Transport for Development High Speed Rail in

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work

Report for Kent County Council

In Association With Southeastern

April 2008

Document Control

Project Title: High Speed Rail in Kent

MVA Project Number: C3683000

Document Type: Final Report

Directory & File Name: H:\Railair\C3683000 KCC Impacts Of CTRL DS\Deliverables\High Speed Rail In Kent Final Report V2.1.Doc

Document Approval

Primary Author: David Jowsey

Other Author(s): Chris Pownall, Ian Bruce

Reviewer(s): James Vickers

Formatted by: DJ

Distribution

Issue Date Distribution Comments

1 14/03/08 JV, CP Internal Review

2 17/03/08 Tim Martin First Draft for comment

3 11/04/08 Tim Martin Final Draft

4 22/04/08 Tim Martin Final Version Part 1

5 30/04/08 Tim Martin Final Version with minor amendments

Contents

1Introduction 1.1 1.1 Purpose of Report 1.1 1.2 Structure of Report 1.1

2 High Speed Rail in Kent 2.1 2.1 Introduction 2.1 2.2 Choice of Route 2.1 2.3 Stations 2.2 2.4 Service Specification 2.3 2.5 Integrated Kent Franchise 2.3

3 Rail Commuting from Kent to 3.1 3.1 Introduction 3.1 3.2 Current Commuting to London 3.2 3.3 Economic Importance of Commuting 3.5 3.4 Kent in a Regional Context 3.8 3.5 Present Day Southeastern 3.11

4 The Attraction of High Speed Services 4.1 4.1 Introduction 4.1 4.2 Service Patterns 4.1 4.3 High Speed Demand Forecasts 4.6 4.4 Individual Station Forecasts 4.12 4.5 Evidence HS1 will attract new people to Kent 4.16 4.6 Attraction of St Pancras 4.19 4.7 Conclusions 4.21

Appendices

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 1

1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose of Report

1.1.1 MVA Consultancy has been appointed by Kent County Council (KCC) to help achieve an understanding and consensus about the changes and opportunities associated with the introduction of High Speed (HS) rail services in Kent. HS services partly use the Route (HS1) from St Pancras to the .

1.1.2 The complete package of work proposed comprises two stages.

1.1.3 Stage 1 builds upon the research undertaken by MVA on behalf of Southeastern, the that will operate the new HS services, as well as existing publicly- available sources of information. The results from this analysis are presented in this Part 1 of this report.

1.1.4 Stage 2 will require new research and supporting analysis to evaluate in more detail the economic impacts of HS services and identify specific local issues that will arise as a result of the new service. Recommendations for this stage of work are presented in Part 2 of this report.

1.2 Structure of Report

1.2.1 The structure of Part 1 is as follows:

 Chapter 2 - High Speed Rail in Kent;

 Chapter 3 – Rail Commuting from Kent to London; and

 Chapter 4 – The Attraction of High Speed Services.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 1.1

2 High Speed Rail in Kent

2.1 Introduction

2.1.1 The idea of a tunnel linking the and France was not a new idea but in 1984, an Anglo-French consortium, Eurotunnel, received the concession to finance, build and operate the Channel Tunnel.

2.1.2 The Department of Transport’s “Kent Impact Study” in 1987 concluded that the capacity of the existing rail network between London and the Channel Tunnel would be sufficient to handle traffic until the end of the century. However, beyond this, a new high-speed line would be required which would be referred to as Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL).

2.2 Choice of Route

2.2.1 In the late 1980s the route was originally proposed to enter London from the southeast, broadly following the M20/A20 corridor to Hither Green. From there a tunnel was planned to provide access to Waterloo with an additional terminus proposed in the King’s Cross Area. The so called Southern Approach was deemed the preferred route corridor by in 1989.

2.2.2 However, by 1991, Government opinion was that the Southern Approach would not realise the full potential of CTRL. The change in thinking was partly precipitated by an Ove Arup study into alternative routes. Arup’s solution published in March 1990 advocated an Eastern Approach into London and it was this route that was eventually accepted.

2.2.3 The primary reason for adopting the Eastern Approach was the expected regeneration benefits the scheme would deliver. There were three key regeneration areas highlighted:

 North Kent;

 Stratford; and

 railway lands around Kings Cross/St Pancras.

2.2.4 The 1991 Arup report proposed a domestic rail capability interspersed with the international trains. Originally it was planned to run services along the and into St. Pancras. However, this proved infeasible due to operational constraints, so it was deemed necessary to construct a new tunnel under East London.

2.2.5 The whole route was originally envisaged as being completed as a single project. However, when this approach ran into serious financial difficulty it was deemed necessary to split the projects into two sections (see Figure 2.1):

 Section 1 – from the Channel Tunnel to Junction in Kent. On opening in September 2003 journey times were cut by 21 minutes, but trains continued to run to Waterloo using existing suburban lines; and

 Section 2 – from Section 1 at Junction to Central London travelling through the Ebbsfleet Valley, under the River Thames and through tunnels into St. Pancras via

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 2.1 2 High Speed Rail in Kent

Stratford. Section 2 opened on 17 November 2007 and cut journey times by a further 20 minutes. Since opening, Eurostar trains have terminated at St. Pancras rather than Waterloo.

Figure 2.1 Chosen CTRL Route

2.3 Stations

2.3.1 The location of stations on the route has been driven by the requirements of international services and the need to encourage regeneration. Four stations are served by the CTRL:

 St Pancras (terminus);

 Stratford;

 Ebbsfleet; and

 Ashford.

2.3.2 Within Kent the two key stations on the CTRL are Ebbsfleet and Ashford.

Ebbsfleet

2.3.3 There was a long standing desire for an international ‘parkway’ station in close proximity to the M25. Ebbsfleet, situated between and , was announced as the recommended location for an intermediate station in 1994.

2.3.4 The importance of the area around Ebbsfleet grew in significance as the wider Thames Gateway was increasingly highlighted as a location for regeneration. The publication of Government regional planning guidance in 1995 (Thames Gateway Planning Framework Regional Planning Guidance RPG9a) lead to the Thames Gateway becoming a national focal point for growth. Kent Thameside, as the area from Dartford to Gravesend is known, was identified as a growth area of regional significance.

2.3.5 The original Kent Thameside Vision document ‘Looking to the Future’, published in Autumn 1995, set out a long term vision for the regeneration of the area. The sustainable mixed use

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 2.2 2 High Speed Rail in Kent

development was planned to integrate with existing communities. The strategy included plans for up to 30,000 new homes and the creation of 50,000 new jobs. An integral part of the strategy was achieving a significant shift from car use to public transport, with HS1 seen as critical in achieving this.

Ashford

2.3.6 The initial route for Eurostar trains between London and the Continent exclusively used the existing rail network. A station was built at Ashford to serve the local areas which had been a growth area for many years and development was supported by local authority lobbying. There was also available land to expand the station and create parking facilities.

2.3.7 The new high speed services are likely to serve as a catalyst for further growth in the Ashford area.

Mid-Kent Parkway

2.3.8 The feasibility of a ‘parkway’ station in Mid-Kent, between and the was examined during the initial route planning stage. However, strong local opposition on the grounds of the environmental impact and limited road access resulted in the proposal being rejected in 1992. The development of the Ebbsfleet alternative led to the abandonment of proposals for a Mid-Kent Parkway.

2.4 Service Specification

2.4.1 The Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) issued their Consultation Document on new passenger services using the CTRL in February 2003. The core option comprised:

 4 peak trains London St Pancras – Gravesend;

 2 peak trains London St Pancras – West (via Ashford);

 2 peak trains London St Pancras – Central (via Ashford); and

 off peak frequency at broadly half the peak frequency.

2.4.2 Following stakeholder consultation including local councils, Kent County Council, Medway Council and South East Regional Assembly, it was decided to extend service provision to the Medway Towns, East Kent and . The primary reasons were to serve development and regeneration proposals within the Medway Towns and to try to stimulate regeneration in Thanet, one of the most deprived areas of Kent.

2.5 Integrated Kent Franchise

2.5.1 Operation of the domestic services using are be delivered as part of the South-Eastern franchise to create a new Integrated Kent Franchise (IKF). The franchise was put out to tender in January 2005 with the announcement made in November 2005 that were awarded operation of the franchise for six years, with a further two years if targets were reached. Govia operate the combined franchise under the name Southeastern.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 2.3 2 High Speed Rail in Kent

2.5.2 Bidders in the competition for the IKF were required to bid against a new timetable specification put together by the SRA and its advisors. This timetable contained a detailed specification for services over the existing network from December 2009 as well as including the specification for the services to operate over HS1.

2.5.3 The SLC2 timetable contained a number of features which were a cause for concern to railway professionals and passenger groups alike. These included:

 a significant reduction in the number of commuter trains from the Medway area to Cannon Street;

 the Canterbury West route served only be High Speed services off peak;

 Victoria to Dover through services reduced to one train per hour off peak, with a second service over the to Dover route running through from the branch; and

 overall a reduction in the peak commuter services into Charing Cross, Cannon Street and London Bridge.

2.5.4 It was also identified that the SLC2 timetable as originally specified by the SRA would be unable to meet the Department for Transport’s High Level Output Statement (HLOS) requirements to accommodate passenger growth via London Bridge.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 2.4

3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 This section demonstrates the extent of, and economic importance to Kent of commuting to London, by:

 describing the extent of commuting from Kent to London with recent figures;

 describing the extent of the boost to local incomes from higher London earnings;

 considering how Kent compares to other areas in the South East; and

 providing an overview of the current characteristics of rail commuting in Kent including station footfall, levels of crowding and recent trends.

3.1.2 Southeastern operates all train services within Kent, as well as services in south east London and part of Sussex. The existing network covers 773km of track and serves 182 stations (Figure 3.1). Southeastern operates about 1,700 journeys a day carrying approximately 145 million passengers a year and 120,000 commuters into London each day1.

Figure 3.1 Existing Southeastern network

1 Source: www.southeasternrailway.co.uk

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.1 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

3.2 Current Commuting to London

3.2.1 The primary focus of this section is current commuting habitats to Central London, where Central London is defined as 4km in distance from Charing Cross and includes all of the West End, the City and Southbank.

3.2.2 Overall, nearly 50,000 people per day commute from Kent to Central London accounting for 6% of the Kent working population. Table 3.1 shows the mode used to commute to Central London across the different districts within Kent, further details are given in Appendix A.

