and
STAG response additional information and details
Responses
from Severn Tunnel Action Group:
*please click above
reports to down load in Mircosoft Word format
SUBJECT - Climate Change Strategy -
Programme of Action Consultation - Responses
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the consultation on Climate Change Strategy, I give below the official response from the Severn Tunnel Action Group (STAG).
As the group is primarily involved in transport and the Consultation document covers a wide range of sectors Residential, Agricultural, Waste etc. it has been considered better to limit the response to Transport and general items and leave specific items relating to the other sectors for individuals to make their own personal response.
| Question 1: Do you agree with the broad focus of Assembly Government action as outlined above? |
| Generally agree
with the focus in Chapter 3 for turning the Vision into reality. |
| Question 2: What do you recognise as your contribution to tackling the causes and consequences of climate change? |
|
Identifying and
bringing to the attention of decision makers at all levels of the
potential for improving the use of public transport. This is by identifying how existing assets can be better utilised particularly if this can be implemented without additional costs. (Example stopping the existing Cardiff to Portsmouth rail services at Severn Tunnel Junction can be achieved without increasing overall journey times; it requires no additional trains as it makes use of existing services. In the process this provides connections and integration with the trains serving the Chepstow line making available from that area travel options of using public transport.) We also identify
potential actions for modal shift away from using private cars as
a means of transport that are not presently included in WAG or other
Organisations Transport Plans and Actions. (In the past provision
of dedicated bus service to feed the busiest trains, in the future
development of full Park and Ride proposals etc.) |
| Question 3: How can the Assembly Government or others enable you to maximise your contribution to tackling the causes and consequences of climate change? |
| By giving positive
consideration and backing to items put forward that can have a positive
impact on Climate Change but may not be in existing Transport Forward
Plans or Budgets. |
| Question 4: Do you agree with our proposed approach to ensuring delivery of the climate change strategy that emerges from this consultation process? Are there ways in which the approach could be strengthened? |
| Yes generally agree
with the approach to ensure delivery. The approached might be strengthened by changing the "regularly update the actions" to include a specific and timed review and report on action changes to ensure the process remains dynamic and new ideas and proposals are encouraged. |
| Question 5: Do you agree our proposed approach to developing a comprehensive approach to promote behaviour change or specific proposed activities? |
|
Yes generally agree with the approach, it is right to focus on Young People and increasing their participation to help educate for the future. The communication
campaign on what action Individual people can take will require considerably
more focus than up till now if a significant change across the majority
of people is to be made. |
| Question 6: What do you recognise as the contribution you could make to promoting behaviour change? What support or activities would enable you to maximise your contribution to promoting behaviour change? |
| Campaigning and
promoting the use of alternative lower carbon transport options. |
| Question 7: Are there ways in which we can strengthen the quantification of proposals contained in this consultation? If so, how? |
| Not known |
| Question 8: Do you agree with the proposals for action in transport? Are there any major barriers to delivery? |
|
Not sure what
is the "Proposed Action 1"? The Annex A is all about action
already underway and the section on "Proposals for further action"
goes straight into "Proposed Action 2". In the section of this consultation on Agriculture and Land Use, the need for action to bridge the gap between private and social costs and benefits has been identified as an issue. A similar approach will be needed for transport if it is to deliver its full potential on climate change. In the present system an intervention may even cover its costs but if it fails to deliver a financial return to the Treasury and reach a Benefit / Cost ratio of at least 1½ then as exemplified in the recent Network Rail Route Utilisation Strategies the proposals will not be progressed in line with the Treasury / DfT Guidelines as laid down to the railway industry.
The wider social / economic costs may be included in drawing up the initial specification for the rail services. Once the franchise is let any further improvements are left purely to the Train Operating Company where this will deliver greater profits to the Company concerned. For the duration of the Franchise any wider social / economic benefits such as greenhouse gas reduction proposals are liable to be ignored unless it involves a profit increases for the Operator. It raises the question that if the wider social / economic considerations are considered important enough in drawing up the initial proposals, then the same criteria should be applied to proposals and decisions throughout the duration of the contract / franchise, and not just the profit margin for the contractor?
It therefore implies that if a transport proposal is not already included it is not the intention to pursue it. If this is the case then it appears that anything significant that comes out of the "Climate Change Strategy - Programme of action" as far as transport is concerned is highly unlikely to be implemented before 2015 at the earliest.
