic prosperity of the Leeds and Manchester city regions, and by the importance of Manchester Airport to the whole of the Northern region.

9. The Consultation Draft records (Executive Summary page 10; paragraphs 5.3.2 and 5.3.3) that improved services are to be provided between East Lancashire and Manchester as a result of schemes being promoted by local authorities, namely the reinstatement of the Todmorden Curve and the provision of increased track capacity between Blackburn and Bolton. It appears, however, that those improvements are limited to increased services between Blackburn and Manchester via Bolton and a new service between Burnley and Manchester via Rochdale. Welcome though those improvements will be, they do nothing to address the transport needs of Pennine Lancashire centred on the Borough of Pendle (population 90,000) that includes the communities of Nelson, Colne and West Craven.

10. In contrast, the transport needs of Pennine Lancashire would be immeasurably improved by re-opening the railway between Skipton and Colne as part of a strategic route between Leeds and Manchester/Preston. Numerous journey possibilities would thereby be created, including commuter traffic flows to the Leeds and Manchester city regions and long distance traffic flows between those regional centres and their respective satellite towns. It has been estimated that over the course of the next ten years there will be a requirement for an additional 150,000 workers in Leeds and an additional 100,000 workers in Manchester. Pennine Lancashire, mid-way between the two regional centres, is well placed to serve both markets.

11. There is existing commuter traffic from Pennine Lancashire to Leeds, but in the absence of a rail service that traffic moves by road – either to Leeds itself or (in view of increasing road congestion on the approaches to Leeds) to the railhead at Steeton & Silsden. With re-opening of the railway between Skipton and Colne, not only would there be the likelihood of capturing much of the existing commuter traffic, but also the opportunity of generating significant additional commuter traffic. The provision of a high quality rail service between Pennine Lancashire and Leeds is likely to generate a growth in traffic similar to that seen on the Airedale route in recent years.

12. Equally, there is existing commuter traffic from Pennine Lancashire to Manchester, but little (if any) of that commuter traffic is currently carried by rail by virtue of the shortcomings of the existing rail service – notably the absence of through services and the lengthy journey times caused by poor connections at Blackburn. Improvements to the existing rail service between Pennine Lancashire and Manchester are likely to yield significant rewards, particularly as increasing road congestion on the approaches to Manchester starts to make journeys by road less attractive.

13. In addition to addressing the transport needs of Pennine Lancashire, re-opening of the railway between Skipton and Colne as part of a strategic route between Leeds and Manchester/Preston would, as indicated in paragraphs 14 to 16 below, serve to address many of the issues identified in the Consultation Draft as objectives to which investment in infrastructure can contribute, namely economic growth, jobs and private sector investment, quality of life and the environment.

14. Rail has a role to play in alleviating the effects of social deprivation in areas in need of significant regeneration and economic growth. An effective transport infrastructure can provide access to key social and major economic centres. Obvious examples include access to places of employment (both for the employed and those seeking employment), educational establishments, medical and other facilities, and leisure amenities. The JMP report indicates that –

(A) 148 out of the 279 wards along the line of the railway between Shipley, Skipton and Blackburn are in the most deprived quartile at national level, with some being amongst the most deprived wards in Britain; and

50

(B) car ownership is much lower than elsewhere in the country, with 30% of all households in Pendle (and up to 50% in some wards) having no access to a car.

Re-opening the railway between Skipton and Colne would accordingly bring a step change in the economic and social opportunities available to the residents of Pennine Lancashire. A re-opened railway would provide a connection between an area of high social deprivation and the Leeds city region. It would also provide a connection to the Manchester city region and Manchester Airport – not only from Pennine Lancashire, but also from large areas of Yorkshire around Skipton, Keighley and Shipley.

15. Rail also has a role to play in limiting future growth of road traffic. The JMP Report indicates that re-opening the railway between Skipton and Colne would result in –

(A) an annual reduction in vehicle kilometers of between 3,141,000 and 4,709,000, with a consequent annual reduction in carbon footprint of between 90 and 159 tonnes; and

(B) an annual reduction in road casualties of between 129 and 193, with a consequent saving in accident costs.

16. Further, rail has a role to play in developing the local tourist market. As indicated in the JMP Report, re-opening the railway between Skipton and Colne would not only make it easier for residents of Pennine Lancashire (and indeed areas further west) to visit Skipton and the Yorkshire Dales, but would also serve to draw visitors (from both sides of the Pennines) into Pennine Lancashire and Calderdale. The Craven area of North Yorkshire (Skipton and the Dales) attracts 6 million visitors a year, who spend a total of £240 million and support 4,800 jobs. The majority of those visitors travel less than 40 miles from their homes, which would include Pennine Lancashire. In this context, the well-advanced proposal for the re-introduction of rail services from Skipton to Bolton Abbey, together with the long term aspiration for the resumption of passenger services from Skipton to Grassington, would only serve to make a rail service to Skipton from Pennine Lancashire and beyond even more attractive.

The unidentified gap that is the need for an additional cross-Pennine rail route

17. The Consultation Draft recognises (paragraph 5.1) that the most acute issues include accommodating the growth in commuter journeys and certain interurban flows. Peak and off-peak overcrowding on the primary cross-Pennine route via Standedge is identified (Executive Summary page 8; section 4 pages 54 to 61) as one of the principal gaps to be addressed by the Northern RUS. The Consultation Draft acknowledges (Section 4 page 56) that even the provision of an additional fifth train every hour throughout the day between Leeds and Manchester would be inadequate to address that gap, and therefore proposes (Section 4 page 61) in addition to the provision of an additional fifth train every hour throughout the day –

- train lengthening in the peaks at Leeds and Manchester, and

- two peak semi-fast services each way between Huddersfield and Leeds

Whether those proposals will be adequate for more than the immediate future must be doubtful, given the acceptance (Executive Summary page 6) that industry standard models tend to under-predict observed passenger growth in the regional centres.

18. The Consultation Draft also recognises (paragraph 5.1) that another of the most acute issues is the provision of additional capacity for freight traffic, and in particular for the significant increase in intermodal traffic anticipated (paragraph 5.2.8) to be the main growth for rail freight. As was recognised in the Y&H-RUS, the pattern of loading gauge is a constraint on freight use. In particular, the primary cross-Pennine route via Standedge is unable to accommodate 9’6” intermodal containers on conventional wagons. The Consultation Draft recognises (paragraph 5.5) that addressing the anticipated increase in intermodal traffic will require loading gauge enhancement to W9, W10 and W12, provision for train lengths of up to 775 metres, and the provision of additional freight paths on the key arteries throughout the Northern RUS area. The Consultation Draft suggests (map, page 35) that there will be loading gauge enhancement on the primary cross-Pennine route via Standedge, although that route is not included in the list (page 11) of routes expected to see loading gauge enhancement. Further, it does not appear that the necessary work will be undertaken earlier than CP7, with no indication being given as to the likely duration of the work.

19. The Y&H-RUS also recognised that, quite apart from the restrictions imposed by loading gauge, freight capacity is severely constrained by the absence of paths on key freight arteries and associated diversionary routes. The arteries where increased capacity was recognised as being most challenging included the primary cross-Pennine

51

route via Standedge. It was anticipated that by CP6 all practical options would have been taken up and that the route would be operating at capacity. It was suggested that it might be necessary to give consideration to four tracking much of the route, including the renovation and re-opening of the old Standedge tunnels and the re- opening of the railway on the southern side of the valley between Standedge and Stalybridge (the cost of which is likely to be significantly greater than the cost of reopening the railway between Skipton and Colne as part of a strategic route between Leeds and Manchester/Preston). That suggestion does not appear in the Consultation Draft, but no indication is given as to how the requirements of freight traffic are to be addressed once the primary cross-Pennine route via Standedge is operating at capacity.

20. In the light of the capacity issues referred to in paragraphs 17 to 19 above, it is surprising that the Consultation Draft makes no mention of the possibility of re- opening the railway between Skipton and Colne as part of a strategic route between Leeds and Manchester/Preston. Not only would that route provide much-needed additional cross-Pennine capacity for both passenger and freight services, but –

(A) the route would be capable of electrification, so as to provide connectivity between the east coast electrified routes (which already extend as far as Skipton) and the west coast electrified routes (which are soon to be enhanced by electrification of “the Lancashire Triangle”;

(B) there is an almost total absence of tunnels, with the result that electrification and/or gauge enhancement to accommodate 9’6” intermodal containers on conventional wagons would be considerably easier and less expensive; and

(C) the route utilises the lowest crossing point of the Pennines, with the result that its ruling gradient is less than 1 in 200, making it ideally suited for freight traffic, which could also be routed away from the congested area of the Manchester Hub.

The unidentified gap that is the need for a diversionary cross-Pennine rail route

21. The Consultation Draft acknowledges (paragraph 5.2.9) the need for diversionary routes for both passenger and freight services in order to achieve the ‘Seven Day Railway’ that the industry’s customers increasingly demand. It is recognised that the need to run additional or lengthened services (as is proposed in the case of the primary cross- Pennine route via Standedge) will lead to the need for additional maintenance access. In addition to periods of routine maintenance, diversionary routes are also required for periods of perturbation. Major disruption to both passenger and freight services is likely to occur in the event of major enhancement to the primary cross-Pennine route via Standedge being undertaken, whether that enhancement were loading gauge enhancement for intermodal freight traffic, electrification as contemplated by the Consultation Draft (Executive Summary page 13), and/or four tracking of the route considered by the Y&H-RUS.

22. In the light of the need for diversionary routes referred to in paragraph 21 above, it is surprising that the Consultation Draft makes no mention of the possibility of re- opening the railway between Skipton and Colne as part of a strategic route between Leeds and Manchester/Preston. This is particularly so, given the acknowledgment in the Consultation Draft (paragraph 5.5) that a benefit of new or reopened lines is that they could be unconstrained by traditional limitations on maximum speed, loading gauge and other output characteristics, and can be built with very little impact on the existing network, thereby minimising disruption to services during construction.

The solution to unidentified gaps offered by re-opening the railway between Skipton and Colne

23. Re-opening the railway between Skipton and Colne would address the unidentified gaps referred to in the previous sections of this response in the following ways –

(A) It would address the transport needs of Pennine Lancashire by enabling the provision of high quality rail services between Pennine Lancashire and the Leeds city region and (in conjunction with the existing schemes referred to in paragraph 9 above) between Pennine Lancashire and the Manchester city region/Manchester Airport.

(B) It would assist in achieving many of the objectives to which investment in infrastructure can contribute outlined in the Consultation Draft, including the alleviation of social deprivation in areas in need of significant regeneration and economic growth, a reduction in the growth of road traffic and road casualties, and the development of the local tourist market.

