Cab.26j 1.2008/13.2 BARNSLEY METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL This matter is not a Key Decision within the Council's definition and has not been included in the relevant Forward Plan. Report of Executive Director, Development Directorate YORKSHIRE AND HUMBER RAIL UTILISATION STRATEGY 1. Purpose of Report 1.1 This report seeks to ensure members are aware of the Consultation process taking place as part of the Yorkshire and Humber Rail Utilisation Strategy (RUS). 1.2 This report also seeks approval of the Cabinet to the Council's RUS Consultation response to Network Rail. 2. Recommendation 2.1 It is recommended that the cabinet approve the response to the consultation. 3. Introduction 3.1 The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) requires Network Rail to produce Rail Utilisation Strategies (RUS) covering all the rail services in the UK (19 in total).The objective of the various RUS's is to "encourage effective and efficient use and development of capacity available, consistent with funding that is or is reasonably likely to become available during the period of the RUS..." 3.2 A stakeholder consultation process began in October and officec have attended a briefing to discuss the various recommendations within he Yorkshire and Humber Rail Utilisation Strategy Draftlhe Consultation will conclude on the 18th December, following which Network Rail will produce a final version likely to be launched early new year. 3.3 Prior to launch of the draft consultation document discussions took place with Network Rail and SYPTE to facilitate the development of the strategy. 4. Proposal and Justification 4.1 Officers from both Transportation and Planning Policy sections of the Development Directorate have reviewed the Yorkshire and Humber RUS and comphed a Barnsley specific response to Network Rail. A summary of which is attached. 4.2 The RUS provides an indication of the future programme of infrastructure and rail service improvements proposed by Network Rail over the coming years. The recommendations to:- • Strengthen peak time services between Barnsley and Sheffield by increasing capacity, • Doubling capacity on the Penistone line should the tram train not be retained and • The need for bi- directional signalling in the area is most welcome (despite the latter having no implementation date). 4.3 It is however, unfortunate that the improvements do not seem to be in line with the aspirations of the Borough in terms of its connectivity, particularly across the Pennines and south towards the capital. It is also of concern that the improvements proposed will not have sufficient capacity to accommodate future growth. 4.4 The combination of increasing road traffic congestion and the success of the existing fast service to Leeds and Sheffield is likely to place significant pressure on capacity. 4.5 Whilst it is recognised that the cost of improving the network will be considerable, the RUS has the potential to make a step change in addressing the long term challenges of increasing costs of congestion on the regional economy and the environment in the sub-region. In our view in its present form the document Is not contributing significantly that much needed step change. 5. Consideration of Alternative Approaches 5.1 An alternative approach would be for the Council not to respond to the Consultation. This approach would be seen as missed opportunity to contribute to the process and consequently could have adverse effects on the future rail services into Barnsley, in particular the boroughs region, national and international connectivity. 6. Local Area Implications 6.1 Consultation response includes reference to improvements to existing rail services across the borough and with no specific local area implications. The aim of the response being to improve rail services throughout. 7. Compatibility with European Convention on Human Rights 7.1 The matters raised in this report comply with convention rights. 8. Promoting Equality and Diversity and Social Inclusion 8.1 Securing and improving social inclusion is a key theme of the SYLTP2 and considerable effort is being devoted to developing a robust strategy for this purpose. The improvements proposed in the consultation response will support the existing strategy. 9. Reduction of Crime and Disorder 9.1 There are no specific considerations at this strategic level of region and local transport planning. 10. Conservation of Biodiversity 10.1 There are no specific considerations at this strategic level. 11. Risk Management Issues, including Health and Safety 11.1 There are no specific risks associated with the RUS. The risks are associated with performance in implementation and delivery against RUS implementation programme and these lie with Network Rail. These include risks which are delays and slippage in spending and failing to meet targets. 12. Financial Implications 12.1 There are no direct financial implications arising from the recommendations contained within this report. 13. Employee Implications 13.1 There are no specific employment implications associated with the RUS. 14. Glossary RUS Rail Utilisation Strategy SYLTP2 Second South Yorkshire Local Transport Plan 15. List of Appendices 15.1 Appendix 1 - Barnsley MBC Consultation Response to The Yorkshire and Humber Rail Utilisation Strategy (RUS). 15.2 Appendix 2- Routes across the Pennines 15.3 Appendix 3 - City region context 16. Background Papers 16.1 Full Yorkshire and Humber Rail Utilisation Strategy - this can be found online at wwwnetworkraLog Officer Contact: Alan West Telephone No: 772598 Date: 4/11/08 Financial Implications/Consultations %, 4t4, 'iibei '& Lt ANNEX YORKSHIRE AND HUMBER RAIL UTILISATION STRATEGY Consultations (a) Financial Implications Consultations on the financial implications have taken place with the Financial Services Manager of behalf of the Executive Director of Finance. (b) Employee Implications There are no employee implications directly arising from this report. (c) Legal Implications There are no implications arising directly from this report. (d) Policy Implications There are no implications arising directly from this report, however the implications of the Rail Utilisation Strategy will be considered as part of the ongoing Local Transport Plan. (e) ICT Implications There are no implications arising directly from this report. (f) Local Members There are no implications arising directly from this report to consult Local Members in detail. (g) Health and Safety Considerations There are no implications arising directly from this report for BMBC. (h) Property Implications There are no implications arising directly from this report. (i) Implications for Other Services There are no implications arising directly from this report, however the implications of the RUS document will be considered as part of the Local Development Framework. (j) Implications for Service Users There are no implications arising directly from this report. (k) Communications Implications Press releases will be issued as appropriate. APPENDIX 1 Barnsley MBC Consultation Response to The Yorkshire and Humber Rail Utilisation Strategy (RUS) Initial Comments Passenger Services The RUS provides an indication of the future programme of infrastructure and rail service improvements proposed by Network Rail over the coming years. The recommendations to: • Strengthen peak time services between Barnsley and Sheffield by increasing capacity, • Doubling capacity on the Penistone line should the tram train not be retained and • The need for bi- directional signalling in the area is most welcome. (despite the latter having no implementation date.) It is however, unfortunate that the improvements do not seem to be in line with the aspirations of the Borough in terms of its connectivity, particularly across the Pennines and south towards the capital. It is also of concern that the improvements proposed will not have sufficient capacity to accommodate future growth in the longer term. The combination of increasing road traffic congestion and the success of the existing fast service to Leeds and Sheffield is likely to place significant pressure on capacity. Freight The reference to the limited line gauge and the absence of passing loops is well made in the document. However the potential for reducing the delay on passenger services, particularly those caused by coal trains on the ECML requires more detail. This would clarify the linkage to the Freight RUS and illustrate the influence infrastructure improvements can have in encouraging long distance freight movements as well as improving journey times and reliability for passenger services. The RUS quite rightly raises the potential growth in intermodal freight. This is particularly relevant as a large number of distribution centres and warehousing units are based in South Yorkshire i.e. major retailers such as B&Q, Next, Aldi etc. This highlights the potential for increasing freight movement by rail to Doncaster rail port, Wakefield Europort and possibly beyond to dedicated freight sidings in the future. Many of the existing movements currently use local and major trunk roads from the Humber ports and at present the only convenient rail freight facility in South Yorkshire is E:\CABINET REPORTS\3. DEVELOPMENT\081 126 Cabinet\Yorkshire and Humber Rail Utilisation Strategy App 1.doc Doncaster rail port. The Freight Facility Grant does however, offer opportunities to increase rail freight movements using the recent improved rail links from the Humber ports to the distribution and warehousing mentioned above. The potential