DOCSLIB.ORG

31645 Highspeed Rail Bill.Indd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
31645 Highspeed Rail Bill.Indd 31645 HighSpeed Rail Bill Modified—26 July 2013 4:45 AM Public Bill Committee HIGH SPEED RAIL (preparation) BILL WRITTEN EVIDENCE PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS LONDON – THE STATIONERY OFFICE LIMITED PBC (Bill 010) 2013 - 2014 31645 HighSpeed Rail Bill Modified—26 July 2013 4:45 AM © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2013 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament Licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/ Enquiries to the Office of Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU; e-mail: [email protected] Distributed by TSO (The Stationery Office) and available from: Online The Houses of Parliament Shop www.tsoshop.co.uk 12 Bridge Street, Parliament Square London SW1A 2JX Mail, Telephone, Fax & E-mail Telephone orders: 020 7219 3890 TSO General enquiries: 020 7219 3890 PO Box 29, Norwich NR3 1GN Fax orders: 020 7219 3866 Telephone orders/General enquiries: 0870 600 5522 Email: shopwparliament.uk Order through the Parliamentary Hotline Lo-call 0845 7 023474 Internet: Fax orders: 0870 600 5533 http://www.shop.parliament.uk E-mail: customer.serviceswtso.co.uk Textphone: 0870 240 3701 TSOwBlackwell and other Accredited Agents 31645 31645 HighSpeed Rail Bill Modified—26 July 2013 4:45 AM High Speed Rail (Preparation) Bill: Written evidence 3 Contents Camden London Borough Council (HSR 01) Dr Paul Hoad (HSR 02) Dr Chris Eaglen LLB (HSR 03) Andrew Bodman (HSR 04) Wendover HS2 action group (WHS2) (HSR 05) HS2 Action Alliance (HSR 06) Greengauge 21 (HSR 07) Charlie Sarrell (HSR 08) Country Land and Business Association (HSR 09) Campaign to Protect Rural England (HSR 10) John Withington (HSR 11) Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) (HSR 12) Rail Freight Group (HSR 13) Heathrow Hub Ltd (HSR 14) Woodland Trust (HSR 15) The Airport Operators Association (AOA) (HSR 16) Dr Paul Harlow (HSR 17) BiblioFox Research (HSR 18) Tonge and Breedon HS2 Action Group (HSR 19) David Richards (HSR 20) David Dundas (HSR 21) Andrew Cordiner (HSR 22) Penny Gaines (HSR 23) London Borough of Newham (HSR 24) Cllr Ray Puddifoot (Leader of Hillingdon Council) (HSR 25) Stop HS2 (HSR 26) Digbeth Residents’ Association, Birmingham (HSR 27) Dr Paul Hoad (HSR 28) Michael Edwards (The Bartlett School, UCL) (HSR 29) Camden London Borough Council supplementary (HSR 30) South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) on behalf of the Sheffield City Region Local Enterprise Partnership (HSR 31) Chris Damant (HSR 32) Network Rail (HSR 33) 31645 HighSpeed Rail Bill Modified—26 July 2013 4:45 AM High Speed Rail (Preparation) Bill: Written evidence 5 Written evidence Written evidence by Camden London Borough Council (HSR 01) SUMMARY 1. The London Borough of Camden (the Council) recognises the need to deliver growth for the UK economy. The Council itself has policies in place to actively encourage and support growth and this can been seen in major regeneration schemes currently in progress across our borough. The Council also acknowledges that investment in rail and other transport infrastructure is key to both delivering and sustaining growth. But the Council does not accept that this High Speed 2 (HS2) proposal is an effective way of achieving these outcomes. The current proposals are already harming our local economy and will do so for more than a decade. The current proposals for Euston Station are a massive lost opportunity to invest in sustained future growth, which is particularly significant for the Council, which has the fourth largest economy of any borough in the UK. The proposals to link HS2 with High Speed 1 (HS1) along the North London line will have a potentially devastating impact on the Camden Town economy. Both the Euston Station and HS1 link proposals are already deterring developers from implementing granted planning permissions, causing the Council and the country substantial loss jobs and growth. 2. Under the current proposals the terminus for HS2 will be at Euston Station, which is in the London Borough of Camden with a proposal for a connection between HS1 and HS2 across the North London Line, which is also located in the borough. The impact of the HS2 development in Camden as a whole will be overwhelming if the proposals remain as they are. The most significant effect would be on the area to the west of Euston Station where hundreds of homes would be demolished, public open space would be lost, schools would need to be moved and businesses would be severely affected. Of all the homes proposed to be demolished along the length of Phase 1 of HS2, eighty percent are located in Camden. There is a large Bangladeshi community located in this area that is likely to be fractured as a result of the HS2 line. Indeed, the whole community around Euston Station will be