52

(C) By providing much-needed additional cross-Pennine capacity for both passenger and freight services, it would ameliorate the acute issue identified in the Consultation Draft of accommodating the growth in commuter journeys and inter-urban flows on the primary cross-Pennine route via Standedge; it would (for example) facilitate direct journeys between Airedale and destinations west of the Pennines, which would no longer need to be routed via Leeds, so easing congestion on services between Airedale and Leeds, and on cross-Pennine services between Leeds and Manchester via Standedge.

(D) It would be possible to operate trans-Pennine freight services (to/from west coast ports, the west coast main line, the east coast main line and east coast ports) on an easily graded and potentially electrified route that avoided entirely the congested area around Manchester and the primary cross-Pennine route via Standedge which is already operating at near capacity.

(E) It would avoid the substantial expenditure and (perhaps even more importantly) the inevitable and prolonged disruption that would be involved in undertaking any major enhancement to the primary cross-Pennine route via Standedge, whether that enhancement were loading gauge enhancement for intermodal freight traffic, electrification and/or four tracking of the route.

(F) It would provide a diversionary route between locations on opposite sides of the Pennines which was not dependent upon the primary cross-Pennine route via Standedge which is already operating at near capacity; further any work required in connection with gauge enhancement and/or electrification could be undertaken without causing disruption to the existing network.

Conclusion

24. The JMP Report indicates that re-opening of the former railway between Skipton and Colne would produce a positive benefit cost ratio of up to 2.43, depending upon whether the railway is rebuilt as single or double track, the nature of the service operated, and the growth and cost scenarios adopted. Given that the appraisal by JMP is only at GRIP1 Stage, the costs include an “optimism bias” of over 60% on the capital costs and 40% on the operating costs. Accordingly, there is likely to be considerable potential to improve the benefit cost ratio as more detailed work is undertaken. Further, as already mentioned, the Consultation Draft accepts that industry standard models tend to under-predict observed passenger growth in the regional centres.

25. SELRAP’s campaign for re-opening the railway between Skipton and Colne has attracted substantial and wide- ranging support from the worlds of politics, business and education, as well as from the community in general. That support demonstrates that the “gap” represented by this “missing link” in the rail network is one which is widely recognised, and that a service filling that gap is one which would be well used.

26. The Consultation Draft acknowledges (paragraph 5.5) that there could be options to provide additional capacity through re-opening currently disused lines or construction of some completely new sections of railway. SELRAP agrees with that conclusion, and believes that for the reasons set out in this response the railway between Skipton and Colne should be a prime candidate for re-opening in view of the substantial impact it would have in improving the capacity of the rail network as a whole. SELRAP further believes that it would be appropriate for the Northern RUS to mirror the conclusion in the Executive Summary of the L&C-RUS that the route between Colne and Skipton could be a candidate for addition to the network with the alignment being protected for railway use, and to include the development of the project in Network Rail’s on-going strategy.

27. SELRAP remains ready, willing and able to work with Network Rail in developing the project to re-open the railway between Skipton and Colne, and will in any event continue its efforts to identify a suitable source or sources of funding for the project.

53

APPENDIX B

SELRAP's Response to the Consultation on the LTP Plan 2011 - 2016 Draft Strategy for North Yorkshire County Council – July 2010, based on the Vision, 5 Objectives [Part 1] & Delivery [Part 2]

SELRAP believes that the Reopening of the Colne – Skipton Railway would meet the Vision, 5 Objectives [Part 1] & Delivery [Part 2] as set out in the Consultation Draft Document of the NYCC Local Transport Plan for the period 2011 -2016.

SELRAP supports the reinstatement of the line for the following reasons:

• There are clear social, economic & environmental benefits, as outlined in the JMP Consulting Full & Executive Summary Reports [October 2007] as well as the JRC Consulting Scoping Document [May 2010], which sets the next steps for SELRAP: Creating a Project Development Group to take forward Stages 2 and 3 of the GRIP Process [Network Rail “Guide to Railway Investment Projects”] . The route is protected and the railway could be relatively easily restored – it represents good value for money – Benefit Cost Ratios of between 2.43 [Single Track] and 1.53 [Double Track] – see JMP Executive Summary and JRC Consulting Reports sent separately; a full JMP Report can be found on the website: www.selrap.org.uk .

• The Social, Economic and Environmental Benefits of the Scheme fit with the Criteria of the 5 Objectives and could be part of the Delivery Programme of Priority Projects within the Framework and Timetable of LTP3 [2011 -2016] & the next Network Rail HLOS [High level Output Strategy] Period [2011 – 2016], if NYCC works in Partnership with other County and Regional Agencies.

• The Reopening would act as an incentive and spur to the much needed Regeneration in the weaker economic areas of Skipton as mentioned in the Consultation Draft as well as in Pennine [East] Lancashire including Pendle [with West Craven] and help to rejuvenate the existing Pennine Lancashire Railway between Colne and Preston. This Scheme is supported by the Pennine Lancashire Leaders and Chief Executives Group [PLLACE] in their Transport Strategy and by their newly formed Regenerate Pennine Lancashire, which has the task of implementing the Multi Area Agreement. PLLACE has urged LCC to strengthen LTP3 by a commitment to pool a proportion of LTP3 Funds to be spent on infrastructure projects within MAA areas agreed by MAA Boards and would expect specific reference to the key rail transport schemes linking Pennine Lancashire to Manchester and Leeds City Regions via Skipton and the Aire Valley. So, there would be mutually shared benefits between Skipton [NYCC] and Pennine Lancashire [LCC].

• Furthermore, the former Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, indicated Government support for reopening of the line when he stated: “The Department of Transport has agreed to work with Pennine Lancashire partners to develop a process to take forward the Colne to Skipton Reinstatement, through the Pennine Lancashire Multi Area Agreement”. The Benefit of Regeneration fits with the Criteria of Objective 1: “Local Economies”.

• This Project, together with the reopening of the Todmorden Curve, would not only bring inward investment but also provide Accessibility and Connectivity to other Regions in the North and major Cities, such as Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool – access to job opportunities and social mobility for those without cars in the Skipton and Aire Valley and the East Lancashire Valley [Pennine Lancashire] & faster, more direct, rail routes to these and other destinations wider afield. This fits with Criteria of Objective 4: “Access to Services”, as well as Objective 1.

• In particular, the Leeds City Region Partnership in their Transport Vision and Strategy says that the strategic support for the Skipton – Colne reopening is underpinned by proposed improvements to the Airedale Line capacity to carry the intended heavy rail linkage between Leeds and Central Lancashire City Regions. This route would include both passenger and freight services. The Vision further emphasises: “Creation of a direct railway service via Skipton- Colne between Pennine Lancashire and Leeds will be faster than off-peak car and even more competitive in peak times”. The map on the next page, shows the connections in the Leeds City Region Catchment Area and marks the “Leeds City Region to Central Lancashire Railway to Re-open” with a plum coloured line.

• This Scheme would encourage Tourism into the Yorkshire Dales National Park by rail rather than by car from Lancashire, Manchester and Liverpool , particularly with the Embsay Railway’s proposals to extend Bolton Abbey rail services to Skipton, as well as eventually from Grassington to Skipton – both areas have ¾ million visitors a year, mostly by car. Pendle [e.g. Boundary Mill, Colne has 2.5 million visitors a year] & Pennine Lancashire would also attract visitors from North Yorkshire & Leeds City Region. [Fits with Objectives 1 & 4]

54

Leeds City Region catchments

“Leeds City Region to Central Lancashire Railway to Re-open” (JRC report)

• It would also take pressure off the other main rail route across the Pennines between Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds & Hull [Manchester Hub and M62 Corridor], relieve Congestion, and provide Accessibility and Choice with an Alternative Trans-Pennine Direct & Fast Route for travellers from East to West and East to West across the Pennines. The re-opened Skipton–Colne Railway would provide a useful Diversionary Route while the Standedge Tunnel Route to improve the main rail services between Hull - Leeds - Huddersfield – Manchester - Liverpool is being considered and constructed. This upgrading will take a long time and be a very expensive project compared with the reopening of the Skipton–Colne railway, which could be reinstated more quickly and cheaply. [Fits with Objectives 1 & 4]

Strategic map showing Skipton-Colne line as part of a new east-west route • It would restore the “Missing Link” to the National Rail Network with Rail Services connecting to the North from Skipton [East Cumbria, Carlisle & Scotland] and to the North West from Skipton [Lancaster and South Lakeland] as well as to the South [Leeds & London], the East [Hull] and North East [Teesside & Tyneside]. [Fits with Objectives 1 & 4]

55

• It could also provide a vital extra rail route between the West Coast Merseyside Ports & East Coast Humberside Ports, as well as Teeside and Tyneside Ports, with Links between Ireland & Europe for Passengers and Freight, as shown in the Strategic Map on Page 4 below. [Fits with Objectives 1 & 4].

• This Rail Scheme would contribute towards reducing CO2 emissions, road accidents and congestion by transferring passenger and freight traffic from road to rail. This would help to protect the Natural and Built “Environment” and combat “Climate Change” [Objective 2], improve “Safer and Healthier Travel” [Objective 3] and increase “Quality of Life” for all. [Objective 5].

• There is strong Political Support for the Reopening of this Railway from all the main political parties. As well as support from the previous Government [Labour], already mentioned above:

• Stephen Hammond, Conservative Shadow Transport Minister, before the General Election, stated: “There are substantial benefits, it is clear, from reopening this [Skipton-Colne] portion of the track. They are not only direct benefits, but [also] the wider benefits”.

• Norman Baker, Lib Dem Shadow Secretary of State for Transport, before the Election, and now a Minister at the DfT in the Coalition Government said: “We have identified 14 lines which we think should be reopened without further delay. You will not be surprised to learn that Colne - Skipton is in there!”

• Chris Davies, Lib Dem NW MEP, declared: “We are talking here about creating an east – west rail artery [serving] the 7 million population in the North West.”

This evidence is contained in Press Reports: “Politicians back rail link call” - “Verdicts on SELRAP’s Campaign” on SELRAP’s Conference on 6/11/09. [See attached Leader Times Newspapers Article, 13 th November 2009; see also Report in the Craven Herald]

• The Rail Industry, Developers, Planners and Consultants have also said yes to the rail link:

1. Network Rail said “It would be more than willing to work alongside other industry parties with a prospective funder, who wishes to take the scheme forward in the future”. This view is mirrored in their Lancashire and Cumbria Route Utilisation Strategy [August 2008] when it looks forward to the next High Level Output Strategy period, starting in 2014 : “Should the promoters of the scheme to reopen the route from Skipton – Colne be successful in securing funding, then it is likely that this line will have reopened.” 2. Peter Frost, Managing Director, Kilbride Community Rail Ltd, which specialises, as Developers of Rail Transport and Regeneration Schemes stated: “Campaigns like this are vital to encouraging rail development round the country.” 3. Steven Cochrane, Planner, Head of Strategy for PLLACE, considers that this Railway Route is a Strategic Link between City Regions. 4. Alan Beswick, Director, JMP Consultants, reiterated: “I think the city links are vital to the campaign. There is a consensus that rail is going to form part of our future.”