This is exemplified with the "Non Cost" proposal that has been campaigned for several years by the Better Trains for Chepstow (BT4C) organisation www.bettertrains4chepstow.co.uk. The proposal to stop all the Arriva Cross Country services at Chepstow has been demonstrated by them to be achievable without any increase in the overall journey time in either direction and also not require any additional rail funding. Perversely, despite the fact that this proposal could deliver a significant modal shift from car to rail, it does not get a specific mention in either the Regional or the National Transport Plans, while proposals costing thousands of pounds and delivering less do appear.
The arrangement was developed at the time of minimising any call on the public purse and the private car as the preferred mode of transport. Based on maximising profit for the operator, in the same way as rail franchises once let, integration and the serving of housing estates and railway stations off the direct route tend to be omitted. Imposing Quality Bus Partnerships would seem a way of overcoming this barrier to opening up public transport to those who do not at present have access and hence provide the choice of using a less carbon hungry transport option.
The present government policy of increasing rail fares at a percentage above annual inflation rates is both a real and perceived barrier to using the more environmentally friendly option of rail travel.
Pricing is used to try and "burn off excess demand" and discounts at times of low demand. This may be a sound financial basis in which to operate but if there is another criterion other than finance, such as the desire to reduce carbon emissions, the fundamentals need to be reconsidered. If there is a desire for a modal shift away from private car usage there must be the resources in place in advance to accept that increase in demand before it starts to arrive. At present there is little or no evidence of significant preparation for any modal shift. Everything appears to be being planned around known and standard growth predictions. A key barrier,
particularly at a time of recession, is making sufficient provision
in advance as compared with the present practice of reacting and responding
to growth after it has arrived and is causing problems. This barrier
needs to be addressed at both the Political and Financial level. |
| Question 9: Are there other key actions that we should be taking in relation to transport? If so what, what would it cost and what level of greenhouse gas emission reduction savings would it generate? |
|
There have been no announcements as to how the impact of not building the new M4 is to be dealt with. While not advocating the building of the new motorway it has been apparent that the level of use in the vicinity of the Brynglas tunnels is above the level that even without incidents the knock on effect of vehicles braking already results in occasional total stoppages of all traffic. In addition it is understood that invasive bridge inspections of the type so far undertaken between the old Severn Crossing and the Coldra will shortly be needed on the bridges to the west of the Coldra. In addition in order to meet the EU Tunnels Directive there will be a need to reduce the already congested tunnels from two lanes to only one lane for a considerable period of time while the remedial work is carried out. It is suggested that Severn Tunnel Junction should be brought forward as a strategic Park and Ride station for South East Wales. A report has been prepared by the Severn Tunnel Action Group that shows that with the services as outlined in the Regional Transport Plan with some revised stopping patterns that effectively a fifteen minute interval rail service can be provided in and out of Newport and Cardiff without in any way adding to the journey times of any existing "Class 1" Main Line services from Wales. Cars entering
Wales from the M5 / M4 can be directed onto the M48 and with slip
roads deliver straight to the Park & Ride Hub. The provision of
the slip roads also avoids the building of the much longer Magor /
Undy Bypass that is being pressed for because of the daily road congestion
through the area. The All Wales Route Utilisation Strategy prepared by Network Rail to inform government of constraints and probable investments in interventions necessary was developed at the time that proposals for the New M4 were actively being progressed as a viable transport solution for South East Wales. The provision
of the Severn Tunnel Junction Park & Ride now becomes a Strategic
Site but will require alteration to the existing Plans to bring it
forward- see barrier item 3 above. This needs action now. |
| Question 10: What are you doing to help reduce emissions from transport? What would help you do more or enable you to start contributing to emission reduction from transport? |
|
We have successfully campaigned to have the station car park tarmaced and lined which has allowed the local bus service to again service the station. Prior to this the lack of any marked out turning area meant the volume of cars filling the car park resulted in no safe turning area and the bus having to be withdrawn on safety grounds. Since reinstatement and following campaigning and discussion with the County Council the supported service has been extended to deliver to and pick up from the most heavily utilised commuting trains. This now provides
an alternative to using private cars for commuters from the Magor
/ Undy area. A similar service covering the larger population area
of Caldicot would provide another lower carbon option for commuters
to get to the station. We have successfully negotiated directly with the First Great Western Train Operating Company as a result there are now sixteen more services calling at the station than was originally declared under the December 2006 Greater Western Franchise rail cuts in this part of Wales. These include morning and evening commuting services for which there were no other public transport options. In addition the majority provide connections with the Arriva Trains Wales Caldicot and Chepstow line services. This process is
ongoing and further services are promised by First Great Western for
the next timetable change in December. What is needed
is the implementation of the Regional Transport Plan to fill the two
hour gaps in the Arriva Trains Wales Chepstow line services sooner
rather than later in order to maximise the potential for integrating
the existing hourly First Great Western rail services. We would like to see the provision of Electric Car Docking stations at rail stations. The small electric "Smart cars" as used in London are ideal for commuters who need to make a short (Max 40 mile) trip to the station. While virtually
unseen in Wales we believe that provision should be made for these
all electric cars at all parking places associated with Public Buildings,
Hospitals, and Supermarkets etc. We would like to see the provision of 24 hour a day, 7 days a week cycle hire of the type marketed by the OY Bike Hire company or similar firms. As long as there
is security such as there is with the station CCTV the provision of
bike hire of this type will encourage the use of sustainable transport.