Table 3.1 Proportion of workforce commuting from Kent to Central London by mode

District Rail2 Bus/Coach Car3 Total

Ashford 3% 0% 1% 4%

Canterbury 2% 0% 0% 2%

Dartford 9% 0% 2% 12%

Dover 0% 0% 0% 1%

Gravesham 5% 3% 2% 9%

Maidstone 4% 0% 1% 5%

Medway 5% 1% 1% 7%

Sevenoaks 12% 0% 2% 14%

Shepway 1% 0% 0% 2%

Swale 3% 1% 1% 5%

Thanet 1% 0% 0% 1%

Tonbridge and Malling 7% 0% 1% 9%

Tunbridge Wells 9% 0% 1% 10%

Total 5% 1% 1% 6%

Source: CENSUS 2001, grown to 2007 values using TEMPRO

3.2.3 The highest proportion of commuting to Central London is unsurprisingly in those areas closest to London such as and Dartford. Rail dominates highway-based modes as a means of commuting to London due to rail’s more competitive journey times, uncertainty

2 Includes Rail and Underground 3 Includes Car (driver) and Car (passenger)

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.2 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

of journey time caused by road congestion, and, in the case of car commuters, the need to pay the Central London Congestion Charge.

3.2.4 However, there is a significant niche market for commuting by bus/coach to Central London from and Medway. This is a result of the slightly longer rail journey times into Central London compared with areas a similar distance to London, such as and Malling. This makes the journey time by coach in Gravesham more comparable to rail than other areas within Kent, and indeed, other parts of the South East. This advantage, combined with the lower costs of commuter coach travel, leads to the relatively high proportion of Gravesham commuters using coach or bus.

3.2.5 The proportion of workers commuting to Central London by rail per Census Standard Output Area (SOA) is shown in Figure 3.2. 2001 census data is grown to 2007 levels using TEMPRO trip rate growth forecasts.

3.2.6 As with Table 3.1 the highest levels of commuting occur in the western part of Kent notably around Sevenoaks, Tonbridge and Tunbridge Wells. In addition, substantial rail commuting takes place between Tonbridge and Ashford particularly clustered around stations. There is a relatively low proportion of commuting by rail to Central London from Gravesham and Medway. Beyond Ashford there are very few people commuting by rail into Central London.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.3 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

Figure 3.2 Rail commuting to Central London

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.4 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

3.3 Economic Importance of Commuting

3.3.1 Kent’s £18bn economy4 ranks it as the sixth largest county or unitary authority economy in the country. Growth in jobs and businesses, along with inward investment has been above the national average.

3.3.2 In Table 3.2, compares Kent to the South East overall and the national average using three key economic indicators.

Table 3.2 Competitiveness indicators

Indicator Kent South East GB/UK

Gross Value Added £13,703 £18,496 £17,451 (GVA) per head

Disposable Household £13,728 £14,656 £12,840 Income per head

Gross median full-time £430.80 £470.10 £448.60 weekly earnings

Source: Kent Property Market 2007 report

3.3.3 GVA is an indicator of economic prosperity. In simple terms, GVA is the values of the goods produced or services as they leave a given area, minus the cost of inputs used to produce them. Unlike Gross Domestic Product (GDP), GVA does not consider taxes but does include subsidies.

3.3.4 GVA data is work-based, i.e. where people work and not where they live, so it is significantly affected by commuting into and out of areas. Part of the reason Kent’s GVA is much lower than the South East overall is due to the high levels of commuting to London. Kent’s GVA may also be understated by its relatively high retirement population.

3.3.5 However, even when considering disposable household income per head which does include London commuters who earn higher wages, Kent still trails the South East average (although it now exceeds the national average). When considering median weekly earnings, Kent is also lower than both the South East and UK average. These three indicators illustrate that Kent is underperforming economically when compared to the South East overall.

3.3.6 There is however significant disparity across Kent. Figure 3.3 shows how average weekly income varies by ward.

4 Kent Property Market 2007, Kent County Council/Cluttons

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.5 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

DartfordDartford MedwayMedway ToTowTo w w nns n s s RamsgateRamsgate MaidstoneMaidstone CanterburyCanterbury SevenoaksSevSevenoaks enoaks

AshfordAshford TunbridgeTunbridge DovDov er er WellsWells

Ward Average Weekly Income, £ 1,000 to 1,920 900 to 1,000 800 to 900 700 to 800 600 to 700 500 to 600 0 to 500

Figure 3.3 Average Household Weekly Income (by ward) Source: 2001 census grown to 2007 figures using GDP data

3.3.7 The areas with the lowest average household weekly incomes are in Dartford, Gravesend, the Medway towns and the Kent coastal towns. In general, the more rural areas in the centre of the county, and also along the western border including Tunbridge Wells and Sevenoaks have higher average income.

3.3.8 By comparing the average income in wards with the proportion that commute to Central London by rail, bus or car, it is possible to estimate the average weekly income of different transport users and hence the difference in weekly income between those who commute to London and those who do not. This relationship is shown in Table 3.3 with further details in Appendix B.

Table 3.3 Effect on average income of commuting into Central London by different mode

Difference in average weekly income by primary mode of transport to work in Central London5

Average Weekly Rail Bus Car (Driver or Income (£)6 (including passenger) underground)

Ashford 748 +7% +5%

Canterbury 652 +0% +1%

5 Only flows with greater than 200 people are shown 6 2001 census grown to 2007 figures using GDP data (from ONS)

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.6 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

Dartford 732 +1% +2%

Dover 633 +1%

Gravesham 668 +1% +4% +5%

Maidstone 797 +5% +8% +3%

Medway 675 +1% +7% +2%

Sevenoaks 886 +5% -1% -2%

Shepway 629 +6%

Swale 660 +5% +1% +5%

Thanet 553 +2%

Tonbridge and Malling 845 +8% +1% +9%

Tunbridge Wells 845 +5% 0%

Source: Census 2001 grown to 2007 figures using TEMPRO and GDP data

3.3.9 Rail users commuting to Central London earn more on average than their working counterparts who do not commute into London. The difference in earnings however varies across districts. The largest uplift is in Tonbridge and Malling, Ashford and Shepway while in Canterbury there is little difference. Of particular note, is the relatively low increase in income for rail commuters in Dartford and Gravesham.

3.3.10 Within Gravesham there is evidence that people who commute by car or coach into Central London have a proportionately higher income than rail users. Evidence from our survey of commuter coach users showed many users have an average income between £45,000 and £75,000. This survey was conducted at Bluebell Hill car park primarily serving Maidstone and the Medway towns but a similar customer profile could be expected for Gravesham residents. Coach commuters from Gravesend and Medway have a higher income than rail commuters because coach is relatively more competitive than other areas particularly if accessing Docklands.

3.3.11 In addition, rail users were surveyed in a questionnaire completed on train and showed that both commuters and non-commuters, had a higher annual household income than non-rail users, defined as having not travelled by rail within the last 12 months (Figure 3.4). In turn, rail commuters have higher household incomes than non-rail commuters.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.7 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

30% Non-rail users 25% Rail users (commuters) Rail users (non commuters) 20%

15%

10% % of survey sample survey of % 5%

0% Less than £10,000 to £20,000 to £30,000 to £45,000 to £60,000 to £75,000 to Over £10,000 £19,999 £29,999 £44,999 £59,999 £74,999 £100,000 £100,000 Annual Household Income

Figure 3.4 – Comparison of income distribution between rail (commuter and non- commuter) and non-rail users. Source: Southeastern market research

3.4 Kent in a Regional Context

3.4.1 There have been a number of recent studies examining commuting in the South East.

 Commuter Flows in the Wider South East 2001 to 2016-21;

 South East Regional Assembly Journey to Work analysis; and

 Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) “Symbiosis or Sibling Rivalry”

3.4.2 The key messages of these studies are:

 there is a significant amount of commuting from the South East to London especially from Kent and ;

 out-commuting has grown in significance especially to Surrey and Berkshire to towns such as Reading, Woking and Slough;

 the main explanation for commuting patterns is the balance between labour and employment;

 compared to other areas near London, Kent is underperforming economically;

 Kent has a high reliance on economic growth within London;

 forecasts show Kent is the only area in the South East which will have an increase in rail commuting to London; and

 Kent is most prone to economic changes in London and also the least certain in forecasting future changes in commuting.

3.4.3 Table 3.4 demonstrates the labour market imbalance across the South East. A value less than one indicates that there is more people in employment than jobs in the area which results in out-commuting.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.8 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

Table 3.4 Regional characteristics of employment

Ratio of jobs to employed workforce

1991 2001 Average Trip Length (km) 2001

Surrey 0.88 0.91 14.4

Kent 0.88 0.90 16.9

East Sussex 0.92 0.89 15.9

Buckinghamshire 0.92 0.96 15.3

West Sussex 0.96 0.97 15.1

Hampshire 0.96 0.96 14.1

Isle of Wight 0.97 0.95 10.7

Oxfordshire 0.98 1.00 14.8

Berkshire 1.00 1.06 13.0

Inner London 1.89 1.73 8.8

Outer London 0.82 0.79 11.3

Source: Census 1991 and 2001

3.4.4 Kent has one of the lowest ratios of jobs to employed workforce of any area in the South East., only has a lower ratio. In addition, residents of Kent have the longest average commute.

3.4.5 The main explanation for commuting patterns is the balance between labour and employment7. In job rich areas, such as Berkshire, residents do not have to travel far to access employment. In comparison, counties such as Kent and Surrey had large proportional deficiencies in jobs in both 1991 and 2001, with many residents needing to travel further to find employment.

3.4.6 Table 3.5 shows the ratio of jobs to employed workforce within Kent.

7 SEERA Journey to Work Analysis

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.9 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

Table 3.5 Ratio of jobs to employed in Kent

Ratio of jobs to employed workforce

Kent 0.90

Ashford 0.94

Canterbury 0.99

Dartford 1.10

Dover 0.99

Gravesham 0.67

Maidstone 1.00

Medway 0.75

Sevenoaks 0.83

Shepway 0.90

Swale 0.83

Thanet 0.84

Tonbridge and Malling 1.01

Tunbridge Wells 0.99

Source: Census 2001

3.4.7 The areas with the highest ratio of jobs to employed workforce, Dartford, Tonbridge and Maidsonte, have a number of large employment sites. Gravesham and Medway have the lowest ratio, these are also the areas with highest use of commuter coaches to London. The table shows that within Kent there is a substantial disparity of where jobs are and where people live which contributes to Kent having the longest average commute in the South East.