• 279 District, Town and Parish Councils across the North appreciate that the reopening will bring benefits to their residents. The Campaign also has the Support of 146 MPs, 80 Peers in the House of Lords, 44 MEPs, over 340 Councillors, 130 Business & 152 Non-Government Organisations. SELRAP has 435 Individuals and 53 Affiliated Groups as Members.

In conclusion, SELRAP would suggest that this widespread and varied Support for the Reinstatement of the Colne – Skipton Railway would indicate that this Campaign meets with the Criteria of all 5 Objectives.

In the light of the above evidence, we hope that North Yorkshire County Council will prioritise this Rail Reopening Project in the Final LTP3.

56

APPENDIX C

SELRAP's Response to the Consultation on the LTP Plan 2011 - 2021 Draft Strategy for Lancashire - November 2010, based on the Questions listed on the Response Form:

1. Does the vision capture the main transport issues in Lancashire over the next ten years?

The Vision does capture the 10 main transport issues, which the Final Draft has identified. In particular, SELRAP supports the need to:

• Invest in priorities to support sustainable economic growth and provide better access to education and employment. • Reduce congestion and assisting economic growth. • Create better connections and links with areas inside and outside Lancashire, which will foster Regeneration - adding, especially in the deprived and isolated East Lancashire [Pennine Lancashire]. • Develop attractive, reliable, profitable, and well used bus and rail services - adding, especially with integrated transport provision, such as Rail/bus interchanges. • Provide access for our more isolated communities - adding, especially in rural West Craven. 2. How will the Vision be delivered for 2021?

SELRAP supports the aim/objective in the Vision that: • "We must also consider a wide range of funding sources ... New funding sources will be sought where these can provide resources that help deliver our priorities." SELRAP would advocate specifically that there should be a focus on private investment in larger rail transport projects, such as the reopening of the Colne - Skipton railway. SELRAP is already in negotiation with funding partners from the private sector [e.g. rail infrastructure company and investment bankers], as well as the public sector in a wide ranging partnership. Such an investment would certainly meet the Priorities identified in the Vision of providing better access and connections to employment, education and training as well as being a driver for regeneration in such deprived areas as East Lancashire and its rural hinterland. Both CC Tim Ashton, Portfolio Holder for Transport, and Chris Anslow, Public Transport Adviser, are fully aware of SELRAP's initiative. So, we urge LCC to specifically include SELRAP's scheme among its priority projects in the Final Local Transport Plan 2011 - 2021. As an indication of its full support for the reopening of the Colne - Skipton Railway, SELRAP would also ask that LCC purchase the trackbed between Colne and Foulridge from the British Rail Residual Property Board to add to the rest of the trackbed LCC owns in Lancashire.

3. Has LTP3 successfully identified the most important challenges that face the Lancashire transport network?

The Final Draft Plan has identified the main challenges. In particular, SELRAP appreciates the challenge of poor rail services:

• "The frequency of services and journey times are a problem when travelling from Colne, Nelson and Burnley, whether west to Central Lancashire, south to Manchester or east to Bradford and Leeds." SELRAP would argue that enhancements to the existing East Lancashire Railway should go hand in hand with the reopening of the Colne - Skipton Railway and the reinstatement of the Todmorden Curve in order to provide easy access to Bradford and Leeds and M/C so that there are more frequent and faster rail services. Rail access and links/connectivity are the key to a sustainable and integrated transport policy.

4. Re Understanding our Most Important Challenges

In particular, SELRAP agrees with the following important challenges:

• The need to support economic growth and regeneration across the county through tackling poor connectivity, congestion and poorer parts of the network which makes travel difficult; • Providing access to skills and education; • High dependency on the car for personal travel; • High levels of carbon emissions By providing better rail services, other challenges would also be met and overcome, such as:

• Road casualties among children; • Poor access to services and social networks for vulnerable and isolated communities in our towns and rural areas;

57

• Addressing the transport needs of an ageing population; • Negative impacts of traffic and transport on communities and the public realm. SELRAP would also ask that the challenge of "Access to employment opportunities" be included in the list of Biggest Challenges.

5. Have the LTP3 transport goals fully addressed the challenges identified?

SELRAP agrees that the 7 transport goals will address the identified challenges. In particular, we strongly support the following goals:

• To help to secure a strong economic future by making transport and travel into and between our major economic centres more effective and efficient and by improving links to neighbouring major economic areas and beyond; • To provide the public with safe and convenient access to the services, jobs, health, leisure and educational opportunities that they need; • To improve the accessibility, availability and affordability of transport as a contribution to the development of strong and cohesive communities; • To create more attractive neighbourhoods by reducing the impact of transport on our quality of life and by improving our public realm; • To reduce the carbon impact of Lancashire's transport requirements, whilst delivering sustainable value for money transport options to those who need them. SELRAP believes that the reopening of the Colne - Skipton Railway would help to achieve the 5 transport goals listed above, especially in terms of economic growth in Pennine Lancashire, connectivity to major economic centres, access to jobs, etc, including tourism, quality of life, public health and well being, and reducing our carbon footprint, the impact of Climate Change, by a switch from unsustainable road to sustainable rail services.

6. Do you support the proposed emphasis on the three priority areas for the early years of the plan?

SELRAP agrees with the setting of the three priorities in the early years of the Plan. In particular, it supports the top priority:

• "Given the fragile state of the economy our highest priority will be to support private sector led economic growth, the creation of jobs and access to employment." SELRAP believes the reopening of the Colne - Skipton Railway would contribute to this highest priority, especially as it would involve private sector investment in the reinstatement of not only the closed part of the line but also enhance the existing East Lancashire Railway by providing a electrified and double track rail service with access to economic centres within Lancashire and beyond.

SELRAP also supports the second priority:

• "To invest in the safety of our children and young people in the early years of this strategy to reduce the numbers involved in accidents on our streets, particularly in our disadvantaged communities. SELRAP considers one of the best ways of reducing road accidents is to lessen the number of vehicles on our roads. This can be achieved by providing alternative means of public transport, such as rail and bus services. Rail is the safest mode of transport both for passengers and freight.

7. Are the seven ten year priorities the most important priorities for Lancashire transport over the next ten years?

SELRAP agrees that "Over the longer term, as the economy recovers, we will look to bring forward some larger strategic schemes that will deliver a step-change in the long-term economic performance of Lancashire which would include improved East/West connectivity, and better linkages with Manchester and Liverpool through the electrification of the key routes and new services via the Todmorden Curve."

SELRAP would also argue that the Reopening of the Colne - Skipton Railway should be included in the list of larger strategic rails schemes and be considered in the medium rather than in the longer term due to the fact that SELRAP is already in the process of bringing together a funding partnership to achieve its objectives. Such a scheme would not only improve "East/West connectivity and better linkages to M/C and Liverpool through the electrification of the key routes and new services via the Todmorden Curve" but also give access to the electrified Aire Valley railway from Skipton to Leeds and Bradford. In addition such a scheme would help relieve congestion and provide a vital Trans-Pennine West - East rail link between the Merseyside/Fleetwood/Heysham Ports from Ireland and Hull/Humber Ports to Europe. The SELRAP scheme would be both for passengers and freight [to take lorries off road and on to rail] and involve building key inland port

58 container hubs. One of these hubs would be situated in East Lancashire and attract inward investment, industry and jobs within the area of the rail complex.

8. Do you consider the proposed actions are the right ones to achieve the Improve Access into Areas of Economic Growth and Regeneration priority ?

SELRAP thinks the proposed actions under this priority should be strengthened.

Rail Transport has a key role in achieving this Priority, particularly in East Lancashire, due to its relatively isolated position on the periphery of the main economic hubs. While Burnley is highlighted as an area for attention, the rest of deprived parts of East Lancashire are not identified for action under this priority.

Yet, under "What we will do", the Final Draft states that LCC will "Work with partners to bring about improvements to connections and links between key employment centres in Lancashire, and also to Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Cumbria and Leeds/Bradford (and beyond)." SELRAP would urge that the whole of East Lancashire should added to the list of "Areas which are the focus for our economic aspirations and which will be the focus for these activities". As well as the commitment to "Improve access to the major ports of Heysham and Fleetwood", SELRAP would urge that rail access to and links between Merseyside and Hull/Humber Ports should also be added to the list of activities to focus on".

9. Do you consider the proposed actions are the right ones to achieve the Provide Better Access to Education and Employment priority?

SELRAP agrees with the proposed actions under "What we will do" and, in particular:

• "We will work with bus and rail operators to provide more joined-up and coherent public transport services that improve access to jobs, training and education opportunities." SELRAP also agrees that there needs to be a focus for these activities on:

• "The need to develop access to employment opportunities and access to skills development is something that is important across Lancashire particularly in areas such as Colne ..." However, SELRAP would also like to see specific mention of Nelson, Brierfield and rural West Craven in Pendle, as well as Burnley and Hyndburn added to the list of areas which will be the focus for these activities.

10. Do you consider the proposed actions are the right ones to achieve the Improve People's Quality of Life and Wellbeing priority?

SELRAP agrees that the areas which will be the focus for these activities should include the disadvantaged communities of Accrington, Burnley, Nelson, and Colne.

SELRAP would also suggest that the relatively disadvantaged communities of Barnoldswick and Earby in West Craven should also be added to the list for action.

11. Do you consider the proposed actions are the right ones to achieve the Improve the Safety of our Streets for our most Vulnerable Residents priority?

SELRAP agrees with the proposed actions for this priority under "What we will do" and "Areas which will be the focus for these activities".

SELRAP would like to see Home Zones added to actions in deprived residential areas and not just 20mph schemes; and, to include the Coates Council Estate in Barnoldswick in the list of "at risk" areas.

12. Do you consider the proposed actions are the right ones to achieve the Provide Safe, Reliable, Convenient and Affordable Transport Alternatives to the Car priority?