As with the electric car docking stations these bike hire facilities
should be extended to college campus, town centres etc. We had supported a Developers proposal to extend the tarmacing and lighting of the "Ash Path" between Caldicot and Severn Tunnel Junction. This would have provided a lit path of just one kilometre from the high density housing area of Longfellow Road. The present official route from this area is via the main road and is some two and a half Kilometres of which part is along an unlit busy main road. A direct path of just one kilometre would encourage walking to the station. The Developer's
housing proposal was declined for Planning Approval, but the provision
of a lit footpath should still be progressed. The above items would all encourage greater use of rail as a mode of transport while also reducing the carbon emissions in getting to and from the stations. They are all included
in our proposals for developing the station which does not appear
to have been taken up at present by the Welsh Assembly Government. |
| Question 11: Have we identified the big challenges for emission reduction in transport? |
| Yes generally the
key big issues have been identified. One item that should be considered relates to the existing location of Developments. The large out of town business and retail parks rarely have any public transport of any significance. This means there is no real alternative for both workers and customers other than using their private cars to commute to and from work or to visit the retail outlets. This is an issue that needs to be considered. It is noted that in this area the number of people using public transport (Rail) has increased by a factor of more than ten times the predicted growth as far as commuters travelling into England. One enquiring, one common feature is the decision by some English Authorities to limit the car parking for employees on any relocated site to just 20% of the workforce. This has resulted in firms standardising working hours with the provision of minibuses to the local railway and bus stations. The challenge is to persuade businesses in Wales to follow this practice of reducing the carbon emissions associated with their staff getting to and from work. |
| Question 12: How do you think these challenges in relation to transport could be addressed? |
| Make the Carbon
Savings equivalent financial values in transport appraisals significantly
greater (as compared to just minor adjustments) than the present values
applied. A vastly increased positive equivalent financial rating would in one change move positive climate change options higher up the transport priority lists without altering the existing appraisal methods. Having said that, in the longer term we believe that the existing systems developed at the time when the car was the preferred mode of transport and priority was to minimise any call on the public purse, needs to be reviewed in the light of the need to consider another criterion (Climate Change) other than just finance. At the end of the day it is the cost of the various options for transport that will dictate the majority of people's decisions on which transport option to use. The organisation for delivering this is the Welsh Assembly Government. |
Phil Inskip
Chair Technical Support Committee
Severn Tunnel Action Group
SUBJECT
- Network RUS: Electrification Strategy - Draft for Consultation -
Response from Severn Tunnel Action Group:
I am responding
on behalf of the Severn Tunnel Action Group (STAG) the user group that represents
passengers that join or transfer between the Bristol and Chepstow line services
at Severn Tunnel Junction Station.
As a formally constituted User Group we are not registered with Network
Rail having been advised by Network Rail at the time that the management
of Land Disposal Consultations was transferred to you from ORR (with whom
we had been registered) that this was not possible.
We have
similarly been advised that you will not be answering the numerous questions
raised with your Public Affairs as you are not resourced to respond to operational
questions from User Groups such as ourselves.
Despite this and not being recognised as a Stakeholder as far as Network
Rail is concerned I would however ask you to consider the items below in
relation to the Electrification Strategy RUS.
1. Option A13.6 Gloucester to Severn Tunnel Junction, the option
identifies "Convert Cardiff to Birmingham and Nottingham service to
electric traction". While this has identified the sixteen Arriva Cross
Country services each way, at the same time it does not mention the thirteen
Arriva Trains Wales services that operate daily over this line.
(Within the present Franchise specification they are Cardiff to Gloucester, but to maximise stock utilisation efficiency the service has at present been combined with the Cardiff to Maesteg service.
In addition as Cross Country services from Bristol no longer call at Gloucester the Train Operating Company has extended the service to Cheltenham.