3.4.8 The 2005 CEBR ‘Symbiosis or sibling rivalry’ report examined the inter-relationships between the South East of England and London, and how they might change in the period to 2006. This showed that west Kent is the most sensitive to what happens in London and the area must be considered a ‘key policy risk area’. In east Kent the lower commuter flows means it is less sensitive to the realisation of the London Plan. However, this sub-region is sensitive to the size of London’s growth given that businesses in the area have a high dependence on trade with London.

3.4.9 A key recommendation in the report is that the South East and London need to be considered as one economy. Recognition of this is crucial in the South East Plan, because

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.10 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

housing, transport and economic activity depend to a large degree upon what happens between the regions.

3.5 Present Day Southeastern

3.5.1 Data on current demand on Southeastern services is provided by the LENNON rail ticket sales system. In addition, for individual station footfall estimates, we used data from MOIRA, the rail industry’s timetable and demand modelling software.

3.5.2 The stations with the highest number of daily commuter journeys within Kent are shown in Figure 3.6. It is not possible to separate London and non-London commuters from the MOIRA data. Commuter journeys for all stations are shown in Appendix C, commuters were defined using season ticket sales data.

Table 3.6 Daily commuter journeys from the ten busiest Kent stations

Station Daily commuter journeys

Tonbridge 12,700

Sevenoaks 11,900

Dartford 11,500

Tunbridge Wells 10,200

Chatham 9,800

Gravesend Central 8,000

Gillingham (Kent) 7,000

Sittingbourne 6,300

Rainham (Kent) 5,500

Ashford (Kent) 4,800

Source: MOIRA (2006/07)

3.5.3 While the top four stations for commuter flows will not have HS Service, the next six will. In future, it is likely that the ordering of this table will change as stations with HS services experience faster growth. Through its close proximity to Ebbsfleet, Dartford will decline due to abstraction.

Recent Growth

3.5.4 Over the past ten years rail growth has been slower on the Southeastern network than either the SWT or Southern. Figure 3.5 shows the changes in passenger revenue (£m) over the past 10 years, further data is given in Appendix D.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.11 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40 Passenger kilometres (millions) (millions) kilometres Passenger 20

0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Year

Southern Southeastern

Figure 3.5 Passenger Growth on TOCs Source: Rail Industry Monitor, 2007.

3.5.5 Since privatisation in 1997, growth on Southeastern has been much slower than other TOCs (Train Operating Companies) operating in the south and southeast of England. From 1997 to 2005 there was very little grown in the number of passenger journeys on Southeastern, although the number of journeys have increased slightly in the last two years. Table 3.7 shows which groups of stations have had the greatest increase in passengers from 2003 to 2006/07. The values were obtained from our modelling work on franchise work for the IKF and recent modelling for Southeastern. Only flows from Kent to London with increases greater than 10% are shown, flows for all station groups (Kent and non-Kent) are shown in Appendix E.

Table 3.7 Modelled annual patronage in London flows for 2003 and 2006/07

Zone 2003 2006/07 % increase

Tonbridge>London 2,060,000 2,660,000 29.1%

Chelsfield to Dunton Green and 1,150,000 1,380,000 20.0% Hildenborough>London

Maidstone Stations>London 980,000 1,200,000 22.4%

Stone Crossing to , plus Cuxton 2,920,000 3,380,000 15.8% to Aylesford>London

Dartford to Blackheath>London 14,500,000 16,800,000 15.9%

Ashford International>London 1,200,000 1,370,000 14.2%

Tunbridge Wells, High Brooms>London 2,180,000 2,460,000 12.8%

Westenhanger to Folkestone Central 790,000 890,000 12.7%

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.12 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

plus Dover Priory>London

3.5.6 Southern and South West trains have grown almost in line with each other over the past 10 years with Thameslink growing even faster. 2007 figures are not shown for Thameslink as this franchise has been combined with the former Great Northern franchise, and now operates as .

3.5.7 The reasons behind the limited growth on Southeastern include:

 relatively low growth of Kent as a county;

 instability in TOC ownership and management; and

 capacity constraints.

3.5.8 We consider each of these issues in turn in the following sections.

The growth of Kent

3.5.9 Kent experienced lower population growth during the 1990s than the rest of the south east. Much of Kent is also more deprived than areas of Surrey, Sussex and Hampshire that have experienced a greater growth in rail journeys. A comparison of population growth is shown in Table 3.8.

Table 3.8 Population change from 1991 to 2006

1991-2001 % change 2001-2006 % change

Kent +3% +4%

Hampshire +5% +3%

West Sussex +7% +2%

East Sussex N/A +3%

Surrey +6% +2%

Source: County Council population statistics

3.5.10 From 1991 to 2001, the population grew much slower in Kent than other southern counties. To a certain extent this imbalance has been removed since 2001 with Kent population growth being higher than any other southern counties.

3.5.11 Much of the passenger growth on the Southern and South West networks shown in figure 3.5 has been on longer mainline journeys such as to Brighton or Southampton/Bournemouth. Journey times on the mainline Southeastern network to places such as Dover and are comparatively longer for the distance travelled so there is less opportunity for growth.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.13 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

Instability in TOC ownership and management

3.5.12 Over the past 10 years, the existing Southeastern network has been under the ownership of three different operators. By contrast South West Trains has been operated by the since privatisation, while the South Central franchise has experienced only one change of ownership, and has achieved consistent growth over a five-year period of stable ownership.

3.5.13 From 1996, the was operated by the French transport group Connex, and was known as . Connex South Eastern undertook significant cost cutting exercises, which led to a perceived reduction in service quality and contributed to a reduction in journeys as shown in Figure 3.5.

3.5.14 Connex lost the franchise in 2003 when it was temporarily taken back under government control by the Strategic Rail Authority due to poor financial management. Train services were taken over by (SET), a publicly owned subsidiary of the SRA. Although the period of public ownership under SET brought some improvement in terms of service quality for the franchise, there was less emphasis on the commercial aspects of the business compared to the privately-owned TOCs.

3.5.15 The re-letting of the franchise gave the SRA the opportunity to incorporate the planned CTRL domestic services into the new franchise, which was accordingly re-titled as the Integrated Kent Franchise. The franchise competition was won by GoVia, the 65/35% joint venture of the UK’s Go-Ahead Group and French-owned Keolis, which, at that time, also operated the South Central and Thameslink franchises.

Capacity Constraint

3.5.16 Southeastern’s slower growth is a result the limited capacity available to accommodate additional passengers. This is partly due to a historical under-investment in infrastructure a result as of competition between the South Eastern Railway and London, Dover and Chatham Railway. As a result, the network has been operating at close to its maximum capacity in terms of number of trains for many years.

3.5.17 There are a number of locations on the Southeastern network where there are serious constraints on the network which limit the amount of trains being able to pass through. The key ‘bottlenecks’ are:

 London Bridge;

 Lewisham; and

 Dartford.

3.5.18 These network constraints limit the number of trains that can get into and out of the London termini. Another constraint is the limited amount of four-track rail lines which means slow and fast services often have to compete with each other. The large number of at grade rail junctions further constrains the network particularly at key junctions.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.14 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

3.5.19 Some mitigation has been possible through the introduction of high density ‘Metro’ rolling stock on inner suburban services in recent years, but equivalent measures are not appropriate on longer-distance services to Kent.

3.5.20 The significant infrastructure investment in HS1 contrasts dramatically with previous under- investment.

Levels of Crowding on Trains

3.5.21 Using data supplied by Southeastern relating to passenger counts and train capacity for individual services, the level of crowding on London-bound services in the morning peak was calculated. Six key routes were selected:

 to Charing Cross (via North Kent coast) – fast service;

 to Charing Cross (via North Kent coast) – slow service;

 Ashford International to Victoria (via Maidstone East);

 Ramsgate to Charing Cross (via Canterbury West);

 Ramsgate to Charing Cross (via Dover Priory); and

 Hastings to Charing Cross (via Tunbridge Wells).

3.5.22 Figure 3.6 illustrates the level of crowding at the six busiest stations along each route.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.15 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

Figure 3.6 Levels of crowding in the morning peak on selected routes

3.5.23 The most crowded services are those from Broadstairs via the North Kent coast and from Ashford International via Maidstone East where passenger loads quickly reach greater than 100% of the critical capacity. This is significant since it is likely these routes will benefit the most from crowding relief due to the introduction of the High Speed services in December 2009.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.16 3 Rail Commuting from Kent to London

3.5.24 Crowding levels are lower on the slower services which have a greater number of stops e.g. services from Ramsgate and Hastings. Longer journey times to London mean that these services are perhaps less attractive to commuters.

3.5.25 Further details of the crowding on the six routes are given in Appendix F.

3.5.26 This section has outlined:

 there are high levels of commuting by rail into Central London especially in western Kent and around the Thames Gateway;

 in addition, coach and car are important modes for commuting to London particularly Gravesham;

 the amount of commuting by rail into Central London is strongly related to rail journey times and income;

 there is a strong relationship between rail commuting and household income across much of Kent except for Canterbury, Dartford, Dover and Gravesham;

 rail usage in Kent has grown more slowly than other areas in the South East due to a number of reasons; and

 the highest levels of crowding in the morning peak occur on the Chatham Mainline and the beyond Maidstone East on the Ashford to London Victoria line.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 3.17

4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

4.1 Introduction

4.1.1 This section describes the new HS services and the implications for Kent including:

 the HS route, stations, service patterns and journey time savings;

 demand forecasts for HS services, including our forecasting methodology and individual HS station forecasts;

 evidence that HS services will attract new people to Kent; and

 the attraction of St Pancras as the new London terminus.

4.2 Service Patterns

High Speed Route & Stations

4.2.1 Figure 4.1 shows the Southeastern route map in Kent, indicating the stations which will be served by the new HS service from December 2009, as well as the existing Classic services, defined as non-HS services.

Figure 4.1 High Speed and Classic Southeastern stations in Kent

4.2.2 Two groups of services will use the new HS1: one serving north Kent stations will join at Ebbsfleet International; the other serving east and southeast Kent will join at Ashford International.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.1 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

4.2.3 A number of alterations to the service pattern specified in the franchise agreement have been agreed by Southeastern and DfT recently. These changes were prompted by the market research and demand modelling work undertaken by us on behalf of Southeastern.

High Speed Peak Services

4.2.4 There will be two peak hours at either end of the working day, during which eight domestic trains per will run on HS1: four on the north Kent route, two on the Ashford route and two St Pancras to Ebbsfleet only services.