SELRAP supports specifically the 3 actions under "What we will do":

• "We will work with bus and rail operators to invest in new public transport services, including new bus routes, stations, and greater capacity, where there is a proven economic or regeneration benefit"; • "We will work with bus and rail operators to press for clean, well maintained and well lit vehicles, stops and interchanges, and for local services to run to schedule and for local bus and rail services to be timetabled to connect with principal services to major destinations"; • "Develop local rail services to achieve further growth in patronage through partnership working with the rail industry and local communities." SELRAP urges that the two "areas which will be the focus for these activities": (1) "Public transport services and routes to Lancashire's main town and city centres for employment and education"; (2) "Congested routes in urban areas" will

59

also include plans to upgrade the East Lancashire Railway and to reopen the Colne - Skipton Railway, which would provide an alternative to dependency on the car.

13. Do you consider the proposed actions are the right ones to achieve the Maintain our Assets priority goals?

SELRAP agrees that Lancashire's transport assets should be maintained, particularly for a) strategic routes, to allow the efficient transportation of goods; and b) in residential areas, to enable people to travel in comfort and safety.

SELRAP, however, suggests that this priority of caring for its Assets should not stop LCC from finding different ways of funding sustainable modes of transport, including rail, which would help to reduce road traffic and the pressure to build new roads as well as help relieve congestion and alleviate the adverse impact of climate change.

14. Do you consider the proposed actions are the right ones to achieve the Reduce Carbon Emissions and its Effects priority?

SELRAP agrees with "What we will do" and in particular, to:

• "Improve the range of sustainable transport options available, including trains, buses, cycling and walking, ensuring that these are as affordable and convenient as possible." SELRAP also agrees with the "Areas which will be the focus for these activities" and the emphasis that "The reduction in carbon emissions is a priority running through all our activities, which will inform and influence the schemes and programmes that are developed to meet the activities under the other six transport priorities identified in this Strategy."

SELRAP believes this is an essential priority which should inform all other priorities and guide LCC in developing a truly sustainable and integrated transport system with accessible links across Lancashire, the North West and other Regions in the North of England. Rail should be a major component in delivering such a transport system.

With regard to Measuring our Performance, SELRAP agrees with the list of 7 Performance Indicators - targets for rolling three year periods towards 2021.

In particular, SELRAP supports Performance Indicator 1: 'Supporting Economic Growth and Regeneration':

• Levels of employment and business turnover • Public transport accessibility into main employment and regeneration areas SELRAP would suggest adding the following measurable target to the above Performance Indicator: "Monitor levels of private investment in transport schemes and infrastructure."

With regard to the "Changing Context", SELRAP agrees with the Statement of the Coalition Government of June 2010:

"The Government believes that a modern transport infrastructure is essential for a dynamic and entrepreneurial economy, as well as to improve well-being and quality of life. We need to make the transport sector greener and more sustainable, with tougher emission standards and support for new transport technologies."

SELRAP also accepts the Government announcement on 22nd September 2010, relating to a new Sustainable Transport Fund which will challenge local transport authorities to develop packages of measures that support economic growth and reduce carbon in their communities as well as delivering cleaner environments, improved safety and increased levels of physical activity. The Government also announced it intends to pool the centrally funded local transport grants to create fewer but larger funding streams which are largely formula based.

SELRAP believes that the Government's Transport Policy supports SELRAP's case for the reopening the Colne - Skipton Railway with some financial assistance from public funds in partnership with investment from the private sector. Therefore, SELRAP urges LCC to include the reinstatement of this railway in its list of priorities for action in the Final Local Transport Plan for Lancashire 2011 - 2021.

60

APPENDIX D JMP Report - Reopening of the Skipton to Colne railway Module 3 Market Assessment and Cost Benefit Analysis CONSULTING 1. Introduction

Scope of module

1.1 The objective of this module is to provide a review of the potential market for the reopened railway and, (in conjunction with the analysis of costs in Modules 1 and 2), enable an update of the previous cost benefit analysis to be undertaken.

1.2 The starting point for the review is provided by a report prepared for Lancashire County Council by consultants in 2003 – Future of the Skipton-Colne Railway Formation , August 2003, Steer Davies Gleave (SDG). We have sought to update this work with more recent information wherever possible, or provide other data sources to corroborate information. These sources (referenced throughout the document) include an analysis of travel to work census data, additional traffic counts, rail industry information, City Region and other published sources of data.

Freight Services

1.3 It should be noted that an outline of the potential freight market was undertaken as part of Modules 1 and 2 which concluded that in the short to medium term we can see little scope for developing freight traffic to serve local origins or destinations or for the route acting as an alternative for existing freight routes. In situations such as this we consider it is more important to seek to establish whether there is a cost benefit case that does not rely on freight traffic.

1.4 Although this may be considered unnecessarily restrictive, our experience of preparing business cases for DfT suggests that they would be unlikely to consider any benefits from freight in the economic appraisal unless there is a firm commitment from an operator to run freight services over the route. There is clearly an element of ‘chicken and egg’ here. If the route existed, it would be more likely that freight operators would see the opportunities associated with it but, in its absence, the route won’t feature in their thinking at all. By undertaking the appraisal on just the passenger services there is an argument that we are providing a conservative case for the route which could be subsequently enhanced if additional freight services could be identified.

Passenger Services

1.5 The SDG report considered four local service options that from an operational perspective can readily be slotted in to existing rail operations. These services comprised:

• Skipton – Colne shuttle;

• extending Blackpool South – Colne service to Skipton;

• creating a new Manchester Victoria – Skipton service via Colne; and

• creating a new Blackburn – Skipton service via Colne.

1.6 More discussion on services is contained within the working note provided for Modules 1 and 2 but, for the purposes of this updated appraisal, we have focused on these four options There are other long distance strategic service opportunities that could be considered but, as with the freight services, if a case can be proven with the more locally focused services, then we are presenting a conservative estimate of the potential benefits.

Structure of this Paper

1.7 The paper begins by looking at the evidence on current travel patterns within the corridor before turning to look at future prospects and preparing a number of demand scenarios for the appraisal which brings together the cost and benefit estimates to prepare an outline cost benefit analysis.

61

2. Current Market

Introduction

2.1 This current review does not attempt to produce a new forecasting model. Rather it reviews a number of sources of information about current travel patterns in order to assemble evidence to help us arrive at a view on a ‘base year’ demand (i.e. what scale of travel demand is there currently within the rail corridor?). These data sources are varied and relate to a number of different time periods but are discussed here in order to provide more context to the analysis that was presented in the previous report. Sources include:

• Lancashire County Council TRIPS model data (used in SDG study);

• The 2001 Census Journey to Work information;

• Burnley Citizens Panel Survey

• Current bus service provision;

• Various traffic counts held by Local Authorities;

• Movement information from various Northern Way & City Regions reports;

• Information on current rail travel from various sources (including Rail Industry Monitor, Route Utilisation Studies).

Base Year Trip Matrix (supplied for SDG study)

2.2 The SDG forecasts were based upon trip movements extracted from a Lancashire County Council TRIPS highway model of the Colne/Burnley area which was based on 1999 roadside interview survey data. Although this data is now eight years old, it has the advantage of being based on surveys of all highway travel in the corridor. It is therefore comprehensive, albeit dated. The model indicated that there are some 15,000 “in-scope” journeys (i.e. those made wholly within the catchment area of the Skipton – Colne railway) in a 12 hour day.

2.3 Key trip movements are presented in Table T2.1 . This shows that as well as local travel such as Barnoldswick to Skipton (15% of the 15,000 in-scope trips) the line could also serve more strategic movements such as Skipton to Manchester (7% of in-scope trips).

T2.1 Lancashire CC 1999 Base Demand – Key Movements

Origin Destination % of Demand Barnoldswick Burnley 15.7% Barnoldswick Skipton 15.0% Foulridge Burnley 9.2% Skipton Burnley 7.9% Earby Burnley 7.9% Barnoldswick Foulridge 7.8% Skipton Manchester Victoria 6.8% Burnley Shipley 5.5% Thornton in Craven Skipton 3.5% Burnley Leeds 3.0%

Journeys to Work 2.4 The 2001 census provides information on the work travel patterns of UK residents. It provides data on the number of people making a journey to work from their home. The data is provided at a fine degree of spatial disaggregation known as Output Areas, (typically around 40 households). The Output Areas which make up the five origin settlements of interest of Barnoldswick, Colne, Earby, Foulridge, and Skipton were selected. These were searched in the census database as journey origins. Figures F2.1 and F2.2 show the geographical distribution of these trips. This provided all the travel to work destinations for the people living in these settlements.

62

2.5 In order to establish how many of these trips are likely to be realistically ‘in-scope’ to divert to rail, we have adopted recognised catchment areas around the origin and destination stations – a larger catchment area being used for the origin station but a smaller one for the destination, reflecting the fact that people are likely to have more travel options available to them for getting to the station from home than there will be for getting to their workplace having alighted from the train.

63

2.6 A two kilometres catchment area was placed around each of the ‘origin’ settlements and a buffer of 800 metres was placed around each of the destination stations on the surrounding rail network, 800 metres being adopted as a typically acceptable walking distance to/from a station. The number of trips to the top five destinations from each of the origins served by the Skipton – Colne railway is given in Table T2.2 . The reverse of these trips (e.g. journey to work to Colne from Skipton, Steeton, Keighley, Leeds and Bradford) have not been included here as the number of trips is relatively small.

T2.2 Daily Journey to Work Trips 2001 (In-Scope for the Re-opened Railway)

From To Total Skipton Colne 28 Nelson 8

Burnley Central Brierfield 28 0 Other 15

Barnoldswick Total 1175 Skipton Steeton 51 Keighley Leeds Bradford 46 Other 30

Colne Total 16 Colne Skipton 13 Nelson 3

Burnley Central Brierfield 10 7 Other 69

Earby Total 47 Colne 81 Nelson 39 Burnley Central Brierfield

Skipton 11 Other 10 Foulridge Total 18 Colne Nelson 21 Brierfield Burnley Central 21

Church & Oswaldtwistle 12 Other 9 Skipton Total 87 Total 2080

2.7 At first glance the journey to work trips from Colne shown in Table T2.2 might appear low compared with those for Barnoldswick given that Colne is a much larger settlement. However, this is because Table T2.2 does not show trips that are along the route of the existing railway (e.g. journeys to work from Colne that go westwards to Burnley, Nelson, Blackburn etc). Only those trips that are made to places that could be reached by a new service operating over the currently disused section of line are included.

