www.streathamaction.org.uk
From the Chair: Robert Doyle 219 Sternhold Avenue London SW2 4PG
The Combined Franchise Replacement Sponsor Department for Transport Zone 3/15 Great Minster House 33 Horseferry Road London SW1P 4DR
By e-mail to thameslink@dft.gsi.gov.uk
Consultation on the combined Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise – response from Streatham Action
Streatham Action is the community forum covering the town of Streatham (the four wards in the London Borough of Lambeth of St Leonards Streatham Hill, Streatham South and Streatham Wells). Our area of benefit is served by the three railway stations with Streatham in their name (Streatham, Streatham Common and Streatham Hill) and also by Tulse Hill which serves residents of the eastern part of Streatham Hill.
The most important issues that we wish to comment on are to stress the need for the continuation through Thameslink services from Streatham and Tulse Hill to central and north London destinations, and our concerns about the problems of passenger interchange inherent in the design of the redeveloped Blackfriars Station (our responses to Q18 and Q19 in the attached annex). However, we have also attempted to provide feedback on the other consultation questions relevant to our area.
Streatham Action is the new name for the Streatham Community Forum established in1997. Correspondence to: Streatham Action, Streatham Business Centre, 1 Empire Mews, Streatham, London, SW16 2BF
Response to Consultation on the combined Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise 2
Your team will no doubt be aware from the level of public interest from passengers using all of the stations along the “Wimbledon loop” at the prospect of the loss of direct services north of Blackfriars.
For some twenty years, successive projects to improve capacity on the Thameslink route – originally branded “Thameslink 2000” back in the 1990s - and more recently as the “Thameslink programme” have promised improvements to the frequency and reliability of rail services on the Wimbledon loop.
The eventual implementation of the scheme, with almost three years of no weekend and late night services, and periods of complete shut-down of through services has been presented to local rail users as a sacrifice worth paying for eventual better local transport connections.
We regard any suggestion that Streatham and adjacent communities along the route should get no net benefit to our rail services after so many years of waiting and so much disruption as an outrage.
We are also concerned that there does not yet appear to be a full assessment of the potential impact on Wimbledon loop service timetabling resulting from the temporary diversion of “fast” Brighton line trains to run via the Elephant and Castle required during the reconstruction of London Bridge staion between 2015 and 2018. We urge that early consultation is undertaken with rail users of all affected Wimbledon loop stations.
Yours faithfully
[By e-mail]
Robert Doyle Chair, Streatham Action The Community Forum for Streatham
Streatham Action Response to Consultation on the combined Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise 3
ANNEX – Streatham Action responses on specific questions
Q.1 What improvements do stakeholders believe could be made on the combined franchise through partnership working between Network Rail and the new operator?
We would hope to see proposals brought forward for a redevelopment of Streatham station to provide disabled access and better integration with local bus services.
Q.2 Do consultees have any other specific aspirations for the new franchise that they wish to bring to the Department's attention?
There is substantial demand among people in Streatham for more rail services that run to East Croydon to allow easier interchange with services to Gatwick Airport and trains to south coast destinations. At present almost all services serve West Croydon, meaning that travellers either have to make an inconvenient interchange by tram across central Croydon or travel to Clapham Junction to make a connection.
Q.4 What increments or decrements to the specification would stakeholders wish to see and how would these be funded?
We believe that there is demand for more frequent Sunday services on South London Metro routes serving Streatham Hill and Streatham Common and we would hope that the DfT and the Mayor of London would look to fund these services to deliver an equivalent level of service for those routes that now form part of the London Overground franchise.
Q.6 Are there other approaches to train service specification which you would prefer?
There is now an expectation that last trains on services will run later and there have been some welcome changes to timetables that mean it is possible to return to Streatham by train until reasonably late at night. This should be reflected in the specification.
Streatham Action Response to Consultation on the combined Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise 4
Q.18 What services that run via Elephant & Castle do respondents think should run via the Thameslink core route?
We believe that it is critical that the current level of service to the Wimbledon loop (four trains an hour in each direction) is maintained.
Even prior to the advent of through Thameslink services, demand for travel to the City of London from Streatham has mostly not been to alight at Blackfriars. A large number of peak hour commuters work in locations that can be reached on foot from the former terminus at Holborn Viaduct station (now the northern exit from City Thameslink station), which is some 800 metres north of the exit from Blackfriars onto Queen Victoria Street . With the changing pattern of office locations, there are now also a substantial number of Streatham and Tulse Hill residents working in “city fringes” locations served by Farringdon.
Another trend has been the substantial number of Streatham and Tulse Hill residents who make onward journeys by connection to the Circle/Metropolitan and City lines at Farringdon. Requiring these passengers to make an additional change – which would lengthen and potentially add extra volatility to the time spend on their regular commuter journey should be avoided.
Q.19 Recognising that not all of these services can run via the Thameslink core route, what would be the most satisfactory way of managing the interchange at Blackfriars?
We are particularly concerned the design of the rebuilt Blackfriars station means that only one terminus platform runs back to back with the northbound through platform. Any suggestion that a 4 trains per hour service from the Wimbedon loop should use alternating terminal platforms is likely to result in irrational behaviour, with the services scheduled to draw up for easy interchange being overloaded and the intermediate trains being relatively underloaded and/or with passengers overcrowded into the carriages at the ends of the train given the long distances to be traversed in order to reach the stairs/lifts to make an interchange.
Streatham Action Response to Consultation on the combined Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise 5
These problems would be partly mitigated if the westernmost terminal platform was reserved for a two train per hour service from a line other than the Wimbledon loop.
Q.21 What improvements would respondents like to see made to other Southern services as part of the combined franchise from 2015, what is the rationale for such proposals and the economic benefit expected to be delivered from these changes?
Q.26 What level of disaggregation of performance do you believe is reasonable? We believe that separate performance information should continue to be provided for South London Metro and for local (Wimbledon loop) Thameslink services. There is a widespread perception among our local residents that without this disaggregation rail industry managers would concentrate efforts on performance on the longer distance routes.
Q.28 What do stakeholders see as the most important factors in improving security (actual or perceived) and addressing any gap between the two?
The retail offer (coffee shops etc) has been crucial in making off-peak stations more welcoming. The franchise holder should not be permitted to maximise rental income alone – getting tenants who can provide services to rail users and an “active frontage” to provide additional eyes and ears is also of importance.
Streatham Action