4.2.5 There will be two peak services per hour on the north Kent route starting at Broadstairs which will then stop at all high speed stations between Birchington-on-Sea and Chatham, then express to Ebsfleet International. Additionally, there will be a half-hourly service starting at Rochester serving the Medway towns.

4.2.6 On the Ashford route, there will be two services per hour to Ashford via Canterbury West, one from Margate, the other from Ramsgate. There will also be two services per hour to Ashford starting at Dover Priory. At Ashford, the services will be split and joined to create half-hourly 12-car trains from Ashford to St Pancras.

High Speed Off-Peak Services

4.2.7 In the off-peak, there will be four trains per hour running on HS1: two on the north Kent route and two on the Ashford route.

4.2.8 The two off-peak services per hour on the north Kent route will start at Faversham. Stations to the east (Whistable, , Birchington-on-Sea, Margate and Broadstairs) will not be served in the off-peak.

4.2.9 Via Ashford, there will one service from Dover Priory and the other from Ramsgate via Canterbury West.

Non-High Speed Services

4.2.10 The combination of the removal of Eurostar paths from the main line through Kent and the introduction of the new HS services has provided the opportunity to develop the timetable further than the original SRA SLC2 specification.

4.2.11 The development of the SLC2 timetable, underpinned by research work undertaken by MVA for Southeastern, has eradicted the features of the original specification that were giving cause for concern. The December 2009 timetable will now feature a number of improvements that ensure that other areas of Kent, beside those that will enjoy HS services, will benefit from capacity released on the classic network.

4.2.12 Particular highlights of the timetable now planned for introduction include:

 additional two trains per hour from Tunbridge Wells to London, also benefiting Tonbridge and Sevenoaks;

 restoration of two fast trains per hour from Victoria to Ramsgate and Dover (dividing at Faversham) which will also provide Longfield and Meopham with three trains per hour; and

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.2 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

 an hourly mainline service via Canterbury West will maintain a service to the local stations while allowing the High Speed service to run between Ramsgate and Ashford with only one stop, at Canterbury West.

4.2.13 The number of trains operating into Victoria, Charing Cross and Cannon Street in the peaks will be maintained at broadly the current levels.

Future Timetable Changes

4.2.14 The next event that will drive further change for timetables in Kent will be the developments at London Bridge to expand the capacity available on the through lines to accommodate Thameslink Key Output Two.

4.2.15 This work is due to commence after the 2012 Olympics and will impose some restrictions while the railway is extensively remodelled. These will primarily impact the low level terminal platforms which handle trains from South London. It is expected that the opening of Phase 1 of the will divert some passengers away from London Bridge with the possibility of further diversion if Phase 2 of the East London Line (the incorporation of the into the network) is authorised.

4.2.16 Once the Thameslink works have been completed, there will be considerably greater capacity through London Bridge which will benefit Southeastern services as well as Thameslink.

4.2.17 The exact pattern of future services using the Thameslink core route is still under consideration, but plans published to date envisage a number of services operating into Kent.

Journey Times & Headways

4.2.18 Proposed journey times and headways of the HS services by station are given in Table 4.1.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.3 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

Table 4.1 High Speed Service Journey Times (to London termini) and Headways

Station Journey Time Peak Off-Peak Time to St Saving over Headway Headway Pancras Classic (min) (min) (min) (min)

Ebbsfleet International 19 N/A 10 15

Gravesend 24 28 30 30

Strood 36 34 30 30

Rochester 41 12 30 30

Chatham 43 8 30 30

Gillingham 47 8 30 30

Rainham 52 8 30 30

Sittingbourne 61 7 30 30

Faversham 66 12 30 30

Whistable 75 11 30 N/A

Herne Bay 81 12 30 N/A

Birchington-on-Sea 89 12 30 N/A

Broadstairs (via 92 21 60 N/A Canterbury West)

Broadstairs (via 100 13 30 N/A Faversham)

Ashford International 37 39 30 30

Folkestone West 61 32 30 60

Folkestone Central 64 31 30 60

Dover Priory 76 31 30 60

Canterbury West 63 45 30 60

Ramsgate 86 35 30 60

Margate 98 9 60 N/A

N.B. Based on typical peak journey times as per latest versions (Dec 2007) of SLC2 timetables. Note that these are subject to change.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.4 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

4.2.19 Journey times before and after the introduction of HS services are shown in Figures 4.2 and 4.3.

Sheerness on Sea London Dartford Gravesend Margate Termini Herne Bay Medway Towns Ramsgate Sittingbourne Faversham Sevenoaks Maidstone Canterbury

Tonbridge KENT

Rail Journey time to Tunbridge Ashford Dover London (minutes) Wells <30 75-90 Folkestone 30-45 90-105 45-60 105-120 60-75 Existing Services Station

Figure 4.2 Existing journey times by rail

Stratford

Sheerness on Sea St. Pancras Dartford Gravesend Margate Herne Bay Ebbsfleet Medway Whitstable Towns Ramsgate Sittingbourne Faversham Sevenoaks Maidstone Canterbury

Tonbridge KENT

Rail Journey time to Tunbridge Ashford Dover London (minutes) Wells <30 60-75 Folkestone 30-45 75-90 45-60 90-105

High Speed Services Classic Services High Speed Station Classic Station Figure 4.3 Post-HS1 journey times by rail

4.2.20 The new HS journey times will create a number of new areas in Kent where journeys times will be within commuting distance of London. For example, journey times from Ashford will become comparable to Kent’s existing commuter hotspots of Sevenoaks and Tunbridge Wells, while Ebbsfleet and Gravesend will have journey times comparable to inner suburban centres such as Orpington.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.5 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

4.3 High Speed Demand Forecasts

4.3.1 Passengers in the catchment area for the new HS services will have the choice of switching to the new HS service or remaining with the Classic services. The choice between the two services will not be straightforward, and will depend on a number of factors:

 the time saving of travelling on HS;

 the frequency of services on HS compared to Classic;

 the ease of access to the nearest HS served station, if it is not the user’s existing station;

 the ease of getting to the passenger’s destination in London from St. Pancras compared to their existing terminal; and

 the difference in price of travelling on either mode.

4.3.2 To forecast demand with HS services in place a demand model was created.

Forecasting Methodology

4.3.3 Our demand model used the same structure and methodology developed by us for use in franchise bids for a number of clients. The model takes LENNON data from a base year (financial year 2006/07) and forecasts the passenger journey for eight subsequent years to 2014/15, the end of the franchise agreement.

4.3.4 The passenger journey data was split according to journey purpose using data from the London Areas Transport Studies (LATS) database, shown in Table 4.2.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.6 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

Table 4.2 Journey Purpose by Zone

Zone High Speed Stations Commuter Business Leisure

Gravesham Ebbsfleet, Gravesend & Strood 72% 10% 19%

Medway Rochester, Chatham & Gillingham 70% 9% 21% Towns

North Kent Rainham, Sittingbourne, Faversham, 68% 10% 22% Coast Whitstable, Herne Bay & Birchington- on-Sea

Ashford Ashford 43% 20% 37%

Folkestone Folkestone Central, Folkestone West 35% 22% 42% & Dover & Dover Priory

Margate & Margate & Broadstairs 25% 22% 53% Broadstairs

Ramsgate Ramsgate 21% 24% 54%

Canterbury Canterbury West 14% 28% 58%

4.3.5 Annual demand forecasts up to 2014/15 were projected from the base demand according to a range of external (exogenous) and service provision (endogenous) factors. Exogenous factors included population increases, economic growth, rates of car ownership and special growth due to anticipated housing and commercial developments, special growth is explained in further detail below. Endogenous factors included the effect of real fare increases (regulated fares are assumed to increase at 1% above RPI p.a. in line with fares regulation), changes to journey times and frequencies and rolling stock quality. Underpinning the forecast calculations were a number of assumptions such as fare, competition and journey time elasticities. Where applicable, forecasts were constrained according to the capacity of the network.

Special Growth is the additional estimated demand that is a result of the combination of major developments and HS services. Special growth is only applied to stations within the development growth areas of Ashford and Thames Gateway comprising Ebbsfleet, Gravesend and the Medway towns. In effect it is assumed that the population moving to the new developments will at least in part be attracted by the HS services and as such have a higher trip rate than the existing population. The assumptions are based on consultation with developers and property experts within Kent which was undertaken as part of our forecasting work for Southeastern.

4.3.6 To model the impact of these different factors, we developed a mode choice model. To divide demand between the two 'modes' of High Speed and Classic, we calculate a 'generalised cost' for travelling by each option. To do this we convert all aspects of cost associated with each option into units of price, including journey time, wait time, access time, egress time,

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.7 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

interchange penalties, fare, plus a 'soft' benefit of travelling in the new High Speed trains. Demand is then allocated according to the relative cost of each option: the less 'expensive' High Speed is compared to Classic, the more demand is allocated to it.

4.3.7 Surveys were also used to estimate up-take of High Speed. The surveys used a mixture of different types of questions:

 Stated Intention (SI) questions, where respondents are asked to consider a specific situation and make specific choices; and

 Stated Preference (SP) exercises, where respondents are asked to rank in order of preference a number of hypothetical scenarios. These provide values of different aspects of the journey experience which were directly inputted into our forecasting work.

4.3.8 Our survey work gave an indication of the proportion of passengers who would consider switching from existing services to High Speed. The results from this were incorporated into the mode choice model. Respondents were asked whether they would switch if the fare remained the same, and also if there was a 20% premium applied to the fare. The results are shown in figure 4.4. The locations of the three areas are shown in Appendix G.

Figure 4.4 Proportion of passengers switching to HS service by area

4.3.9 For journey time, the attractiveness of the High Speed service will vary considerably depending on the ultimate destination in central London, in particular the need to interchange and ease of egress from St. Pancras station compared to the Classic service London terminal. Our market research indicated the distribution of destinations across eight London zones from each High Speed station. The journey time was calculated for travelling to each zone by Classic and High Speed, including time penalties for interchanges and modal changes.