at risk if the basic infrastructure that it relies upon is removed, demolished or relocated. We have good reason to believe that the full costs of making good or mitigating these impacts have not been accounted for by the Department for Transport or HS2 Ltd. Once the costs are understood, this will further undermine the business case for HS2 and push up the full costs of the project well beyond the recently revised figure of £46bn. 3. For all those reasons, the Council opposes the idea of Parliament sanctioning an open-ended authorisation for expenditure on the project, and therefore objects to the Bill in principle. Nonetheless, the Council believes that there are a number of ways in which it could be improved for the Council’s benefit: (i) the Bill should contain some recognition of the enormous impact of the proposals at Euston, and should contain a specific requirement that expenditure should be spent on implementing mitigating those impacts; (ii) in respect of the proposed HS1 link, expenditure should in the first place be limited to the carrying out of a) a proper cost benefit analysis, independently reviewed; and b) a full structural survey of the North London Line viaduct. No further expenditure should be incurred on the link if the analysis results in an unacceptable cost benefit ratio or the survey shows unacceptable impacts to the structure of the viaduct; (iii) save for expenditure on compensating and otherwise mitigating those adversely affected by the proposals in terms of loss of housing, school places, business revenue and open spaces; expenditure on the proposed route north of Birmingham should be limited in time up to the point where the government announces the proposed route, following consultation; (iv) the Bill should be more tightly drafted so as to ensure that only expenditure on high speed railways is permitted, not other railways; (v) the Bill should specifically provide for the payment of compensation to local authorities who are incurring significant costs themselves in relation to the HS2 proposals; and (vi) the Bill should specifically allow for expenditure to address the blight that has already occurred around Euston Station and which will only worsen as the scheme progresses, to ensure that the station itself and the businesses around it are able to continue to operate as a contributor to the London and regional economy for the time required to construct the line into and station at Euston. 4. Comments in greater detail on some of the clauses which are of particular interest are set out in paragraphs 5 to 21 below. CLAUSE 1(1) 5. The Council has four issues with this clause: (i) a general complaint at the proposal to provide unlimited funds to be spent on a project with unproven cost benefits at a time when people are experiencing financial austerity; 31645 HighSpeed Rail Bill Modified—26 July 2013 4:45 AM 6 High Speed Rail (Preparation) Bill: Written evidence (ii) the cost to the London Borough of Camden has been significantly underestimated in the Department for Transport and HS2 Ltd’s calculations; (iii) funds should not be applied to developing the proposed HS1 link. They could be more effectively used elsewhere; and (iv) a general complaint of the incurring of cost without proper consideration of reasonable alternatives. These points are discussed separately below. Unlimited Expenditure 6. The Secretary of State for Transport recently announced an additional £10b contingency allocation for HS2, thus increasing the total projected cost of HS2 to £46b. This £10b increase is almost exactly the amount of money that the Chancellor identified as “essential cuts” in his recent Spending Review. These figures are also based on 2011 figures, so are already out of date, especially considering the start date for the development is currently projected for 2017. 7. At a time when the country is trying to recover from the recent recession and is experiencing more pushes for austerity and cuts to services from central government, it is difficult to understand how the promoters of HS2 are able to justify the enormous spend on the HS2 line, particularly when there is doubt about the cost benefits of the scheme. 8. Recent reports from two important and influential bodies who have investigated the financial statements and forecasts of DfT in relation to spending on HS2 have been very critical of the project. Margaret Hodge, the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee stated on 16 May 2013: “There is virtually no evidence in this business case to support claims that HS2 will deliver regional economic growth, one of the key aims and justifications for this project”. 9. The National Audit Office’s report1 concludes that the strategic case for HS2, in terms of increasing rail capacity and generating regional growth, has still to be demonstrated clearly. 10. On 1 July 2013, the Public Accounts Committee took evidence from HS2 Ltd and DfT officials and scrutinised the cost of HS2.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Railfuture Response to Consultations on the Proposed East Coast Main Line Timetable May 2022