The service therefore appears as Maesteg to Cheltenham, but there is little synergy between the Maesteg and Gloucester line services with rarely any through passengers.
The extension beyond the minimum franchise requirements to Cheltenham has no doubt attributed to the 20% growth from 2007 to the start of 2009 on this service).
In calculating the ratio of Number of vehicle miles to Track miles to be electrified to determine the priority "Tier" this should include not only the present Arriva Cross Country 16 trains but also the Arriva Trains Wales13 trains.
This might lift the "Tier" that this line comes under, improving the business case for this valuable diversionary line when the tunnel is closed for maintenance.
2. Option A13.2. We welcome the Strategy Paper and are pleased to see that the A 13.2 options include electrification all the way to Swansea on the South Wales Main Line.
We note that under Section 7.4.2.b Core Strategy Main Lines you identify that the Business Case for Bristol Parkway to Swansea is not as strong as Maidenhead to Bristol.
However we do see that in your Figure 3.6 identifying the "Total Tonnes non electrified lines" that the traffic passing us here at Severn Tunnel Junction and on into Wales is in the highest category, as is Maidenhead as far as Swindon, and is actually higher than Swindon to Bristol via either route.
We therefore strongly support that any electrification of the GWML must go all the way to Swansea and not just to Bristol.
3. Option A13.2. We note under the A 13.2 Options that the Cardiff to Taunton service would be split at Bristol with the Cardiff to Bristol service converted to electric traction.
We opposed the change to the FGW Franchise Specification when First Great Western asked to split the franchise requirement to run through services from Cardiff to Taunton.
However this has gone ahead and there is no longer any franchise requirement for any services from South Wales to go any further into the West Country than Bristol.
While so far there are only a couple of services that have actually been limited to a Bristol to Cardiff shuttle, we would fully support the Option A13.5b (Cross Country Electrification) that would re-instate through services from Cardiff to Taunton.
Ideally these should extend as far as Exeter at least providing direct services from South Wales to the South West.
4. Option A13.2 & A 13.6. In noting that until the electrification would extend south from Bristol that the Taunton to Cardiff service would be limited to an electric Bristol to Cardiff service this does open up other possibilities not considered in your paper.
As stated above the Cardiff to Gloucester service has been combined for stock efficiency purposes with the Cardiff to Maesteg service.
If the Gloucester line (A 13.6) is electrified ahead of the Cardiff Valley lines (A15.1) then improved stock utilisation could be achieved by linking the Bristol to Cardiff with the Cardiff to Gloucester service.
Indeed in view of the growth of traffic from this part of Monmouthshire towards Bristol and the poor service under the present franchises / timetables between Chepstow and Bristol we have suggested a more radical approach.
Under the present resignalling; facilities are being provided at Severn Tunnel Junction to enable passenger services diverted off the Gloucester - Bristol (Yate) line down the Chepstow line, to reverse at the Junction instead of having to go the extra ten miles into Newport.
Our suggestion is that at peak commuting time when Cardiff is already congested and it would be difficult to fit in additional trains, two services starting at Gloucester come down the Chepstow line, reverse at Severn Tunnel Junction and continue on to Bristol.
This will not only provide a direct service when it is needed from Chepstow to Bristol but avoids the severe overcrowding as passengers at Severn Tunnel Junction attempt to join the already full and standing services from Cardiff / Newport.
(We have recorded this year that on average every two months morning commuters are left behind unable to join the overcrowded trains.
This is despite the Portsmouth services having been increased by an additional coach over that specified in the FGW Franchise for December 2006).
5. Growth. We have severe concerns about the robustness of the models used by Network Rail to predict growth.
In the All Wales RUS we challenged the figure being used which calculated out as an annual growth rate of 1.47%.
In the final version different values were put on different routes and for this area towards Bristol and the South West this was lifted to 2.6%.
On the Chepstow line as quoted above we have been advised that the Train Operating Company has recorded a 20% increase from 2007 to the start of 2009.
We have been taking regular counts on the busiest trains from here to Bristol and have also undertaken all day footfall surveys.
Below is the information that we sent to Train Operating Companies, Network Rail, DfT, MPs etc. regarding the Bristol services: -
"The graph of loading has shown an actual increase in growth of 51% for the year on this service.
This confirms and validates the one day footfall survey undertaken on the 2nd March that identified a 50% annual growth for the full three hours to nine o'clock of travel from Severn Tunnel Junction towards Bristol.