4.3.10 The High Speed service will attract a premium fare compared to the equivalent Classic service. The premium increase allowable under the Franchise Agreements are outlined in Table 4.3. Patronage forecasts provided in this report are based on these rates of premium fare.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.8 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

Table 4.3 High Speed Fare Calculation

Stations High Speed Fare Calculation

All High Speed stations Based on the Classic fare from the station to London plus a between Gravesend and supplement of 30% of the Classic fare from Gravesend to Broadstairs London

All High Speed stations Based on the Classic fare1 from the station to London plus 20% via Ashford International of the Classic fare from Ashford International to London

Ebbsfleet International Based on the Classic fare1 from Gravesend to London plus 35% supplement

4.3.11 Valuations from the stated preference surveys carried out by us on behalf of Southeastern allowed all of these generalised cost variables to be converted into a common unit of cost. From this, the relative proportions travelling on each service were calculated. For example, if the generalised cost of travel is exactly the same for each mode, the mode share will be equal. If travelling by Classic is ‘cheaper’ in overall money and time terms, then its mode share will be greater than 50%.

4.3.12 The shares from the mode choice model were applied to the demand forecasts. This generated annual passenger forecasts split between Classic and High Speed services by zone and by journey type. Knowing the current proportion of passengers travelling from each station within each zone, individual station forecasts were produced.

4.3.13 Comparing the with and without High Speed scenarios, the High Speed demand can be split from that abstracted from Classic services and generated demand.

4.3.14 Generated demand is calculated by using an elasticity calculation on generalised cost: as the overall cost of travel (by High Speed and Classic combined) decreases, the amount of generated traffic is assumed to increase. The calculations are based on rail industry research, and do not distinguish the source of this generated demand - i.e. whether it is new trips or abstraction from car or other modes. However, to provide a 'reality check' on the level of generation forecast, we have undertaken penetration analysis to ensure that the trip rates forecast are realistic.

4.3.15 This calculation covers only generated or abstracted trips by existing residents. In addition, a further source of additional trips is from 'special growth,' trips from new residents or commercial activity attracted to Kent by the new HS services.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.9 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

Overall Kent Forecasts

4.3.16 Figure 4.5 shows the overall growth in demand for rail services (Classic and High Speed combined) from stations in Kent served by High Speed, split according to journey purpose (see Appendix H for data table). This shows a 66% increase overall in the number of annual journeys from Kent to London between 2006/07 and 2014/15.

25,000,000 HS service commence December 2009 20,000,000

15,000,000 Leisure Business Commuter 10,000,000

Annual journeys to London to journeys Annual 5,000,000

0

/07 /08 /09 /10 /11 /12 /13 /14 6 3 0 07 08 09 10 11 12 1 14/15 Year

Figure 4.5 Total annual journeys from Kent High Speed stations to London, 2006/07 to 2014/15

Commuter Forecasts

4.3.17 The increase in total daily commuter journeys between Kent High Speed stations and London is shown in Figure 4.6 (see Appendix I for data table). This distinguishes between Classic and HS commuter journeys, the latter being split approximately evenly between passengers abstracted from Classic services and those generated by the new service.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.10 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

60,000

50,000

40,000 HS (generated)

HS (abstracted from 30,000 Classic) Classic

20,000

10,000 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily

0

7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 /0 /0 /0 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 Year Figure 4.6 Daily commuter journeys from Kent High Speed stations to London, 2006/07 to 2014/15

4.3.18 Figure 4.7 shows the split between Classic and High Speed across the nine zones for commuters (see Appendix J for data table). With the exception of Ebbsfleet International which will not be served by Classic services, the propensity of commuters to travel to London on High Speed services is greatest at stations in east and southeast of Kent i.e. Canterbury West, Ramsgate and Margate. This is because the time savings by High Speed over Classic are most pronounced from these locations. For example, from Canterbury West, High Speed is 45 minutes quicker than the Classic service. As a result over 90% of commuters travel by High Speed. In areas close to London where the time saving is more marginal, the proportion of High Speed commuters is much lower. For example, at Sittingbourne, the High Speed time saving is just seven minutes and consequently, the proportion of commuters taking the quicker but more expensive High Speed service is less than 20%.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.11 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% Classic 50% HS 40% 30% 20%

10% 0%

m d ast ns a or irs o h over a fleet D Tow Ashf erbury nt bbs ay raves oadst Ramsgate E G Ca one & Br & Medw est e North Kent C at Folk g ar M

Figure 4.7 Commuter split between Classic and High Speed services (2010/11)

4.4 Individual Station Forecasts

4.4.1 Daily commuter forecasts (data tables and charts) for each of the HS stations in Kent to London are provided in Appendix K.

4.4.2 The forecasts include ‘special growth’ journeys. To account for variations in the special growth estimates, a sensitivity analysis is provided in Appendix L. This shows the impact of applying 0%, 50% and 150% of the existing special growth assumptions on daily commuter journeys from those High Speed stations expected to experience ‘special growth’.

4.4.3 With the exception of Ebbsfleet, the five largest absolute increases in daily commuter traffic from 2006/07 to 2014/15 will be Gravesend, Chatham, Ashford International, Gillingham and Strood (Table 4.4). While some of the increases at these stations will be due to new housing and commercial developments, with the exception of Strood the majority of the increase in commuter traffic is likely to be abstracted from existing rail services.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.12 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

Table 4.4 Projected increase in daily commuters at Kent HS stations ordered by size of increase from 2006/07 to 2014/15

06/07 14/15 Increase in % increase daily commuters

Ebbsfleet 0 7,900 7,900 N/A

Gravesend 5,800 8,900 3,100 55%

Chatham 5,500 7,800 2,300 40%

Ashford Intl 2,700 4,800 2,100 75%

Gillingham 3,900 5,500 1,600 40%

Strood 1,800 2,700 900 55%

Sittingbourne 2,700 3,500 800 27%

Rainham 2,400 3,000 600 27%

Rochester 1,400 1,900 500 40%

Faversham 2,000 2,500 500 27%

Folkestone Central 600 1,000 400 52%

Dover Priory 600 900 300 52%

Whitstable 1,000 1,300 300 27%

Herne Bay 1,000 1,300 300 27%

Canterbury East 300 400 100 63%

Canterbury West 200 400 200 63%

Margate 200 400 200 45%

Ramsgate 200 300 100 56%

Birchington-on-Sea 300 400 100 27%

Broadstairs 200 300 100 45%

Folkestone West 60 90 30 52%

4.4.4 Whilst the absolute increases in daily commuter traffic are relatively small at the outermost stations e.g. Canterbury West, Ramsgate, Dover Priory and Folkestone, the percentage

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.13 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

increases are all over 50%. Again, this can be attributed to the greater advantage of High Speed journey times over Classic from these locations compared to stations where the time saving is more marginal such as on the North Kent coast. The absolute increases are largest at the North Kent stations because these stations have a higher base value of London commuters. In addition the reduction in classic services will result in a high degree of abstraction along parts of the .

4.4.5 As the HS service is no longer scheduled to stop at Sandling and Westernhanger as was originally proposed. As a result Folkestone West is expected to attract rail-heading passengers from these two stations. The forecast for Folkestone West is therefore likely to be higher than that shown in Table 4.4.

Ebbsfleet

4.4.6 Ebbsfleet International station is unique in that it will be served only by HS services. Demand in the first full year of HS operation (2010) will be in excess of 6,000 commuters per day, increasing to almost 8,000 by 2014 (Figure 4.8). This makes it one of the busiest commuter stations.

9,000

8,000

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 1,000

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

HS (railheading) HS (generated)

Figure 4.8 Forecast of daily commuter journeys from Ebbsfleet International station to London, 2006/07 to 2014/15

4.4.7 Some of the Ebbsfleet traffic is attributed to generated demand from existing residents and special growth from new housing and commercial developments in the Kent Thameside area and for which this will be the nearest station. Over 70% however is accounted for by passengers who will rail-head to use the HS service from their existing station.

4.4.8 Evidence from our survey work where abstraction is likely to occur is shown in figure 4.9. The responses indicate that much of the demand is likely to be abstracted from stations on the fringes of the London suburban area. The Medway stations are grouped together on this graph, as, although no single station makes a contribution to Ebbsfleet’s catchment of more than 5%, in total they contribute around 11% of Ebbsfleet’s potential catchment.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.14 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

Figure 4.9 Abstraction from existing Southeastern stations to Ebbsfleet International

4.4.9 Figure 4.10 illustrates where respondents from our survey who indicated that they would switch to the HS service and board it at Ebbsfleet currently live, with each point representing one individual. The likely mode of access is also shown. The prospect of shorter journey times is encouraging passengers to consider ‘back-tracking’ from the Dartford area.

Figure 4.10 Likely mode of access for Ebbsfleet passengers

Classic-only Stations

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.15 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

4.4.10 Appendix M shows the daily commuter journeys from the larger Kent stations that will not be served by HS services: Dartford, Hastings, Maidstone East, , Sevenoaks, Staplehurst, Tonbridge and Tunbridge Wells.

4.4.11 Dartford and Maidstone East will be impacted the most by the introduction of HS services. As discussed above, a proportion of passengers currently using these stations will instead rail-head to Ebbsfleet from 2009 to take advantage of the faster service. In the year following the introduction of HS services, daily commuter passengers are expected to drop by 5% and 7% at Dartford and Maidstone East respectively before increasing again at typically 2% per annum.

4.4.12 At the remaining Classic-only stations where rail-heading to a HS station would be impractical, the effect of HS will be negligible. On the whole, commuter traffic is expected to grow at these stations at current levels over the next seven years with typically a 1% to 2% per annum increase in daily commuter numbers from 2009 onwards.

4.5 Evidence HS1 will attract new people to Kent

4.5.1 This section provides a brief analysis of the likely extent of HS services attracting new residents to Kent, specifically commuters to London. The new HS1 terminus at St. Pancras creates journey opportunities for existing Kent residents to use services onto northern England as well as passengers with a destination in north London. However, the new station will also make living in Kent more attractive for commuters that at present arrive in St Pancras or Kings Cross from the north.

4.5.2 Rail commuters to a certain extent choose to live in locations convenient to their workplace. Commuters currently living in Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire who may move to Kent would be less discouraged by arriving in St. Pancras as they either work nearby or are satisfied in using other modes of transport to reach their final destination.

4.5.3 It therefore makes sense to benchmark areas of Kent and specifically those served by High Speed with comparable areas with train services currently arriving at Kings Cross or St. Pancras.

4.5.4 Typical fastest peak journey times are used to pair Kent and non-Kent stations together (Table 4.5).

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.16 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

Table 4.5 Peak journey times in minutes to St Pancras/Kings Cross (peak trains per hour shown in brackets)

Kent Non-Kent (North of London)

Ebbsfleet 19 (8) 19 (7) St Albans

19-25 (2) Potters Bar

Gravesend 24 (2) 23-28 (6) Radlett

25 (3-4) Harpenden

Ashford 37 (2) 32 (6) Luton

Chatham 43 (2) 43 (2) Bedford

Gillingham 48 (2) 45-50 (5) Flitwick

Sittingbourne 56 (2) 57 (2) Cambridge

Canterbury 61 (2) 56 (3-4) Peterborough

Dover 74 (2) 70-76 (1) Grantham

4.5.5 The next benchmarking exercise compares Ebbsfleet, Gravesend, Ashford and Canterbury with stations to the north of London that have comparable journey times (Tables 4.6 to 4.9).