    RAILFUTURE RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS ON THE PROPOSED EAST COAST MAIN LINE TIMETABLE MAY 2022 From: Railfuture Passenger Group & Branches: East Anglia, East Midlands, Lincolnshire, London & South East, North East, North West, Yorkshire & Scotland Submitted to: CrossCountry, Great Northern/Thameslink, LNER, Northern, TransPennine Express Copied to: East Midlands Railway, First East Coast Trains, Grand Central, Hull Trains, Network Rail & ScotRail Index Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Background ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 2 Strategic Interventions .................................................................................................................................. 3 LNER ............................................................................................................................................................... 5 Responses to LNER Questionnaire ............................................................................................ 6 TransPennine Express .................................................................................................................................. 9 CrossCountry ...............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rail Lincs 67
    Has Grantham event delivered a rail asset? The visit of record breaking steam locomotive, A4 pacific Mallard, to Grantham at the RailRail LincsLincs beginning of September, has been hailed an outstanding success by the organisers. Number 67 = October 2013 = ISSN 1350-0031 LINCOLNSHIRE With major sponsorship from Lincolnshire County Council, South Kesteven District Lincolnshire & South Humberside Branch of the Council and Carillion Rail; good weather and free admission, the event gave Grantham Railway Development Society N e w s l e t t e r high profile media interest, attracting in excess of 15,000 visitors (some five times the original estimate). Branch has a busy weekend at One noticeable achievement has been the reconstruction of a siding resulting in the clearing of an ‘eyesore’ piece of land at Grantham station, which forms a gateway to the Grantham Rail Show town. The success of the weekend has encouraged the idea for a similar heritage event Thank you to everyone who helped us The weekend was also a very in the future. over the Grantham Rail Show weekend. successful fund raising event which has However, when the piece of land was cleared and the Up side siding reinstated, it This year, the Rail Show was held in left our stock of donated items very became apparent that Grantham had, possibly, unintentionally received a valuable association with the Mallard Festival of depleted. If you have any unwanted items commercial railway asset. Here is a siding connected to the national rail network with Speed event at Grantham station, with a that we could sell at future events, we easy road level access only yards from main roads, forming the ideal location for a small free vintage bus service linking the two would like to hear from you.
    [Show full text]
  • Rail Issues Update
    Briefing Paper to the Energy and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Commission 4th March 2014 Rail Issues Update Briefing Paper of the City Regeneration and Policy Manager 1. Purpose of the Briefing Note This report is an interim position statement on rail issues following the rail themed meeting of this commission with rail industry representatives in June 2013. Rail industry representatives have been invited to attend this commission to answer questions and give further updates. 2. Rail Issues for Consideration 2.1. Electrification 2.1.1. First Hull Trains (FHT) have submitted a proposal to the Government in which they would raise the funding to deliver electrification of the route between the East Coast Main Line (North of Doncaster) through to Hull via Selby. This could potentially bring electrification forward to 2016/17 (The Government currently does not plan to electrify this section until some unspecified time after 2019). FHT‟s proposal appears to depend on the Government releasing the funding to „buy-back‟ the completed electric infrastructure. Exactly how much (and when) the Government agree to pay is critical to FHT‟s fund raising and to any request for public funding support. FHT have requested a grant from the LEP (Local Growth fund) and a loan (Public Works Loan Board) from the LEP / Council towards the total scheme cost which is believed to be around £94m 2.1.2. The Council, business leaders and MP‟s have been lobbying ministers for early scheme funding and they have agreed to meet a delegation from the City and the East Riding on the 25th February (verbal update to be given).