64

Burnley Citizens Panel Survey

2.8 Burnley Borough Council undertakes regular Citizens Panel surveys which included a transport survey in 2005.

Mode of transport for

journ eys which go outside

Burnley

otal Car/Van as driver as Car/Van as passenger Car/Van Bicycle Motor cycle/Scooter Bus Train Walking/Jogging Taxi % % % % % % % % %T Going to/from work 87.7 11.2 -- 2.2 7.5 10.0 2.1 0.6 121.3

Going to/ from local shops 73.9 18.5 0.6 1.1 16.2 6.5 10.3 1.3 127.1 Going to/ from town centre shops 71.8 21.8 -- 1.2 23.9 5.4 5.3 1.9 131.3

Going to/from edge of town superstores 77.8 23.7 -- 1.9 10.6 1.6 3.4 1.9 120.9

Going to/ from out of town shops, mills, factory outlets 76.8 25.3 -- 1.1 15.0 3.1 1.4 1.0 123.7

Going to/ from town centre pubs/clubs 51.3 18.6 -- 0.6 19.7 8.2 6.3 33.9 138.6

Visiting family and friends 74.3 26.8 -- 1.9 14.1 6.6 2.9 2.3 128.9 Other leisure activity 79.0 22.4 3.6 1.9 15.2 10.6 8.2 5.0 145.9 Taking the children to/ from school 79.9 8.6 -- 1.6 5.6 -- 11.3 1.5 108.5

Other trips 76.3 24.1 0.9 0.6 24.8 16.4 5.0 7.3 155.4

2.9 The table above indicates how local residents use different modes of travel for different purposes. For journeys to work around 10% of journeys involve the use of the train (note that the totals exceed 100% since some people will use more than one mode for their journey). It is important to note that this table relates only to adults (including pensioners) and excludes the under-18s. This fact, coupled with a low response rate from the under- 30s, means that education journeys are effectively excluded from the survey.

Traffic Flows on A56

2.10 Another source of data is traffic flow (count) information from Automatic Traffic Counters (ATCs) placed on the highway by County Councils. Although ATCs do not tell us anything about where people are travelling to or from they have the advantage of being much cheaper to install and, as a consequence, are routinely used by local authorities to monitor traffic volumes . This means that they are a good source of more up-to-date information.

2.11 As part of our investigation, data for two sites on the A56 were obtained. The first site, south of Kelbrook, shows that the five day 12 hour average (February to June 2007) is 7,159 vehicles northbound and 7,095 southbound. The second site, north of Earby, shows that the five day 12 hour average (February to June 2007) is 3,747 vehicles northbound and 3,742 southbound.

65

Bus Services

2.12 Obtaining information on bus passenger numbers is extremely difficult as it is considered by bus operators to be commercially confidential. However, it is possible to make assumptions about travel based upon the level of bus service that is provided.

2.13 There are currently only limited bus services between Skipton and Barnoldswick and Colne. There is an hourly direct service from Colne to Skipton (215). Alternatively, people can travel from Colne to Cross Hills (Mainline 4) where there are onward services to Skipton (66 / 78 / 79 / 80). From Barnoldswick, there is only one service to Skipton which operates every two hours. A summary of the services available is presented in Table T2.3.

T2.3 Bus Services Between Skipton and Colne

Daytime Freq

Route No. Destinations Mon - Fri Sat Sun

215 Colne – Skipton 1 per hr 1 per hr Up to 1 per hr Mainline 4 Colne – Cross Hills 1 per hr 1 per hr 1 per 2 hr

66 Cross Hills – Ski pton 2 per hr 2 per hr 1 per hr

78 Cross Hills – Ski pton 1 per hr until mid 1 per hr until afternoon mid - 79 Cross Hills – Ski pton 2 services am1 afternoon- - service pm 1 service am - -

28080 BarnoldCross Hillssw i–ck S ki– ptonSkipton 1 per 2 hr 1 per 2 hr -

Linking the City Regions

2.14 An important facet of the proposals to reopen the route is that the line links the Leeds City Region and the Central Lancashire City Region. A considerable body of work has been developed in recent times about the economic value of linkages between City Regions and there is some information about travel volumes which can help inform our analysis.

Leeds City Region

2.15 At the eastern end of the route is the Leeds City Region. As part of the development of a City Region transport vision some analysis of current and future transport demands and available transport capacity has been undertaken.

2.16 Figure F2.1 shows that even in 2001 the corridor between Leeds and Manchester had become one of the most constrained in the City Region and that the Skipton corridor was beginning to approach capacity.

2.17 A ‘do minimum’ future scenario for 2021 is illustrated in Figure F2.2. This shows the impact of the application of forecast growth on the current transport road and rail networks. A new black arrow category has been introduced which indicates where capacity is forecast to be over 100%, which represents severe road congestion and rail overcrowding. Figure 2.2 shows that the Leeds Manchester rail corridor will become overcrowded if nothing is done and that the Skipton to Leeds and Skipton to Bradford corridors are in effect at capacity. This analysis is being used to demonstrate that additional capacity is needed between Leeds and Lancashire/Manchester to enable the region to grow.

66

F2.1 2001 Main Highway and Rail Movement Patterns and Constraints Source: A Long Term Vision for Transport in Leeds City Region

F2.2 2021 Main Highway and Rail Movement Patterns and Constraints Source: A Long Term Vision for Transport in Leeds City Region

67

Central Lancashire City Region

2.18 We have not been able to identify a similar piece of analysis for the Central Lancashire City Region but other research demonstrates that, in terms of levels of Gross Value Added (the regional measure of GDP), employment, travel to work and migration patterns, there are four “nodes” of activity affecting the City Region. These have been identified as the areas centred on Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Preston. The research demonstrates that each of these areas acts as a node for public and private consumer services (the so called “travel to” movements associated with shopping, work, leisure and entertainment), clusters of advanced manufacturing industries and producer services (law, financial and business services).

2.19 Preston, and consequently Central Lancashire, has an important contribution to make to the Northern Way. Despite this, it is geographically “outlying” from the M62 motorway network connecting the other urban nodes along the M65 axis. Proposals for better connecting the Central Lancashire City Region to the other nodes and thereby enabling an optimum economic outcome are identified in the Northern Way Development Programme.

2.20 One of the transport priorities contained within the North West Regional Economic Strategy (RES) is to enhance public transport services between Liverpool / Manchester / Central Lancashire / Leeds / Sheffield in order to develop a critical mass of activity which supports growth of key sectors and widens the labour markets in the city centres.

Rail Usage in the Study Area

2.21 Other sources of data on current travel include the information provided from various rail documents.

Existing Rail Demand

2.22 The Lancashire and Cumbria Route Utilisation Study (RUS) by Network Rail shows that there are 4,300 daily trips between Lancashire/Cumbria and Yorkshire/Humberside across all the current corridors (i.e. Settle, Morecambe, Calder Valley routes). The RUS also shows that there are 1,870 daily trips on the Blackpool south to Colne corridor.

Recent Trends in Rail Demand Growth

2.23 Table T2.4 shows the growth in passenger journeys and passenger kilometres compared with the growth in timetabled train kilometres for TransPennine Express and Northern taken from the National Rail Trends Yearbooks which is published by The Office of the Rail Regulator (ORR).

2.24 This shows that TransPennine Express in particular has experienced significant growth in both passenger journeys and passenger kilometres over the past year.

T2.4 Recent Annual Rail Growth

2006-2007 2005-2006 TransPennine Northern Rail TransPennine Northern Rail

Passenger Kilometres 19.6%Express 4.6% Express6.8% 7.7% Passenger Journeys 13.9% 1.9% 6.6% 5.3% Timetabled Train Kilometres 5.2% 2.8% -1.6% - 1 2.25 The Rail Industry Monitor 2007 shows that there are 4.7million journeys per year between Yorkshire & Humber and the North West and furthermore that this movement has seen a significant growth of 54.5% since 1995 - equating to an annual growth rate of 4%. This indicates that the high levels of growth shown in Table T2.4 have, in fact, been sustained for over a decade.

Revenue Yield

2 2.26 The Rail Industry Monitor 2007 also shows that Northern Rail has a revenue yield of 7.7p/ passenger kilometre. This means that on average, allowing for the wide range of fare types that are available, passengers pay 7.7p for every kilometre that they travel. The TransPennine service has the highest yield for a regional operator with a revenue yield of 9.2p/km.

1 Rail Industry Monitor 2007, TAS 2 Rail Industry Monitor 2007, TAS

68

Future Rail Proposals

3 2.27 The Rail White Paper identifies additional capacity on the Trans-Pennine route as being a priority. This will be provided by lengthening the trains operated by TransPennine Express. The fastest services between Manchester and Leeds will be cut from around 55 minutes to 43 minutes. The recently announced High Level Output Specification (HLOS), which describes the improvements in rail safety, reliability and capacity which the Government wants to buy to 2014, will deliver a 30 per cent increase in capacity on the north Trans-Pennine route.

2.28 The Rail White Paper, forecasts a 15.9% increase in passenger kilometres between 2008/09 and 2013/14 on the North Trans- Pennine, North and West Yorkshire Routes. This equates to a 3% growth per annum.

2.29 We would conclude, therefore, that there is evidence of both a strong level of linkage between the City Regions east and west of the Pennines, that this market has been growing at above average rates for more than a decade and that this growth is expected to continue into the foreseeable future. Agencies responsible for economic development in the City Regions see risks to their economic performance in the failure to provide sufficient transport capacity to meet future growth predictions.

3 Competitive Position

3.1 A key question is whether reopening the Skipton-Colne line would provide a useful additional element of rail capacity across the Pennines. Part of the answer to that question is whether it would offer a competitive journey time, although this is only one element of the competitive position of course – relative fares and the costs of parking also coming into the equation.

3.2 Although the last two decades has seen the relative cost of car travel consistently decrease relative to public transport the combined impacts of road congestion and policies that have increased the cost of parking in the major conurbations may be beginning to tilt the balance in favour of rail in the future. Policies under consideration such as road user charging (nationally and potentially within some of the city regions) could tip the balance more conclusively – we consider this later.

Journey Times

3.3 In the meantime a comparison of current journey times between key locations by car, bus / coach and existing train services is presented in Table T3.1.

3.4 Car times are a mix of information taken from the RAC Route Planner (www.rac.co.uk/web/routeplanner/) combined with consultants estimates. Peak period car journey times vary greatly from day-to-day and within peak periods making rail a more predictable and reliable mode in terms of journey time.

3.5 Train times are taken from National Rail Enquiries (www.nationalrail.co.uk) and bus / coach times are taken from www.transportdirect.co.uk, nw.aimwebsites.co.uk or by consulting individual timetables.

3.6 Train times using existing services are shown in column 4 whilst column 5 includes an estimate of train journey times following the opening of the Skipton to Colne Line (timings taken from Modules 1 and 2).

