Lancashire and Cumbria Route Utilisation Strategy 2008
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Lancashire and Cumbria Route Utilisation Strategy August 2008 Foreword I am delighted to present Network Rail’s Route There are currently aspirations for a service Utilisation Strategy (RUS) for Lancashire and between Southport, Preston and Ormskirk. Cumbria, which considers issues affecting This is partly facilitated by work to enhance the railway in this part of the country over the track and signalling between Preston and next decade and gives a view on longer-term Ormskirk, which will allow a standard hourly issues in the years beyond. service pattern with improved journey times but without the need for more rolling stock. Getting to this stage has involved following a now well-established process. However, there Services into Sellafield during peak hours are two key differences with this strategy. suffer from overcrowding, though Northern The first is that no part of the area it covers Rail’s anticipated service from December is the responsibility of either a Passenger 2008 will address that to a degree. It is Transport Executive or a regional body with important services on this route firstly cater public transport responsibilities. Secondly, for peak traffic at Sellafield and Barrow, with the challenge usually faced when producing services outside the peak being on as close a RUS, that of insufficient capacity to meet to an hourly pattern as possible. current or future demand, is not a major A number of consultation responses were problem here. As a result, this strategy received regarding a direct service between focuses on how to make the best use of Manchester and Burnley, including a report what is already available. carried out on behalf of Lancashire County A range of factors have influenced this Council and Burnley Borough Council. strategy’s development. Notable among these As a result of that report, and potential options is the development of the December 2008 for delivery of High Level Output Specification timetable on the West Coast Main Line, which peak capacity requirements in Manchester, we presents real opportunities for improvements, have identified that there could be a case for a particularly in terms of some of the physical direct service, although further work is needed and timetabling interchanges. In addition, there to confirm the impact of issues affecting the are the aspirations of stakeholders and the business case and sources of funding. responses received to the consultation. This RUS was initially published as a Draft Overall, the RUS looks to move timetables for Consultation in April 2008, and I would towards a more regular pattern with good like to thank all those who responded. Its connections and better station facilities. production has been led by Network Rail, As an example, it recommends a number but it has been developed by the whole of small investments at Preston, Carlisle, industry. A large number of organisations, Ormskirk, Blackburn and Burscough Junction including our customers, the passenger and to improve interchanges. freight operators, have been fully involved and I would like to thank them all for their efforts. Iain Coucher Chief Executive Executive summary Introduction The RUS broadly covers the railway north of This Lancashire and Cumbria RUS has the line between Preston and Burnley as far as followed the now well-established RUS Carlisle, with the exception of the West Coast process, which includes extensive involvement Main Line (WCML), and lines east of Skipton. of stakeholders. However, it differs from It considers issues over a 10-year time period previous RUSs in two important ways. from 2008 whilst giving a view on issues that Firstly, the RUS geography is not covered could arise within a 0-year horizon. by a Passenger Transport Executive (PTE) The geography of the RUS is bisected by or regional body with specific transport the WCML, the RUS for which is now being responsibilities. Secondly, the familiar RUS scoped, and adjoins routes covered by the gap of ‘insufficient capacity to meet current Scotland and North West RUSs which have or future demand’ is not a major problem been established, and the Merseyside and facing rail in Lancashire and Cumbria. By Yorkshire and Humber RUSs which are comparison, services typically have low still underway. patronage and the infrastructure is relatively expensive (eg. due to the numerous viaducts Process and sea defences). This RUS is hence The RUS primarily considers the next 10 mainly focussed on making the best use years, but has also taken account of the of the available network and resources. Government’s 2007 White Paper “Delivering Nevertheless, there are a number of minor a Sustainable Railway” to give a 0-year investment options that have a reasonable context. The RUS has examined the current business case. and future freight and passenger markets and assessed the predicted growth in each. Scope and background It has sought to accommodate this growth The Lancashire and Cumbria RUS adjoins effectively and efficiently, in accordance with the infrastructure covered by the recently the route utilisation objective specified in published North West RUS and a number Licence Condition 7. It has also looked at of the Stakeholder Management Group stakeholder aspirations, particularly those of (SMG) are common to both RUSs. It has local authorities and regional bodies, and has been recognised that many of the issues taken account of responses to the RUS Draft in Lancashire and Cumbria are relatively for Consultation. minor when compared with Manchester and surrounding area, especially in terms of Development work on the December 2008 capacity. It has hence been useful to treat timetable, Northern Rail’s view of how to Lancashire and Cumbria separately, as it address High Level Output Specification has allowed us the opportunity to adjust the (HLOS) metrics in Leeds and Manchester, zoom lens to see this piece of railway in the and option analysis for the Yorkshire and appropriate context and scale. Humber RUS, have all evolved in parallel as this RUS was being developed. Consequently, some of the recommendations in this RUS are conditional or cross-referenced to other planning activities. The Lancashire and Cumbria RUS process key social infrastructure and major economic is overseen and directed by the SMG which centres is generally more limited than in other comprises representatives from passenger parts of the RUS area. operators, freight operators, the Department Rail services are not well integrated with for Transport (DfT), Network Rail, ATOC, the local tourism market. In conjunction with Passenger Focus and the Office of Rail colleagues from Passenger Focus, the RUS Regulation (ORR) (as observers). has identified the main tourist markets and Gaps attractions on the route. Despite a number of The RUS identified seven generic gaps which these being situated in close proximity to a the recommended options address. These are: railway station, they are generally on lightly used parts of the route where rail services Inter/intra regional links are typically are typically infrequent and not on a regular poor. Rail links between some of the main interval. As a consequence rail is unattractive conurbations in the RUS area, and links to tourists, particularly at popular times such between these conurbations and other as weekends. sizeable destinations in the North West and beyond are poor relative to other The capability of the network in some broadly equivalent parts of the UK network. areas constrains service improvements Specific problems include infrequent services, and future needs. Slow maximum line short operating days and a lack of direct speeds and permanent speed restrictions journey opportunities. are spread throughout the route and are a serious constraint to improved journey times, The rail service is unattractive to increased service frequencies and better commuters. There are a number of areas train performance. In many instances the where the potential commuter market may constraint on improvement is infrastructure be suppressed. Reasons for this include lack capability rather than rolling stock capability. of direct rail services, infrequent or poorly Some of these restrictions are freight specific, timed services, last trains not late enough to or load specific. Parts of the RUS area have provide a reliable return journey, slow journey restrictive loading gauge clearance, which times, insufficient on-train capacity (in a limited reduces the suitability of lines as diversionary number of cases), lack of car parking provision routes for the West Coast Main Line. Key and poor access to railway stations. capacity pinch-points on the network, such Rail may be able to play a bigger role in as single lead junctions, single line sections alleviating social deprivation. The RUS area and long signal sections, make increasing the includes a number of deprived areas. These frequency of passenger and freight services typically have low levels of rail patronage per difficult and expensive. Carlisle has a rather head of population. A number of deprived restrictive layout and is the point where West communities on the route have an infrequent Coast traffic and Ayrshire – Yorkshire/Midlands rail service to a limited number of destinations, coal traffic interact and is hence a significant as the potential for a sizeable rail market is constraint on capacity. On certain route unclear. This means that the accessibility of sections, regular and lengthy possessions for maintenance and renewals are required Many of the recommendations are reliant on to keep the infrastructure fit for purpose. additional rolling stock being available in order This can be disruptive to passenger and to provide longer or more frequent trains. freight operations. Consequently the practicality of taking forward these recommendations will be dependent on Performance of a number of train services the process for deploying rolling stock, taking is poor. Similar to the previous gap, parts of into account the priority likely to be given to the network exhibit poor train performance.