    [Show full text]
  • Application Form P
    Form P Application to the Office of Rail Regulation for a passenger track access agreement, or amendment to a passenger track access agreement under sections 17-22A of the Railways Act 1993 1. Introduction Please use this form to apply to the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) for: • directions under section 17 of the Railways Act 1993 for a new track access contract. Section 17 allows companies who want the right to use a railway facility (including Network Rail’s network) to apply to ORR for access if they are not able (for whatever reason) to reach agreement with the facility owner. • approval under section 18 of the Railways Act 1993 for a new track access contract. Section 18 allows companies to apply for approval if they have agreed terms with the facility owner. • approval of a proposed amendment (agreed by both parties) under section 22 of the Railways Act 1993 to an existing track access contract. • directions under section 22A of the Railways Act 1993 for an amendment to an existing track access contract. Section 22A allows anyone seeking an amendment to an existing track access contract which allows the operation of more extensive services to apply for a compulsory amendment if they are not able (for whatever reason) to reach agreement with the facility owner. If it is the facility owner, Network Rail will carry out a pre-application consultation. In this case fill in this form up to section 7.3. You should fill in the rest of the form after the consultation and before applying to ORR.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Competition for and in the Market Co-Exist in Terms of Delivering Cost Efficient Services? Evidence from Open Access Train O
    Transportation Research Part A 113 (2018) 114–124 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Transportation Research Part A journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tra Can competition for and in the market co-exist in terms of delivering cost efficient services? Evidence from open access train T operators and their franchised counterparts in Britain ⁎ Phill Wheata, , Andrew S.J. Smitha, Torris Rasmussenb a Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, UK b Norwegian Railway Directorate, Norway ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: This paper aims to inform an important policy debate in Europe on how best to open up pas- Returns to density senger rail markets to increased competition: and specifically, whether to allow open access train Competition-in-the-market operators alongside franchised (tendered) operators. The paper utilises new British data to Competition-for-the-market analyse the cost side of this debate. Our data is unique in that we have cost data by route level for both the incumbent (corresponding to British franchises) and the open access operators, as op- posed to only having cost data on the incumbent at the network level as in other countries. The open access operators are found to have comparable unit costs to franchised operators. This is unexpected considering the significant returns to density that benefit the larger franchised op- erators. This is subsequently found to be due to lower input prices and an ‘open access business model’ effect that outweigh any density disadvantages. Overall we find that there are negligible cost disadvantages of allowing open access operators to compete with franchised intercity op- erators.
    [Show full text]
  • Chiltern Main Line: London-Birmingham
    Chiltern Main Line: London-Birmingham Streckenbeschreibung zur Chiltern Main Line London-Birmingham Zitat von Aerosoft Die Strecke von London nach Birmingham ist als Chiltern Main Line bekannt und führt von der Londoner Endstation Marylebone nordwestlich zum Birmingham Snow Hill. Diese hochpräzise Chiltern Main Line Route führt Sie etwa 112 Meilen von London nach Birmingham, durch 40 detaillierte Stationen und bietet zahlreiche kundenspezifische Gebäude und Sehenswürdigkeiten. Strecken Features: Streckenklasse: Modern Streckenlänge: ca. 112 Meilen Wunderschöne, detaillierte und eindrucksvolle Landschaften von London Marylebone bis Birmingham Snow Hill 14 Standardszenarien enthalten Quick Drive fähig 40 individuell gefertige Stationen Viele Gebäude und Objekte Stationen: London Marylebone West Hampstead* (London Underground) Kilburn* (London Underground) Willesden Green* (London Underground) Dollis Hill* (London Underground) Neasden* (London Underground) Wembley Stadium Sudbury & Harrow Road Sudbury Hill Harrow Northolt Park South Ruislip* (London Underground) Ruislip Gardens* (London Underground) West Ruislip Denham Denham Golf Club Gerrards Cross Seer Green and Jordans Beaconsfield High Wycombe Saunderton Princes Risborough Haddenham and Thame Parkway Bicester Village Bicester North Kings Sutton Banbury Leamington Spa Warwick Warwick Parkway Hatton Lapworth Dorridge Widney Manor Solihull Olton Acocks Green Tyseley Small Heath Birmingham Moor Street Birmingham Snow Hill *Hinweis: Die mit einem Sternchen gekennzeichneten Stationen der Londoner
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2006