T3.1 Journey Time Comparisons

Train with Skipton Route Car Car Bus / Existing - Colne Coach Colne – Leeds 52-70 min 95 min 135 min 157 min 1 68 min Colne – Skipton 18-20 min 23-30 min 42 min 183 min 14 min Skipton – 58-70 min 71-100 min 141 min 107 min 50-132 min2 Manchester 1. By combining bus and train travel, Leeds can be reached in 1 hour and 38 minutes from Colne. 2. Journey times of 50 minutes or less could be achieved with reinstatement of the Stansfield Curve at Todmorden.

3.7 In addition, depending upon the stopping pattern operated, the new link could also open up further journey opportunities from intermediate stations not currently served by the Leeds-Halifax-Preston-Blackpool North service.

3 Delivering a Sustainable Railway, DfT, July 2007

69

4 Forecasting Development of Demand Scenarios

4.1 As noted at the beginning of this paper the intention has not been to produce a new forecasting model, but to consider how the existing forecasts should be updated to allow for changing circumstances and to enable us to consider the implications of different assumptions.

SDG Model

4.2 The SDG demand and revenue assessment was based around an Excel-based logit mode choice model. SDG have kindly supplied the model to JMP for this current exercise. Car trip movements for this model were extracted from a Lancashire County Council highway model of the Colne/Burnley area built using specialist software (TRIPS). This model was built using 1999 roadside interview survey data. This showed that there were around

15,000 ‘in-scope’ journeys across a 12 hour day.

4.3 The model predicted that of these 15,000 in-scope daily journeys, the rail service captures around 260 (or 2%). This is quoted in the report as ‘around 300 trips’. When annualised and multiplied by a fare function this produces a revenue estimate of £200,000 per year. SDG do not quote what revenue or annualisation factors they have used but working backwards from their spreadsheets we estimate that it is equivalent of a fare of £2.14 per single trip (£4.28 return).

4.4 It was assumed by SDG that the source of the overall rail demand would be;

• around 30% diverted from car; • 50% will be ex bus; • and that 20% will be newly generated trips.

4.5 On this basis, SDG estimated that 500 trips per day would transfer from bus and 200 trips would be newly generated. This would give a total demand of approaching 1,000 single (or 500 return) trips per day. SDG forecast that this would produce total annual revenue of £620,000.

Updated Forecasts

Passenger Demand

4.6 For the purposes of this paper we have considered alternative methods for establishing what the demand could be. In so doing we can attempt to ‘benchmark’ the earlier forecasts, seek to draw some conclusions on the robustness of the estimates and provide a range of estimates by varying some of the key assumptions.

Demand Scenarios

In the following text we illustrate how we have developed a number of assumptions about diversion rates and growth rates. These have been assembled into packages to provide demand and revenue forecasts

for three scenarios: a central low scenario; a low scenario and a positive policy intervention (or “high”) scenario.

The Central Scenario as the name implies is our central estimate and is based upon a set of assumptions that we believe best reflect current policy.

The Positive Policy Scenario indicates how demand could be enhanced if a number of policy decisions that are favourable to rail are enacted – these could include infrastructure decisions such as reopening the Todmorden Curve or policy interventions which increase the cost of using a car, such as road pricing or increased car parking charges in the main city centres.

The Low Scenario includes a number of what we consider to be pessimistic assumptions such as lower than average rail patronage growth rates.

4.7 Consequently a revised set of forecasts has been produced using the journey to work data. This arguably provides a better estimate of in-scope trips, although since it only covers work journeys an allowance for other types of journeys needs to be added to it.

70

Journeys to Work – Potential Diversion to Rail

4.8 Table T2.2 showed that there are over 2,000 in-scope journey to work trips. This of course relates to 2001 and so needs to be updated to current levels. The DfT produce a traffic growth monitoring and forecasting tool known as TEMPRO and this shows that journey to work trips to Skipton/Colne have grown by 7.8% since the 2001 census. This implies that there could be around 2,240 in-scope daily journey to work trips.

4.9 If 10% of these switched to rail (in line with the findings of the Burnley Citizens Panel Survey for journeys to work) this would give 224 return work trips per day. This is taken as the Central Scenario.

Other Trips

4.10 To make an allowance for other non-work trips we have reviewed a number of sources and adopted the figures 4 from the National Rail Travel Survey 2007 as being the most appropriate. These show that, in Yorkshire & Humber and the North West, commuting accounts for 53% of trips with the other 47% being accounted for by a range of journey purposes including business and leisure. As a crude indicator of potential demand, we can apply this relationship to the journey to work estimates. This would increase the daily demand to 423 return trips. The connectivity for leisure purposes and the growth of enhanced Further and Higher Education facilities along the route mean that this is a conservative estimate.

Newly Generated Travel

4.11 Evidence suggests that, when a new rail station or new service is introduced, a proportion of the journeys will be newly generated (i.e. they were not made at all previously). The range of ‘generation factors’ varies considerably, but the most comprehensive analysis by Leeds University Institute for Transport Studies in the early 1990s suggested that this might typically be in the order of 15% of total trips are newly generated for weekday travel (primarily commuting) and 30% for weekend (leisure travel). The generated demand would be additional to the 423 daily return journeys.

4.12 The assumptions of 15% of total trips being newly generated for journeys to work and 30% for leisure travel are adopted for the Central Scenario. The Positive Policy Scenario adopts 30% for both and the Low Scenario, 15% for both.

Revenue from Fares

4.13 Typical fares for a number of local rail journeys are shown in Table T4.1 below.

T4.1 Typical Rail Fares

From To Distance Standard Full Fare Discounted Fare (Saver/Cheap (One way) (return) Da y Return etc) Colne Nelson 3.3 £1.70 N/A Colne Burnley Central 8.8 £2.60 N/A Colne Manchester 66.8 £11.30 £9.70 Skipton Keighley 14.8 £3.30 N/A Skipton Leeds 42.1 £8.10 £6.70

4.14 The examples above suggest that typical ‘headline’ fares work out at anywhere between 7.3p/km and 25.8p/km. However, as noted earlier, the actual yield that the train operator receives per passenger kilometre tends to be at the lower end of this range – only 7.7p/km for Northern Rail. This is because the typical fares shown in Table T4.1 will be diluted by people on concessionary fares (students, senior citizens, HM Forces), children paying half price (or nothing if under 4), and any ‘super discounted’ tickets. It is also a product of the fact that many of the journeys made on Northern Rail are wholly within PTE areas where the pence/km figure is lower (e.g. in the West Yorkshire PTE area, pensioners pay only 35p per journey after 09:30). Most commuting journeys made using the Skipton to Colne line would attract a higher yield as fares would not be set by PTEs.

4.15 As noted above, we estimate that the SDG model incorporated an average revenue per single trip of £2.14 (at 1999 levels). Factoring this up to 2007 prices using the retail price index, would give an average revenue per single trip of £2.68 (i.e. 25% growth). Assuming a revenue yield of 7.7p/km (from our earlier analysis) this implies an average journey length of 35km.

71

4.16 From examining the Census Data on journey to work trip distributions, the average journey distance for this type of trip is nearer 15 kilometres. However, we would expect leisure journeys to be typically longer distance, so we have retained the figure of £2.68 single (£5.36 return) for the central case but looked at the trip distributions implied by the SDG model for some of the longer distance service options. Over time, the existence of the new travel opportunity will attract a growing number of commuters to the Leeds City Region and Greater Manchester who will pay higher fares. Revenue Growth 5 4.17 As discussed earlier, the Rail Industry Monitor 20071 shows that journeys between Yorkshire & Humber and the North West have seen significant growth at around 4% per annum over the last decade. Looking forward, the RUS assumes 3%. Therefore, the revenue growth of 2% assumed by SDG appears to be on the conservative side. Our revenue growth scenarios are therefore: • Positive Policy - 4% growth per annum. • Central - 3% growth per annum. • Low - 2% growth per annum. Demand and Revenue Scenarios 4.18 The preceding text has illustrated how we have developed a number of assumptions about diversion rates, generation rates and growth rates. These have been assembled into packages to provide demand and revenue forecasts for three scenarios - a Central case and Positive Policy and Low scenarios. 4.19 The assumptions made in each scenario are presented in Table T4.2. They are additive – applying the percentage figures to the totals in the column. For example, column 2 of the table shows journey to work demand to be 672 trips representing 70% of the 960 total trips switching mode plus 288 newly generated trips representing 30% of the 960 total trips. T4.2 4.20 It can be seen that, in the base year (2014) once demand has built up, the demand forecasts range between 155,000 and 565,000 with a Central Scenario of 341,000. By way of comparison the Blackburn to Clitheroe service was recently reported to be carrying 300,000 passengers per year. 4.21 Translating the demand forecasts into revenue results in the range of £416,000 for the Low Scenario and £1,514,000 for the Positive Policy scenario with £914,000 as the Central figure. This compares to the reported figure of £620,000 in the SDG report. 4.22 In the future year 2024, ten years after full forecast demand levels are achieved, revenue ranges from £559,000 for the Low Scenario to £2,035,000 for the Positive Policy Scenario with £1,229,000 as the Central figure.

Positive Policy Central Scenario Low Scenario

Current Year Modal switch 15% 10% 5% Journey to work from mode switch 672 448 224 Leisure from mode switch 596 397 199 Journey to work % newly generated 30% 15% 15% Leisure % newly generated 30% 30% 15% Journey to work newly generated 288 79 40 Leisure newly generated 255 170 35 Total journey to work 960 527 264 Total leisure 851 567 234 Total Daily Demand 1,811 1,094 498 Total Annual Demand 2014 565,032 341,328 155,376 Average single fare £2.68 £2.68 £2.68 Total Annual Demand 2014 £1,514,290 £914,760 £416,410

Future Year 2024 Annual Growth Rates 4% 3% 2% Total Annual Demand 759,358 458,716 208,813 Total Annual Revenue £2,035,080 £1,229,360 £559,620

Demand and Revenue Scenarios

5 Rail Industry Monitor 2007, TAS 72

5 Appraisal

SDG Appraisal

5.1 An appraisal of the single track option was undertaken by SDG using the following assumptions:

• Capital Cost of reinstating the line (single track option) - £33m;

• Incremental operating cost - £790,000 per annum;

• Revenue from fares (1999 levels) - £620,000 per annum;

• Ratio of fare revenue to economic benefits - 1:2

• Revenue growth - 2% per annum;

• Operating cost growth - 1% per annum;

• Discount rate - 3.5% per annum;

• Opening year 2007 with construction phased over 2 previous years.

5.2 This gave a quoted Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) of 0.7. However, it is not clear how many years the appraisal was over and the year to which the costs were discounted.

Revised Appraisal – Inputs and Assumptions

5.3 Module 1 provides an update on the capital costs for reinstating the line, both for a single track and for a double track option. These are as follows:

• Single track option - £42.55m;

• Double track option - £80.65m;

5.4 The single and double track options include for new stations at Earby and Foulridge.

5.5 The additional works to the A56 Bypass scheme will only occur if the road scheme goes ahead, therefore, these should not be included in the base appraisal.