Ebbsfleet

Table 4.6 Benchmarking: Ebbsfleet vs St. Albans and Potters Bar

Ebbsfleet St Albans Potters Bar

Average house price £180,000 £392,000 £360,000

Average detached house price £250,000 £716,000 £575,000

Approx % of working population ~5% 10-15% 7-12% commuting to London

Cost of annual season ticket £2,000 £2,460 £1,700

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.17 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

Gravesend

Table 4.7 Benchmarking: Gravesend vs Radlett and Harpenden

Gravesend Radlett Harpenden

Average house price £200,000 £550,000 £500,000

Average detached house price £400,000 £750,000 £800,000

Approx % of working population 7-10% 12% 12-15% commuting to London

Cost of annual season ticket £2,240 £2,000 £2,800

Ashford

Table 4.8 Benchmarking: Ashford vs Luton

Ashford Luton

Average house price £239,000 £166,000

Average detached house price £373,000 £252,000

Approx % of working population 5-7% 5-7% commuting to London

Cost of annual season ticket £3,460 £3,000

Canterbury

Table 4.9 Benchmarking: Canterbury vs Peterborough

Canterbury Peterborough

Average house price £228,000 £167,000

Average detached house price £312,000 £246,000

Approx % of working population 2% 5% commuting to London

Cost of annual season ticket £3,480 £5,000

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.18 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

4.5.6 The key messages from the benchmarking are:

 Kent towns have lower levels of commuting to Central London than towns with similar journey times to the north of London;

 average Kent house prices in areas with journey times less than 30 minutes are typically lower than the comparable areas north of London; and

 average Kent house prices in areas with journey times greater than 30 minutes are typically higher than the comparable areas north of London.

4.5.7 On the assumption that house price is a key driver of location, these results would imply there is potential for new people to be attracted to Kent to take advantage of the combination of lower house prices and shorter journey times into Central London. However, other local factors such as schools and the environment also drive the choice of location particularly further out of London where commuting to London makes up a smaller proportion of the workforce.

4.6 Attraction of St Pancras

4.6.1 The High Speed terminus of St. Pancras is seen by some as a barrier to the success of HS rail in Kent. Our research of potential HS users showed this perception existed, but further research and analysis showed that targeted information and marketing would reduce the negative perception.

4.6.2 Respondents were asked how they perceived the convenience of St. Pancras compared to their existing London station. These results have been mapped according to destination postcode in figure 4.11

Figure 4.11 Convenience of St. Pancras

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.19 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

4.6.3 In summary figure 4.11 shows:

 key destinations are Westminster, the West End, The City and South bank which are all areas with perceived lower convenience;

 there are relatively high levels of perceived inconvenience in the West End, even though St. Pancras has equally good transport connections to these areas; and

 respondents expressed a difference in perceived convenience depending whether their destination was north or south of Oxford Street/High Holborn.

4.6.4 In general, respondents considered St. Pancras to be much less convenient than their existing station if they reached their destination on foot, but were more likely to lessen this view if they already need to take a tube to complete their journey.

4.6.5 It is clear St. Pancras is perceived by many as being less convenient which for many users in The City, Southbank and Westminster is probably the case. However, in reality St. Pancras is equally convenient for many locations in the West End, around Holborn and to the north of The City. Targeted marketing, emphasising overall HS journey times, may address the imbalance between perception and reality, especially when egress time and peak HS journey time savings are compared (see Figure 4.12).

10

Gravesend - Holborn Ashford - Holborn

HS time savings

0 Medway - West End -10103050Medway - North of the Gravesend - Blackfriars City Canterbury - Blackfriars Canterbury - West End Ramsgate - Covent Ashford - Covent Garden Garden

-10 Egress time Medway - Kensington savings/losses Gravesend - The City Ashford - The City

-20 Medway - Westminster Canterbury - Westminster Gravesend - South Bank

No Overall Journey Overall Journey Time Time Savings Savings

-30

Figure 4.12 Overall journey time savings by HS services

4.6.6 Our work for Southeastern did not consider the additional benefit of the improved interchange between Kent services and rail services to the North, Midlands and East England from Kings Cross, St. Pancras and to a lesser extent Euston. The accessibility of St. Pancras will create new journey opportunities for residents in Kent increasing its attractiveness.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.20 4 The Attraction of High Speed Services

4.7 Conclusions

4.7.1 This section has outlined:

 HS1 will dramatically reduce journey times to Central London for a substantial portion of the Kent population;

 the largest time savings occur at Ebbsfleet, Gravesend, Ashford and services accessing HS1 at Ashford;

 there is significant growth forecast in all journey purposes;

 HS services will generate new commuter journeys as well as abstracting from existing services;

 the largest increases in daily commuters to London as a result of HS services will occur at Gravesend, Chatham and Ashford;

 at Ashford the number of daily commuters is forecast to increase by 75% from 2006/07 to 2014/15;

 the combination of quick journey times to London and low house prices will attract more people to live in Kent commuting to London;

 St. Pancras is less convenient for many users but targeted marketing emphasising overall journey time savings will address the imbalance between perception and reality.

Part 1 – Results from Stage 1 Work 4.21

Appendix A – Kent population working in Central London

District Overall Central London Commuters Only

Commute Total Commute via Commute via Commute Workforce Rail via Rail Bus/Coach via Car Total

Ashford 57,606 2,855 1,728 27 291 2,046

Canterbury 66,358 2,413 1,097 24 261 1,382

Dartford 49,973 6,511 4,619 171 1,096 5,886

Dover 50,407 1,227 244 12 144 400

Gravesham 48,892 3,751 2,336 1,260 856 4,452

Maidstone 76,111 4,602 2,874 319 837 4,030

Medway 123,301 9,400 5,588 1,642 1,627 8,857

Sevenoaks 55,195 9,097 6,644 267 957 7,868

Shepway 48,428 1,228 681 12 174 867

Swale 64,054 3,966 1,907 586 447 2,940

Thanet 56,160 1,470 484 21 99 604

Tonbridge and Malling 58,501 5,560 4,044 268 747 5,059

Tunbridge Wells 55,173 6,703 4,910 12 396 5,318

Kent incl Medway 810,160 58,782 37,157 4,621 7,932 49,710

Note: 2001 census and journey to work statistics used. Grown to 2007 figures using TEMPRO growth rates.

Appendix B - Weekly Income (£) by district and mode of travel to work

District Overall Central London Commuters Only

Commute District Commute via Commute Average Commute via Rail via Rail Bus/Coach via Car

Ashford 748 783 798 725 785

Canterbury 652 643 652 672 656

Dartford 732 732 738 828 749

Dover 633 618 640 650 666

Gravesham 668 662 672 693 700

Maidstone 797 828 836 860 820

Medway 675 673 679 722 686

Sevenoaks 886 917 929 872 868

Shepway 629 639 669 590 642

Swale 660 674 694 667 695

Thanet 553 558 563 542 558

Tonbridge and Malling 845 893 914 856 920

Tunbridge Wells 845 879 891 754 848

Sources: - 2001 Census Origin-Destination Statistics for Output Areas grown to 2007 using TEMPRO growth rates (workers and non-home based work trips, i.e. commuting)

- 2001 Census model based ward level income estimates grown to 2007 levels by using observed GDP growth from ONS

Appendix C - 2006/07 commuter flows

2006/07 Commuter Commuter Station Journeys (from % Commute Journeys (p.a.) Journeys (daily) MOIRA)