    widening markets 2006 providing value… annual report JOHN LAING plc annual report 2006 . ed Office: +44 (0)20 7901 3200 +44 (0)20 7901 3520 el: Register Allington House, 150 Victoria Street, London SW1E 5LB England No. 1345670 Registered T Fax: JOHN LAING plc Further copies of this statement are available from the address below or website at by visiting the Company’s www.laing.com email: [email protected] www.laing.com Forward-looking statements Certain statements contained in this document, including those in the “Operating and Financial Review” constitute statements that are, or may be deemed to be, “forward-looking statements”. In some cases, these forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology, including the terms “believes”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “plans”, “anticipates”, “targets”, “aims”, “continues”, “expects”, “intends”, “may”, “will”, “would” or “should” or, in each case, their negative or other variations or comparable terminology. These forward- looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors and include statements regarding the Group’s intentions, beliefs or current expectations concerning, among other things, the Group’s results of operations, financial condition, liquidity, prospects, growth, strategies and the industries in which the Group operates. By their nature, forward-looking statements involve risk and uncertainty because they relate to future events and circumstances. A number of factors could cause actual results and developments to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements including, without limitation: conditions in the operating margins, anticipated investments and capital expenditures, changing business or other market conditions and general economic conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • East Coast Trains Limited Draft Agreement Section 17
    TRACK ACCESS CONTRACT (PASSENGER SERVICES) Dated [ ] Between NETWORK RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED and EAST COAST TRAINS LIMITED 428317 CONTENTS Clause Page 1 INTERPRETATION 1 1.1 Definitions 1 1.2 Interpretation 6 1.3 Indemnities 7 2 NETWORK CODE AND TRACTION ELECTRICITY RULES 7 2.1 Incorporation 7 2.2 Modifications to the Network Code or the Traction Electricity Rules 8 2.3 Compliance by other operators 8 3 CONDITIONS PRECEDENT AND DURATION 8 3.1 Effective date 8 3.2 Conditions precedent to Clause 5 8 3.3 Obligations to satisfy conditions precedent to Clause 5 9 3.4 Consequences of non-fulfilment of conditions precedent to Clause 5 9 3.5 Expiry 9 3.6 Suspension and termination 9 4 STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE 9 4.1 General standard 9 4.2 Good faith 10 5 PERMISSION TO USE 10 5.1 Permission to use the Routes 10 5.2 Meaning 10 5.3 Permission under Clauses 5.2(e) and 5.2(f) 10 i 428317 5.4 Changes to Applicable Engineering Access Statement and Applicable Timetable Planning Rules 11 5.5 Engineering Access Statement, Timetable Planning Rules and Restrictions of Use 11 5.6 The Services and the Specified Equipment 11 5.7 Performance 11 5.8 Stabling 11 6 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF TRAINS AND NETWORK 11 6.1 General 11 6.2 Trespass, vandalism and animals 11 6.3 Safety 12 6.4 Use of Railway Code Systems 12 6.4.1 General 12 6.4.2 Provision of Train Consist Data 12 7 TRACK CHARGES AND OTHER PAYMENTS 12 8 LIABILITY 12 8.1 Performance Orders in relation to breach 12 8.2 Compensation in relation to breach 13 9 NOT USED 13 10 LIABILITY - OTHER MATTERS 13
    [Show full text]
  • Delay Attribution Board Members and Representation
    OFFICIAL Delay Attribution Board Members and Representation Franchised Passenger Class Band 1 DAB Representative Abellio ScotRail Veronica Bolton Avanti West Coast Trains Govia Thameslink Railway Franchised Passenger Class Band 2 Abellio East Anglia London & South Eastern Railway Phil Starling Arriva Rail North London North Eastern Railway First Great Western Ltd West Midlands Trains First MTR South Western Railway Franchised Passenger Class Band 3 Arriva Rail London Merseyrail Electrics Steve Longmore Chiltern Railway Company MTR Crossrail Cross Country Trains Serco Caledonian Sleepers East Midlands Trains Trenitalia C2C First TransPennine Express Keolis Amey Wales Non-Franchised Passenger Class Chinnor and Princes Risborough Nexus Tyne and Wear Jonathan Seagar East Coast Trains North Yorkshire Moors Railway Eurostar International Peak Rail Ffestiniog Railway Rail Express Systems Grand Central Railway Company Vintage Trains Heathrow Express West Coast Railway Company Hull Trains Company Yorkshire Supertram Locomotive Services Limited Non-Passenger Class companies - Band 1 DB Cargo Nigel Oatway Freightliner Non-Passenger Class companies - Band 2 Amey Rail Ltd GB Railfreight Mike Byrne Babcock Rail Harsco Rail Balfour Beatty Plant Rail Express Systems COLAS Rail Ltd Rail Operations Group Devon and Cornwall Railways Victa Railfreight Direct Rail Services VolkerRail Freightliner Heavy Haul Network Rail Alex Kenney Andrew Rowe Georgina Collinge Scott Provan Paul Harris Anna Langford Non-Voting Members Chairman: Richard Morris Secretary: Richard Ashley April 2021 .