5.6 DfT Guidance now requires that an optimism bias is applied to the capital costs of a scheme as there has been a tendency for outturn costs to be greater than the estimated costs. The level of optimism bias applied to the capital costs depends on the type of scheme and whether a quantified risk assessment has been undertaken. As the costs are 6 only at GRIP1 WebTag Unit 3.13.1 requires that an optimism bias of 66% is applied to rail scheme costs. As a contingency of 20% is included in the scheme costs, the optimism bias has been reduced to 46% to avoid compounding the contingency.

5.7 This is highly significant because, in effect, we have to apply a 66% premium to the cost estimate for the purposes of the appraisal. The expectation is that this premium will be managed-down as the scheme becomes better defined. In the meantime, if a positive benefit cost ratio can be achieved with the 66% premium on the capital costs, this can be viewed as being promising.

Operating Costs

5.8 Module 1 provides an estimate of annual operating costs for a number of service options, which are summarised below:

• Option 1 - An hourly Skipton to Colne shuttle service - £0.858m p.a.

• Option 2 - An hourly Skipton to Blackpool South service based on an extension of the existing service from Colne – additional cost £0.833m p.a.

• Option 3a - An hourly Skipton to Blackburn service operated by only two additional trains resulting in a ‘clockface’ headway westbound between Colne and Blackburn and an uneven headway with intervals between trains alternating between 20 and 40 minutes eastbound - £2.408m p.a.

• Option 3b - An hourly Skipton to Blackburn service timed to integrate as well as is possible with the existing Colne to Blackpool South service by deploying three additional trains - £3.364m p.a.

6 Web Tag Unit 13.3.1: Guidance on Rail Appraisal, August 2007

73

• Option 4 - An hourly Skipton to Manchester Victoria service superimposed on existing services - £6.251m p.a.

7 5.9 WebTag Unit 3.13.1 also requires an optimism bias to be applied to operating costs. For GRIP Level 1 the present value of operating cost has to be increased by 41%.

User and Non User (Road Decongestion) Benefits

5.10 User benefits include journey time savings to people using the rail service (this can include savings due to improved frequency and improved reliability).

5.11 Non user benefits include road decongestion benefits such as journey time and vehicle operating cost savings to highway users as a result of people switching from car to rail. SDG assumed that, in combination, the user and non user benefits will be double the revenue benefit. Our own review of other rail scheme appraisals has indicated that user and non user benefits are typically around 2.5 times revenue values and this higher value has been used here.

Appraisal Period and Discount Rate

5.12 Latest guidance from the DfT requires that the appraisal is undertaken over a 60 year period with a discount rate of 3.5% for the first 30 years which drops to 3.0% for the subsequent 30 years. It also requires that costs are discounted back to 2002.

Operating Cost Growth

5.13 The operating cost growth rate of 1% assumed by SDG has been used in the appraisal.

Results of Revised Cost Benefit Analysis

5.14 The results of the preliminary appraisal of the single track option, excluding costs for the diversion of the A56 to the motorway junction and the additional works associated with the A56 bypass scheme, for each of the 5 operating scenarios are given in Table T5.1 and the results for the double track options are given in Table T5.2.

T5.1 Single Track Benefit Cost Ratios

Demand Forecast Operating Option 1 2 3a 3b 4

Skipton Colne Skipton Blackpool Skipton Blackburn Skipton Blackburn Skipton South (integrated (integrated with Manchester with Colne – Skipton Colne) Victoria Blackpool Sth)

Positive Policy 2.41 2.43 1.49 1.20 0.76 Central 1.28 1.30 0.79 0.64 0.41 Low 0.52 0.52 0.32 0.26 0.16

5.15 Table T5.1 shows that for the single track option, operating scenarios 1 and 2 produce a benefit cost ratio greater than 1 for the Central Scenario and over 2 with the Positive policy demand assumptions.

T5.2 Double Track Benefit Cost Ratios

Demand Forecast Operating Option 1 2 3a 3b 4 Skipton Colne Skipton Blackpool Skipton Blackburn Skipton Blackburn Skipton South (integrated with (integrated with Manchester Colne – Skipton - Colne) Victoria Blackpool Sth)

Positive Policy 1.52 1.53 1.09 0.93 0.64 Central 0.81 0.81 0.58 0.50 0.34 Low 0.32 0.33 0.23 0.20 0.14

7 Web Tag Unit 13.3.1: Guidance on Rail Appraisal, August 2007

74

5.16 At face value, the double track options (Table T5.2 ) require the more favourable policy environment to obtain the positive benefit cost ratios although it is likely that the forecasts will understate the impact on demand and revenue of the reliability benefits that would be gained from operating a double track railway over one with a significant single track section.

5.17 When one considers the disruption costs that would be incurred if the line were to be opened as a single track railway, then subsequently upgraded to double track then the case for the double track railway is likely to become more compelling.

Sensitivity Tests

5.18 Sensitivity tests on the level of optimism bias applied to the capital costs has been undertaken. This has looked at the impact of applying the full 66% optimism bias on top of the costs which already include a 20% contingency (i.e. an 86% uplift) as well as looking at the impact of reducing the optimism bias to 26% (giving 46% in total). For the single track option, the tests were undertaken on the Central scenario and for the double track option, the tests were undertaken on the Positive Policy Scenario. The results of these tests for the single and double track options are presented in Tables T5.3 and T5.4 respectively.

5.19 T5.3 Single Track Central Scenario Sensitivity Tests

Capital Cost Operating Option 1 2 3a 3b 4 Optimism Bias Skipton Colne Skipton Blackpool Skipton Blackburn Skipton Skipton (integrated South Blackburn Manchester with Colne – (integrated with Victoria Blackpool Sth) Skipton Colne)

86% 1.18 1.19 0.75 0.61 0.40 66% 1.28 1.30 0.79 0.64 0.41 46% 1.41 1.43 0.84 0.67 0.42

T5.4 Double Track Positive Scenario Sensitivity Tests

Capital Cost Operating Option 1 2 3a 3b 4 Optimism Bias Skipton Colne Skipton Blackpool Skipton Blackburn Skipton Skipton South (integrated with Blackburn Manchester Colne – (integrated with Victoria Blackpool Sth) Skipton Colne)

86% 1.37 1.38 1.01 0.87 0.66 66% 1.52 1.53 1.09 0.93 0.64 46% 1.70 1.71 1.18 1.00 0.67

5.19 Table T5.3 shows that the single track option with service options 1 and 2 can withstand the increase in optimism bias to 86% and still return a positive benefit cost ratio.

5.20 Table T5.4 shows that for the double track option, service options 1 and 2 can withstand the increase in optimism bias while service option 3a becomes borderline.

75

Wider Appraisal

5.21 DfT Rail will not only consider the benefit cost ratio but will also consider the performance of the project against a wider set of policies. This is usually set out in the form of an Appraisal Summary Table (AST). This includes a summary assessment of the scheme against wider policies including environment, safety, accessibility and integration as well as the economy. Modules 4-6 elaborate upon some of these wider policy benefits.

6 Summary

6.1 The preceding analysis has shown that a positive benefit cost ratio could be achieved for the single track option under a number of growth and cost scenarios. The double track railway would require the higher demand forecasts to be achieved in order to achieve a similarly positive result, but there are likely to be compelling arguments for the double track option which will not be fully picked up in this GRIP1 level appraisal.

6.2 It should also be noted that, because the appraisal is only at the GRIP1 Stage, the costs include very heavy ‘optimism bias’ penalties of over 60% on the capital costs and 40% on the operating costs. As a consequence, there should be considerable potential to reduce the costs (and improve the cost benefit results) as more detailed work is undertaken.

6.3 There is also likely to be a broad policy-fit for the re-opening proposals and in Modules 4 -6 we elaborate on some of these wider benefits that are not included within the cost benefit appraisal.

76

APPENDIX E

Evidence of Protection of Colne – Skipton Track Bed as a Transport Corridor in Lancashire & North Yorkshire 1. Joint Lancashire Structure Plan 2001 – 2016 (adopted 31 st March 2005)

Chapter 6.2 Accessibility and Transport

Policy 10: Rail and Bus Improvements:

6.2.26: The value of the former Colne-Skipton railway line includes possible long-term potential for rail reinstatement as well as being the current preferred route for the A56 Village Bypasses. It is, therefore, important that this corridor is safeguarded for transport purposes. Before a final decision is made on the most appropriate road alignment, further analysis of options will be undertaken ensuring that the potential of rail re-instatement is not precluded. Any scheme on this corridor will serve to enhance cross border links to North Yorkshire.

Please note that the JLSP was subsumed into the North West Regional Spatial Strategy on 30 th September 2008 but revoked by the Coalition Government on 6 th July 2010.

2. Pendle Local Plan: The Replacement Pendle Local Plan (2001-2016) was formally adopted by the Full Council on Thursday 18th May 2006 Chapter 5: Transport with overall Aim: • To create an accessible Borough and attract inward investment and create viable town centres. • To promote development in accessible locations so as to reduce the need to travel. Where travel is necessary, sustainable modes of transport should be encouraged. This was followed by: Policy 29 – Creating an improved transport network

29.2 The former route of the Colne-Skipton railway line will be protected for future transport use (see proposals map). Planning permission which would prevent the re-use of the railway route for future road and/or rail will not be permitted.

The Trackbed within Lancashire

a) Colne – Kelbrook

77

b) Kelbrook – Thornton in Craven

2. North Yorkshire County Structure Plan

Like Lancashire’s JLSP [No. 1 above], this Structure Plan is no longer on their website, as it has been subsumed into the Yorkshire and Humberside Regional Spatial Strategy, which was adopted in May 2008, but also revoked by the Coalition Government on 6 th July 2010.

3. Craven District Council Adopted Local Plan (1999) Chapter 9: Traffic. Transportation and Car Parking Safeguarding disused railways T7. Protection of trackbeds The Council will protect the disused trackbed and existing infrastructure of the following disused railway lines from developments which prejudice their future use for transport and/or recreation purposes: 1. The former Skipton - Colne railway line. 2. The former line linking Clapham - Ingleton - Sedbergh. 3. The Council will continue to support the aims of the Yorkshire Dales Railway Museum Trust by protecting the trackbed of the former Skipton to Ilkley Railway between Embsay and Bolton Abbey and encouraging the extension of its services to Skipton. Justification for Policy Transport: Paragraph 7 7.1 Disused railway lines can offer valuable opportunities to provide new transport routes and, as highlighted in: • PPG17 “Sport and Recreation”, recreational schemes such as private tourist railways, cycle tracks and footpaths. PPG12 “Development Plans and Regional Planning Guidance” notes that, where there is the potential for such schemes, the trackbed may be protected from other development proposals.