Tonbridge 4,112,781 67.9% 2,794,494 12,702

Sevenoaks 3,791,318 69.0% 2,617,308 11,897

Dartford 3,147,681 80.4% 2,529,180 11,496

Tunbridge Wells 3,449,764 65.2% 2,250,196 10,228

Chatham 3,091,595 69.6% 2,151,991 9,782

Gravesend Central 2,472,935 71.6% 1,769,959 8,045

Gillingham (Kent) 2,192,545 69.6% 1,526,182 6,937

Sittingbourne 2,028,523 68.0% 1,379,596 6,271

Rainham (Kent) 1,778,918 68.0% 1,209,840 5,499

Ashford (kent) 2,432,484 43.0% 1,046,468 4,757

Faversham 1,461,124 68.0% 993,709 4,517

Maidstone East 1,764,414 39.1% 690,091 3,137

Canterbury West 1,256,375 54.3% 682,594 3,103

Clock House 885,886 72.0% 638,195 2,901

Paddock Wood 1,138,063 54.3% 618,315 2,811

Hayes (Kent) 849,252 72.0% 611,804 2,781

Greenhithe 821,334 71.6% 587,855 2,672

Canterbury East 1,518,996 37.8% 573,933 2,609

Chelsfield 680,777 79.8% 543,388 2,470

Strood 758,255 71.6% 542,708 2,467

High Brooms 816,697 65.2% 532,711 2,421

Rochester 758,940 69.6% 528,281 2,401

Whitstable 772,755 68.0% 525,550 2,389

Herne Bay 760,793 68.0% 517,414 2,352

Staplehurst 886,968 54.3% 481,894 2,190

Hastings 761,136 56.7% 431,459 1,961

Hildenborough 538,038 79.8% 429,455 1,952

West Malling 645,049 65.2% 420,273 1,910

Sheerness-on-Sea 578,157 68.0% 393,204 1,787

Folkestone Central 972,677 35.2% 342,453 1,557

Headcorn 622,041 54.3% 337,958 1,536

Longfield 481,873 67.5% 325,474 1,479

Battle 536,767 56.7% 304,273 1,383

Borough Green & Wrotham 419,558 65.2% 273,357 1,243

Otford 399,142 65.2% 260,056 1,182

Bearsted 371,646 63.4% 235,454 1,070

Wadhurst 414,138 56.7% 234,759 1,067

Maidstone West 530,869 39.1% 207,631 944

Meopham 306,764 67.5% 207,199 942

Ramsgate 936,694 21.3% 199,380 906

Birchington-On-Sea 257,382 68.0% 175,045 796

Margate 660,930 25.3% 167,245 760

Knockholt 189,465 79.8% 151,229 687

Higham 200,487 71.6% 143,495 652

Westgate-On-Sea 207,956 68.0% 141,431 643

Robertsbridge 236,962 56.7% 134,325 611

Farningham Road 197,059 67.5% 133,101 605

Etchingham 229,908 56.7% 130,326 592

Marden 233,371 54.3% 126,791 576

Broadstairs 498,354 25.3% 126,106 573

Snodland 160,985 71.6% 115,222 524

St Leonards W S 202,192 56.7% 114,615 521

Queenborough 166,601 68.0% 113,305 515

Swanscombe 156,741 71.6% 112,185 510

Teynham 160,401 68.0% 109,089 496

Lenham 168,330 63.4% 106,645 485

Chestfield & Swalecliffe 149,439 68.0% 101,633 462

Newington 144,517 68.0% 98,286 447

Stone Crossing 131,039 71.6% 93,789 426

Kemsley 137,607 68.0% 93,586 425

Stonegate 164,587 56.7% 93,298 424

Eynsford 140,256 65.2% 91,382 415

Dover Priory 923,173 9.4% 86,721 394

Barming 132,945 65.2% 86,619 394

Deal 469,792 17.8% 83,462 379

Wye 152,538 54.3% 82,875 377

Dunton Green 89,240 79.8% 71,230 324

East Malling 97,960 65.2% 63,825 290

Bat & Ball 92,220 65.2% 60,085 273

Sole Street 86,764 67.5% 58,603 266

Sandwich 327,737 17.8% 58,225 265

Aylesford 80,005 71.6% 57,262 260

Frant 98,861 56.7% 56,041 255

Pluckley 99,764 54.3% 54,202 246

Sandling 148,561 35.2% 52,304 238

Northfleet 68,331 71.6% 48,907 222

New Hythe 63,862 71.6% 45,708 208

Walmer 254,694 17.8% 45,248 206

Charing 70,944 63.4% 44,946 204

Harrietsham 68,919 63.4% 43,663 198

Sturry 80,237 54.3% 43,593 198

West St Leonards 71,240 56.7% 40,383 184

Aylesham 97,698 37.8% 36,914 168

MINSTER_(THANET) 65,246 54.3% 35,448 161

Halling 43,925 71.6% 31,439 143

Folkestone West 87,508 35.2% 30,809 140

Cuxton 41,533 71.6% 29,727 135

Crowhurst 50,341 56.7% 28,536 130

Wateringbury 51,618 54.3% 28,044 127

Chartham 51,475 54.3% 27,967 127

Selling 63,692 37.8% 24,065 109

Shepherds Well 61,899 37.8% 23,388 106

Adisham 58,762 37.8% 22,202 101

Hollingbourne 32,642 63.4% 20,680 94

Bekesbourne 49,049 37.8% 18,533 84

Chilham 31,559 54.3% 17,146 78

Shoreham (Kent) 25,508 65.2% 16,619 76

Yalding 29,912 54.3% 16,251 74

Kearsney 40,166 37.8% 15,176 69

Westenhanger 42,224 35.2% 14,866 68

East Farleigh 21,742 54.3% 11,813 54

Dumpton Park 48,355 17.8% 8,591 39

Kemsing 11,875 65.2% 7,737 35

Martin Mill 38,178 17.8% 6,783 31

Snowdown 17,179 37.8% 6,491 30

Beltring 7,205 54.3% 3,915 18

Swale 3,935 68.0% 2,676 12

Appendix D – Passenger growth on South East England TOCs

Passenger Kilometres (millions)

South West Southern Southeastern Trains Thameslink

1997 2092.1 2959.52 3276.47 923.72

1998 2211.8 2768.75 3487.29 1018.02

1999 2296 2885.74 3666.56 1135.68

2000 2510.4 3096.8 3895.84 1206.72

2001 2575.8 3196.8 4143.04 1283.36

2002 2624 3232 4076 1340

2003 2666 3300 4184 1387

2004 2726.8 3296.4 4290.4 1368.9

2005 2802.9 3311.5 4605.8 1413.8

2006 2826.3 3351.7 4576.6 1432.4

2007 3161.4 3356.7 4897.8 N/A

Appendix E – Changes in modelled annual station flow (2003 and 2006/07)

Zone Area 2003 2006/07 % increase

Chislehurst to Grove Park>Charing X/Cannon Street plus Bromley North shuttle London 4,967,442 6,442,042 29.7%

Tonbridge>London Kent 2,060,410 2,664,703 29.3%

Chelsfield to Dunton Green and Hildenborough>London Kent/London 1,154,582 1,375,699 19.2%

Hayes to Ladywell and St. Johns>London London 7,354,758 8,673,974 17.9%

Selling and Bekesbourne to Kearnsey>London London 54,868 64,391 17.4%

Maidstone Stations>London Kent 982,893 1,152,508 17.3%

Stone Crossing to Strood, plus Cuxton to Aylesford>London Kent 2,924,005 3,383,091 15.7%

Dartford to Blackheath>London Kent/London 14,547,641 16,800,710 15.5%

Crayford to Lee plus Hither Green>London London 13,058,639 14,938,380 14.4%

Ashford International>London Kent 1,203,974 1,369,300 13.7%

Tunbridge Wells, High Brooms>London Kent 2,182,000 2,464,775 13.0%

Westenhanger to Folkestone Central plus Dover Priory>London Kent 791,700 886,933 12.0%

Slade Green to >London London 11,733,845 12,992,643 10.7%

Orpington, Petts Wood>London London 6,245,281 6,896,923 10.4%

Canterbury plus Wye to , and Minster>London Kent 801,047 879,877 9.8%

Paddock Wood to East Farleigh and to Pluckley>London Kent 2,155,828 2,367,958 9.8%

Eynesford to Barming, Bat and Ball>London Kent 1,299,797 1,418,782 9.2%

Ramsgate>London Kent 189,891 203,244 7.0%

Bromley South>London London 4,076,034 4,290,870 5.3%

Swanley, St. Mary Cray, Bickley, Shortlands to Brixton>Victoria London 10,059,769 10,551,125 4.9%

Lewisham, New Cross>London London 4,929,428 5,126,585 4.0%

Rochester to Gillingham>London Kent 3,263,470 3,391,273 3.9%

Sevenoaks>London Kent 2,912,860 3,025,512 3.9%

Rainham to Westgate-on-Sea and Sheerness Branch>London Kent 3,631,059 3,715,491 2.3%

Margate and Broadstairs>London Kent 368,615 376,132 2.0%

Bearsted to Charing>London Kent 336,109 342,801 2.0%

Hastings to Sussex 2,346,785 2,337,750 -0.4%

Appendix F – Levels of crowding in morning peak on six selected routes

Route Station where passenger load becomes >= x% of critical load capacity

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Broadstairs to Cannon Whistable Teynham Sittingbourne Gillingham Chatham Street (via North Kent coast)

Ashford - Victoria (via Bearsted Maidstone East East Malling Maidstone East)

Ramsgate - Charing Cross Staplehurst Tonbridge Sevenoaks Sevenoaks (via Canterbury West & Ashford)

Ramsgate - Charing Cross Ashford Int'l Marden Tonbridge Sevenoaks (via Dover Priory & Ashford)

Ramsgate - Charing Cross Sittingbourne Chatham Bromley South (via North Kent coast)

Hastings - Blackfriars (via Etchingham Wadhurst Tunbridge Tunbridge Wells) Wells

Appendix G - Geographic zones of HS up-take

Appendix H - Total annual journeys from Kent HS stations to London

06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 06/07 to 14/15 increase

Commuter 7,266,453 7,751,257 8,065,127 9,028,535 10,767,443 11,156,323 11,478,710 11,899,589 12,163,324 67%

Business 1,667,162 1,789,954 1,865,694 2,068,363 2,442,000 2,524,822 2,594,256 2,681,513 2,736,093 64%

Leisure 3,454,235 3,707,037 3,861,158 4,271,877 5,030,052 5,198,546 5,340,009 5,518,160 5,628,934 63%

Total 12,387,849 13,248,247 13,791,979 15,368,775 18,239,495 18,879,691 19,412,975 20,099,261 20,528,351 66%

Appendix I – Total daily commuter journeys from Kent HS stations to London

06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15

Classic 32,555 34,358 35,355 34,216 27,226 28,113 28,789 29,681 30,178

HS (abstracted from Classic) 0 0 0 2,421 11,431 11,484 11,572 11,830 11,947

HS (generated) 0 0 0 4,402 10,286 11,113 11,815 12,578 13,162

Total 32,555 34,358 35,355 41,039 48,943 50,711 52,176 54,089 55,288

Appendix J- Commuter split between Classic and High Speed services

HS Classic

North Kent Coast 18.8% 81.2%

Medway Towns 33.0% 67.0%

Gravesham 41.2% 58.8%

Ashford 50.4% 49.6%

Folkestone & Dover 66.2% 33.8%

Margate & Broadstairs 70.0% 30.0%

Ramsgate 78.8% 21.2%

Canterbury 91.4% 8.6%

Ebbsfleet 100.0% 0.0%

Appendix K - Daily commuter journeys from Kent HS stations to London

HS Station Service 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15

Ashford International Classic 2,696 2,896 3,001 3,000 2,070 2,163 2,236 2,320 2,379

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 175 1,416 1,430 1,450 1,485 1,500

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 432 696 774 825 871 916

Total 2,696 2,896 3,001 3,607 4,183 4,367 4,511 4,676 4,794

Birchington-on-Sea Classic 347 365 376 364 328 336 342 351 356

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 22 70 72 73 76 77

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 2 6 6 6 6 6

Total 347 365 376 388 404 414 421 433 439

Broadstairs Classic 187 202 208 170 74 76 78 80 81

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 50 168 173 177 182 185

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 2 7 6 6 6 5

Total 187 202 208 222 249 255 261 268 271

Canterbury West Classic 220 239 247 189 28 29 29 30 31

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 80 291 299 307 315 321

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 3 10 9 9 8 8

Total 220 239 247 272 328 337 345 354 359

Chatham Classic 5,526 5,811 5,971 5,727 4,731 4,868 4,980 5,134 5,214

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 442 1,742 1,753 1,760 1,794 1,811

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 272 614 663 706 741 762

Total 5,526 5,811 5,971 6,442 7,086 7,284 7,446 7,668 7,788

Dover Priory Classic 606 651 672 566 284 292 298 307 311

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 147 512 526 538 554 563

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 14 48 48 47 46 45

Total 606 651 672 727 844 865 883 907 920

Ebbsfleet Classic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 International High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 578 859 1,130 1,440 1,847 2,175