    [Show full text]
  • Framework Capacity Statement 2021
    OFFICIAL Framework Capacity Statement 2021 Including consultation on alternative approaches to presenting capacity information Network Rail April 2021 Network Rail Framework Capacity Statement April 2021 1 OFFICIAL Contents Framework Capacity Statement Annex: Consultation on alternative approaches 1. Purpose 4. Background to the 2021 consultation 1.1 Purpose 4 4.1 Developments since 2016 17 4.2 Timing and purpose 17 2. Framework capacity on Network Rail’s network 2.1 Infrastructure covered by this statement 7 5. Granularity of analysis – examples and issues 2.2 Framework agreements in Great Britain 9 5.1 Dividing the railway geographically 19 2.3 Capacity allocation 11 5.2 Analysis at Strategic Route level 20 5.3 Analysis at SRS level 23 3. How to identify framework capacity 5.4 Constant Traffic Sections 25 3.1 Capacity of the network 13 3.2 Capacity allocated in framework agreements 13 6. The requirement 3.3 Capacity available for framework agreements 14 6.1 Areas open for interpretation in application 28 3.4 Using the timetable as a proxy 14 6.2 Potential solutions 29 3.5 Conclusion 15 6.3 Questions for stakeholders 30 Network Rail Framework Capacity Statement April 2021 2 OFFICIAL 1. Purpose Network Rail Framework Capacity Statement April 2021 3 OFFICIAL 1.1 Purpose This statement is published alongside Network Rail’s Network current transformation programme, to make the company work Statement in order to meet the requirements of European better with train operators to serve passengers and freight users. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/545 of 7 April 2016 on procedures and criteria concerning framework Due to the nature of framework capacity, which legally must not agreements for the allocation of rail infrastructure capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • A Systems Design Study Introducing a Collection Point for Baggage Transfer Services at a Railway Station in the UK
    Urban Rail Transit (2019) 5(2):80–103 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40864-019-0101-4 http://www.urt.cn/ ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPERS A Systems Design Study Introducing a Collection Point for Baggage Transfer Services at a Railway Station in the UK 1 2 Ho Ki Yeung • Marin Marinov Received: 4 January 2019 / Revised: 26 April 2019 / Accepted: 3 May 2019 / Published online: 24 May 2019 Ó The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Railway transport has shown a steady growth in 1 Introduction passenger numbers over the past 20 years across the UK. Passengers travel with luggage. It has been forecasted that Because of the absence of baggage transfer service in all of there will be a reduction of ‘‘luggage racks-to-seats’’ ratio the UK’s train stations as part of the urban rail transit in the future passenger train fleet. There are currently no systems in the UK, the main aim of this study is to baggage transfer systems at any of the train stations as part investigate the possibility of designing and launching a of the urban rail transit system in the UK. Hence, the new baggage transfer system at Newcastle Central Station, purpose of this study is to investigate the possibility of which can serve passengers and their luggage travelling to having a baggage transfer service at Newcastle Central various destinations in the region and across the country. Station, which can serve different travel destinations. A This new service is intended to facilitate the passengers’ simulation modelling study of different parts of the bag- boarding and alighting process on trains for those carrying gage check-in shop within the railway station is offered.
    [Show full text]
  • System Operator Strategic Business Plan
    System Operator Strategic Business Plan February 2018 System Operator Strategic Business Plan 1. Foreword by Jo Kaye, Managing Director, System Operator I am pleased to set out, in this Strategic Business Plan, our plan and vision We provide a whole-system, long term view, informed and integrated by the for the railway’s System Operator in Control Period 6 (CP6) and beyond. detailed knowledge we have from planning the network and by the industry- wide interfaces we have with every train operating customer, route and Role of the System Operator infrastructure manager. Our services extend beyond Network Rail. Trains already run between Network Rail routes and infrastructure owned by other Why we exist (our role) infrastructure managers, such as High Speed 1 (HS1), Transport for London We plan changes to the GB railway system so that the needs of passengers (TfL), Nexus and Heathrow Airport. and freight customers are balanced to support economic growth. The network needs to be planned as an integrated whole, irrespective of What we want to be (our vision) ownership. This will be particularly important in the next few years, as Our vision is to become the recognised expert trusted by decision makers to Crossrail and High Speed 2 (HS2) become operational, and as other plan the GB railway. infrastructure managers emerge. How we will do this (our strategic intent) We are a distinct but connected part of Network Rail. The separation of our We will support each other to realise our full potential, building confidence role in managing capacity allocation from the routes allows route businesses and being a better System Operator.
    [Show full text]