• PPG13 “Transport” states that such routes should be protected for future transport routes where there is a reasonable chance they will be put to such use in the future . 7.2 In Craven the former Skipton - Colne railway runs a course south of Broughton, north of Elslack and south of Thornton-in Craven up to the Lancashire Border and Earby.

78

It is important to note that the legal status of Protection is vested in the Local Plans of Pendle and Craven, which are the Planning Authorities, as indicated below in PPG 12.5.22, and, not in County Structure Plans or Regional Spatial Strategies.

It is also true that Local Plans are due to be incorporated into the Core Strategies of Local Development Frameworks in 2011. This is furthered complicated by the fact that the Coalition Government is planning to introduce a new planning framework under the Localism Bill going through Parliament. Those Local Authorities, who do not have their Core Strategy of the Local Development Framework in place by the time the Localism Bill is enacted, will have to implement the measures in the Localism Act.

The above Policies and Plans of Protection are based on 2 Government Planning Policy Guidance Documents - 12: Development Plans and 13: Transport:

(1) PPG 12: Development Plans

Chapter 5: Integration of transport and land use policies

5.1 The Government's White Paper on the future of transport Safeguarding Transport Routes:

5.22 Where planning authorities wish to safeguard land for a future transport scheme (e.g. a new road, rail link or restored canal), they should do so through a proposal in the local plan.

5.23 The Government's White Paper on Transport makes it clear that development plans should give better protection to those sites and routes (both existing and potential) which could be critical in developing infrastructure to widen transport choices. Alternative uses related to sustainable transport should be considered first for sites now surplus to transport requirements. Local authorities should therefore consider the potential of disused railway trackbeds and routes for possible future transport schemes, including rail (both passenger and freight), metro and light rail projects, cycling and walking, and apply appropriate protective policies where justified.

Similar protective policies are appropriate for rail and waterway connections to existing or proposed manufacturing, distribution, and warehousing sites adjacent or close to the rail and inland waterway networks and to coastal ports. Local authorities may also wish to safeguard sites for transport related development which might otherwise be lost to other development, such as sites adjoining railway sidings or wharves alongside waterways and ports.

(2) PPG 13: Transport

Under Section 6: In order to deliver the objectives of this guidance, when preparing development plans and considering planning applications, local authorities should:

10. Protect sites and routes which could be critical in developing infrastructure to widen transport choices for both passenger and freight movements.

Planning Policy Guidances have since been replaced in most cases by Planning Policy Statements. These PPSs do not undermine PPGs but strengthen them and direct Local Authorities to carry out National Planning and Development Policies, and, in the case of Transport, under the various Transport [e.g. 1985 and 2000] and Local Transport [e.g. 2008] Acts of Parliament. PPGs/PPSs are Codes of Good Practice to assist Local Authorities implement their Policies in their Local Plans.

79

APPENDIX F

Train services usage pattern

With the low quality train service offered, passenger usage on the Colne branch line is very poor: 2.2 passenger journeys per head of population per year (using 2009/10 figures)

This should be compared with a national average for non-metropolitan districts away from the London commuter belt of 10.5 [Passenger journeys per head of population per year]

Figures for other districts in Pennine Lancashire are: Blackburn 11.2; Ribble Valley 7.1; Hyndburn 4.66; Burnley 4.3; Pendle (Colne branch line) 2.2; and Rossendale (with no trains) 0.0

The lack of attractive train services, in particular to Manchester is the major factor re the low figures for Hyndburn, Burnley and Pendle. And from Pendle there is no service beyond to Skipton and Leeds.

To the East of the Pennines, the electrified line from Leeds and Bradford to Skipton gives figures at Skipton of 61.4 passenger journeys per head of population, with that for all of Craven District being 22.4 and ..... showing the difference that attractive train services can make. The figure for [all of] the Aire Valley is 42.9.

Individual station usage figures table

05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 Growth Passengers No of Station Name Entries & Entries & Entries & Entries & Entries & per year Population per head of stations Exits Exits Exits Exits Exits / 4 years population

Darwen 1 205,841 230,721 247,662 250,082 256,798 5.69% 31,570 8.13 Blackburn 1 982,355 1,051,142 1,132,415 1,162,930 1,184,162 4.78% 105,085 11.27 Total Blackburn & Darwen 6 1,264,489 1,365,811 1,463,736 1,500,056 1,540,342 5.06% 137,470 11.20 Whalley 1 54,131 61,822 65,200 64,408 71,052 7.04% 2,645 26.86 Clitheroe 1 217,659 230,732 237,496 226,806 235,858 2.03% 14,697 16.05 Total Ribble Valley 4 351,304 374,796 393,727 384,442 415,622 4.29% 58,500 7.10

Rishton 1 38,335 44,174 52,810 51,034 55,124 9.51% 7,350 7.50 Church & Oswaldtwistle 1 31,143 33,107 32,147 32,596 32,788 1.30% 16,520 1.98 Accrington 1 224,452 236,668 259,944 275,652 279,442 5.63% 35,203 7.94 Huncoat 1 11,071 10,889 10,617 11,300 13,274 4.64% 4,400 3.02 Total Hyndburn 4 305,001 324,838 355,518 370,582 380,628 5.69% 81,600 4.66 Total Rossendale 0 0 0 0 0 0 67,300 0.00 Hapton 1 10,078 13,286 16,179 17,080 19,448 17.86% 3,769 5.16 Rose Grove (Pop for Padiham) 1 23,824 24,374 27,003 26,924 27,898 4.03% 8,998 3.10 Burnley Manchester Road 1 151,216 167,159 178,869 190,070 191,274 6.05% Inc Below Burnley Barracks 1 964 1,776 2,110 3,854 9,986 79.40% 73,021 4.48 Burnley Central 1 107,770 110,993 116,269 116,486 125,750 3.93% Inc Above Total Burnley Borough 5 293,852 317,588 340,430 354,414 374,356 6.24% 87,300 4.29 Brierfield 1 18,539 18,600 22,316 20,006 20,934 3.08% 8,199 2.55 Nelson 1 70,692 78,873 84,120 83,462 100,816 9.28% 28,998 3.48 Colne 1 62,056 61,098 64,533 70,412 80,034 6.57% 20,118 3.98 Barnoldswick 0 0 10,859 0.00 Earby 0 4,348 0.00 Total Pendle Borough 3 151,287 158,571 170,969 173,880 201,784 7.47% 89,900 2.24 Total Lancashire 61 12,700,887 13,329,966 14,122,014 14,647,518 15,063,382 4.36% 1,449,700 10.39

North of Skipton 9 233,612 234,532 232,300 243,704 250,050 1.71% Skipton 1 794,076 816,561 850,387 865,024 878,662 2.56% 14,313 61.39 Cononley (+ nearby places) 1 99,020 107,917 127,910 135,160 130,712 7.19% 1,080 121.00 Cross Hills Kildwick 0 9,478 0.00 Total Craven District 11 Stas 11 1,126,708 1,159,010 1,210,597 1,243,888 1,259,424 2.82% 56,200 22.41 Steeton & Silsden 1 479,070 505,210 519,662 647,840 680,632 9.18% 12,276 55.44 Keighley 1 1,127,154 1,155,471 1,182,704 1,492,776 1,513,122 7.64% 51,429 29.42 Crossflatts 1 186,571 194,036 213,126 291,304 305,758 13.14% Inc with Bingley Bingley 1 692,168 721,405 749,834 1,012,816 1,040,072 10.72% 19,884 67.68 Saltaire 1 418,597 429,262 450,113 586,208 602,928 9.55% Inc with Shipley Total Airedale 16 4,030,268 4,164,394 4,326,036 5,274,832 5,401,936 7.60% 139,789 42.96 Shipley 1 862,724 902,192 946,386 1,275,264 1,303,096 10.86% 28,162 67.68

New Lines Est p.m. Est p.a. 1st months "=First Year 0910 Alloa Line 1 155,000 335,654 383,605 390,072 151.66% 18,989 20.54 Ebbw Vale line 6 22,000 264,000 105,562 648,994 717,236 171.68% 134,100 5.35

80

The Figures in the previous table show a consistent increase in passenger numbers over the last 4 years.

The Airedale line is used by over 5 million passengers per year, but the East Lancashire Line east of Blackburn is used by just 700,000 passengers/year for a larger population.

Passenger Forecasts

In the case of two recent railway re-openings (Alloa, in Scotland and Ebbw Vale in Wales) the forecast usage figures have been greatly exceeded by the actual passenger usage ..... by 150 %, i.e. 2.5 x the forecast value

In the case of the Skipton to Colne Line, the recent JMP report gave a most optimistic figure of 565,000 additional passengers per year, together with a Benefit: Cost ratio of up to 2.43:1. With these figures uplifted to the 150% higher actual usage figures as proved at Alloa and Ebbw Vale, then this would give 1.4 Million additional passengers per year, giving a much higher BCR.

Conclusion

These figures for the Skipton East Lancashire Rail Project are very similar to the projected usage for the Northern Hub, which promises 3.5M more passengers every year and Quicker journey times, with £530m of targeted investment. The Northern Hub is eventually projected to return £4 in benefits for every £1 invested.

81

APPENDIX G

SELRAP Membership & Support - National, regional and local

Lobbying by SELRAP has ensured that the alignment for a reinstated railway between Skipton and Colne has been safeguarded in development plans. The North Yorkshire and Lancashire Local Transport Plans for the period 2006 to 2011 contain statements of support in principle for the restoration of a rail link between Skipton and Colne.

There is strong support for re-opening of the railway from:

• 487 individuals who are members of SELRAP’s campaign group • 65 affiliated groups • 44 UK MEPs (60% of UK MEPs) • 164 MPs • 101 Peers • 4 members of the Cabinet. • 4 members of the Scottish Parliament • 401 Councils including: o Lancashire & North Yorkshire County Councils o 24 unitary authorities o 102 town councils • 426 individual councillors • 555 Organizations • 145 businesses • 13 unions including all 3 Rail unions and the TUC • 182 non-government organizations • local and national faith leaders including: o the Archbishop of York o 19 Anglican and Catholic bishops

NB Figures correct as of 1 st July 2011

Acknowledgements SELRAP would like to thank the following, who have given freely of their time to compile sections of this document, proof read and advised on the printing details: Mick Holehouse, Derek Jennings , Chris Laycock, David Mawdsley, Peter Nowland David Penney, Andy Shackleton, Roy St Pierre, David Walsh, Balfour Beatty Rail