High Speed 0 0 0 1,603 5,303 5,410 5,499 5,637 5,713 (railheading)

Total 0 0 0 2,181 6,162 6,540 6,939 7,483 7,888

Faversham Classic 1,968 2,075 2,137 2,067 1,863 1,906 1,939 1,993 2,022

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 127 397 408 416 429 436

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 12 36 35 35 33 32

Total 1,968 2,075 2,137 2,205 2,296 2,349 2,390 2,455 2,490

Folkestone Central Classic 639 686 708 597 299 307 314 323 328

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 155 539 554 567 583 594

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 15 51 50 50 49 48

Total 639 686 708 766 890 911 931 955 969

Folkestone West Classic 57 62 64 54 27 28 28 29 29

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 14 49 50 51 52 53

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 1 5 5 4 4 4

Total576264698082848687

Gravesend Classic 5,457 5,715 5,866 5,991 4,596 4,820 4,974 5,142 5,242

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 76 1,793 1,720 1,686 1,705 1,697

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 885 1,458 1,675 1,807 1,894 1,973

Total 5,457 5,715 5,866 6,952 7,847 8,214 8,467 8,741 8,911

Gillingham Classic 3,919 4,121 4,234 4,062 3,355 3,452 3,532 3,641 3,698

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 314 1,235 1,243 1,248 1,272 1,284

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 193 435 470 501 525 541

Total 3,919 4,121 4,234 4,568 5,025 5,165 5,280 5,438 5,523

Herne Bay Classic 1,025 1,097 1,130 1,093 985 1,008 1,026 1,054 1,069

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 67 210 216 220 227 231

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 6 19 19 18 18 17

Total 1,025 1,097 1,130 1,166 1,214 1,242 1,264 1,299 1,317

Margate Classic 248 268 276 226 99 101 104 106 108

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 66 223 229 234 241 245

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 3 9 8 8 8 7

Total 248 268 276 295 330 339 346 355 360

Rainham Classic 2,396 2,526 2,601 2,516 2,268 2,320 2,361 2,427 2,461

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 154 484 496 507 522 531

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 15 44 43 42 41 39

Total 2,396 2,526 2,601 2,685 2,796 2,860 2,910 2,989 3,032

Ramsgate Classic 198 214 221 177 59 61 62 64 65

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 60 213 219 224 231 234

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 3 10 9 9 9 8

Total 198 214 221 240 282 289 296 303 308

Rochester Classic 1,356 1,427 1,466 1,406 1,161 1,195 1,222 1,260 1,280

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 109 428 430 432 440 445

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 67 151 163 173 182 187

Total 1,356 1,427 1,466 1,581 1,740 1,788 1,828 1,882 1,912

Sittingbourne Classic 2,732 2,880 2,966 2,869 2,586 2,646 2,692 2,767 2,807

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 176 552 566 578 595 606

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 17 50 49 48 46 45

Total 2,732 2,880 2,966 3,062 3,188 3,261 3,318 3,409 3,457

Strood Classic 1,673 1,752 1,799 1,837 1,409 1,478 1,525 1,577 1,607

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 23 550 527 517 523 520

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 271 447 514 554 581 605

Total 1,673 1,752 1,799 2,132 2,406 2,519 2,596 2,680 2,732

Whitstable Classic 1,041 1,097 1,130 1,093 985 1,008 1,026 1,054 1,069

High Speed (abstracted) 0 0 0 67 210 216 220 227 231

High Speed (generated) 0 0 0 6 19 19 18 18 17

Total 1,041 1,097 1,130 1,166 1,214 1,242 1,264 1,299 1,317

Ashford International

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 1,000

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Birchington-on-Sea

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 100

50

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Broadstairs

300

250

200

150

100 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 50

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Canterbury West

400

350

300

250

200

150

100 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily

50

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Chatham

9,000

8,000

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000 Daily commuterDaily journeys to London

1,000

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Dover Priory

1,000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 200

100

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Ebbsfleet

9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000

Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (railheading) HS (generated)

Faversham

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 500

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Folkestone Central

1,200

1,000

800

600

400 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 200

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Folkestone West

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 20

10

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Gravesend

10,000

9,000

8,000

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 2,000

1,000

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Gillingham

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 1,000

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Herne Bay

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily

200

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Margate

400

350

300

250

200

150

100 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily

50

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Rainham

3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily

500

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Ramsgate

350

300

250

200

150

100 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 50

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Rochester

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

Daily commuterjourneys to London 500

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Sittingbourne

4,000

3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily

500

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Strood

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 500

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Whitstable

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily

200

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Classic HS (abstracted from Classic) HS (generated)

Appendix L – Special growth sensitivity analysis

HS Station Special 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Growth

Sensitivity Level

Gravesend 0% 6,233 6,932 7,078 7,195 7,379 7,463

50% 6,592 7,389 7,646 7,831 8,060 8,187

100% 6,952 7,847 8,214 8,467 8,741 8,911

150% 7,311 8,304 8,782 9,102 9,422 9,635

Strood 0% 1,911 2,125 2,170 2,206 2,263 2,288

50% 2,021 2,266 2,344 2,401 2,471 2,510

100% 2,132 2,406 2,519 2,596 2,680 2,732

150% 2,242 2,546 2,693 2,791 2,889 2,954

Rochester 0% 1,548 1,698 1,734 1,763 1,809 1,832

50% 1,565 1,719 1,761 1,795 1,846 1,872

100% 1,581 1,740 1,788 1,828 1,882 1,912

150% 1,598 1,760 1,815 1,860 1,919 1,952

Chatham 0% 6,307 6,915 7,062 7,180 7,368 7,461

50% 6,374 7,001 7,173 7,313 7,518 7,624

100% 6,442 7,086 7,284 7,446 7,668 7,788

150% 6,509 7,171 7,394 7,578 7,819 7,951

Gillingham 0% 4,473 4,904 5,009 5,092 5,225 5,291

50% 4,521 4,965 5,087 5,186 5,332 5,407

100% 4,568 5,025 5,165 5,280 5,438 5,523

150% 4,616 5,086 5,244 5,374 5,545 5,639

Ashford 0% 3,233 3,679 3,783 3,874 3,989 4,059

50% 3,420 3,931 4,075 4,192 4,332 4,427

100% 3,607 4,183 4,367 4,511 4,676 4,794

150% 3,794 4,434 4,659 4,830 5,019 5,162

Ebbsfleet 0% 1,602 5,299 5,401 5,483 5,610 5,673

50% 1,891 5,730 5,970 6,211 6,547 6,780

100% 2,181 6,162 6,540 6,939 7,483 7,888

150% 2,471 6,593 7,109 7,666 8,420 8,996

N.B. Values are total daily commuter journeys

Appendix M - Daily commuter journeys on Classic services to London from key Classic-only stations

Station 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15

Dartford 8,431 8,776 9,025 8,955 8,501 8,709 8,876 9,140 9,264

Hastings 1,291 1,367 1,406 1,441 1,486 1,530 1,563 1,607 1,626

Maidstone East 1,585 1,695 1,744 1,711 1,597 1,634 1,666 1,708 1,730

Paddock Wood 2,172 2,296 2,362 2,389 2,390 2,436 2,471 2,528 2,558

Sevenoaks 9,625 10,085 10,342 10,504 10,584 10,697 10,768 10,967 11,077

Staplehurst 1,693 1,789 1,841 1,862 1,863 1,898 1,926 1,970 1,993

Tonbridge 8,343 8,771 9,008 9,189 9,350 9,517 9,623 9,831 9,939

Tunbridge Wells 7,408 7,790 7,994 8,172 8,384 8,589 8,728 8,942 9,035

Dartford

10,000

9,000

8,000

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 2,000

1,000

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Hastings

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily

200

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Maidstone East

2,000

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 400

200

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Paddock Wood

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 500

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Sevenoaks

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

Daily commuter journeys to London London to journeys commuter Daily 2,000

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Staplehurst

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 500

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Tonbridge

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000 Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 2,000

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

Tunbridge Wells

10,000

9,000

8,000

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

Daily commuter journeys to London to journeys commuter Daily 2,000

1,000

0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Year

MVA Consultancy provides advice on transport and other policy areas, to central, regional and local government, agencies, developers, operators and financiers. A diverse group of results-oriented people, we are part of a 350-strong team worldwide. Through client business planning, customer research and strategy development we create solutions that work for real people in the real world. For more information visit www.mvaconsultancy.com

Birmingham Lyon Second Floor, 37a Waterloo Street 11, rue de la République, 69001 Lyon, France Birmingham B2 5TJ United Kingdom T: +33 (0)4 72 10 29 29 F: +33 (0)4 72 10 29 28 T: +44 (0)121 233 7680 F: +44 (0)121 233 7681 Manchester Dubai 25th Floor, City Tower, Piccadilly Plaza PO Box 123166 Dubai, 803-805 Arbift Tower Manchester M1 4BT United Kingdom Baniyas Road, Deira, Dubai UAE T: +44 (0)161 236 0282 F: +44 (0)161 236 0095 T: +971 (0) 4 223 0144 F: +971 (0) 4 223 1088 Marseille Dublin 76, rue de la République, 13002 Marseille, France 1st Floor, 12/13 Exchange Place T: +33 (0)4 91 37 35 15 F: +33 (0)4 91 91 90 14 Custom House Docks, IFSC, Dublin 1 Ireland T: +353 (0)1 542 6000 F: +353 (0)1 542 6001 Paris 12-14, rue Jules César, 75012 Paris, France Edinburgh T: +33 (0)1 53 17 36 00 F: +33 (0)1 53 17 36 01 Stewart House, Thistle Street, North West Lane Edinburgh EH2 1BY United Kingdom Woking T: +44 (0)131 220 6966 F: +44 (0)131 220 6087 Dukes Court, Duke Street Woking, Surrey GU21 5BH United Kingdom Glasgow T: +44 (0)1483 728051 F: +44 (0)1483 755207 Seventh Floor, 78 St Vincent Street Glasgow G2 5UB United Kingdom T: +44 (0)141 225 4400 F: +44 (0)141 225 4401

London Second Floor, 17 Hanover Square London W1S 1HU United Kingdom T: +44 (0)207 529 6500 F: +44 (0)207 529 6556

Email: [email protected]

Offices also in Bangkok, Beijing, Hong Kong, Shenzhen and Singapore