This demonstrates that the growth on this particular part of the route in the Government White Paper 'Delivering a Sustainable Railway' which equates to a 50% growth over twenty years has actually occurred within one year only.
In other words we have already passed the DfT's predicted level for the year 2030 by the start of 2009! Based on the revised increased growth rate in the Final Wales RUS for all journeys from South East Wales to the West of England it appears we have already reached the level that Network Rail would not have predicted to have been reached before the year 2022"
While it is appreciated that no-one can explain to us why this should be happening, and even now deeply into the recession we are still showing a month on month growth that is almost ten times greater than was predicted at the start of the RUS in 2007 before the recession was on the horizon.
We therefore feel that this RUS should at least acknowledge the difference in growth from the November 2008 published All Wales RUS and ideally include an "Upper level of Growth" for areas such as this.
I am not
sure if this is an isolated occurrence, but get a feeling that this sort
of trend is being reflected elsewhere. Actual growth rates of 15% - 50%
compared with predicted 1.47% must have a profound effect on the Business
Case Benefit / Cost Ratios.
6. "6.4 Approach to economic appraisal"
I note your comments regarding the present system of adding the cost of lost duties to the exchequer for diesel fuel not being used and how this counts against electrification proposals.
I am pleased to see that changes will be implemented from April 2010 that include moving indirect taxation impacts from the Present Value Cost (PVC) calculation to the Present Value Benefits (PVB).
At the
NATA Refresh Workshops at the DfT I felt there were only two or three of
us out of fifty / sixty that were arguing that the existing arrangement
was not right and the Transport Appraisal System actually favoured taking
people off trains and into single user cars rather than the other way about.
*Please
click "here" to download WAG Consultation on Climate Change Strategy
in pdf format
(Maesteg - Cheltenham) draft timetable from Arriva Trains Wales for consultationFrom a quick look at the Monday to Friday timetable there appears to be no change to the service and timings.
Could you let us have any comments so STAG can respond to the consultation, If anyone wants any of the other ATW Draft Timetables please email us with the Table number you want and STAG will forward the ATW Draft Timetable required via email.
STAG need all responses by the 13th July 2009.
*please click here to down load the 2010 ATW Draft Timetables
in Mircosoft Word format
Extract by STAG from the DfT Consultation on proposed new categories for Minor Modifications under the Railways Act 2005
Introduction
The Government is considering measures that can be taken to reduce levels of regulation where it is appropriate to do so. In October 2006 the Government published the Railways Closures Guidance which set out the process that must be followed when proposing a Railway Closure.
The Government is seeking views on a proposal to make use of powers contained within the Railways Act 2005 "the Act". to make an Order to create additional categories of Closure that are eligible to be treated as a Minor Modification.
Section 356. of the Act allows the Secretary of State to make an Order to treat Closures of any description as Minor Modifications because of their temporary nature or because they have limited effect on the provision of railway passenger services.
This consultation is limited to England and Wales. Transport Scotland is carrying out an identical consultation for an Order to apply in Scotland.
The Proposals
This consultation is seeking views on creating new categories of Minor Modification that can be used for two types of closure that would currently be required to follow the full closure process where there is limited effect on the provision of railway passenger services.
These two categories are;
· Station relocation;
· Reducing a multiple track railway that runs through a station to a minimum of a single track.
Proposal 1 - Station Relocation
Under the current legislation, a railway station that is replaced by another new. railway station a short distance along the line is required to follow the process set out in the Closures Guidance published by the Government in October 2006.
To comply with this guidance a full economic assessment and public consultation must have been carried out. The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR). would then ratify that this process has been followed before any Closure could take effect.
The Government is proposing that in certain circumstances, where there does not appear to be a material adverse impact to passengers on the provision of railway passenger services, the alternative Minor Modification process may be more appropriate.
The Act permits the Secretary of State to make an Order to do so where there is limited effect on the provision of railway passenger services.
Since 1986, there have been six stations that have closed where a new station has opened within 400 metres of it. These stations were;
· Tiverton Junction replaced by Tiverton Parkway.
· Morecambe Promenade replaced by new Morecambe station 400 metres away.
· Smethwick West replaced by Smethwick Galton Bridge.
· Filton Station replaced by Filton Abbey Wood.
· Wrexham Central relocated 280 metres.
· Mountain Ash replaced by new station on a passing loop.
In addition, Dalston Junction station closed in 1986 following the closure of the Broad Street branch from the North London Line. Three years earlier a new station had been opened around 300 metres away at Dalston Kingsland.
If a station relocation were to be treated as a Minor Modification, it would need to meet certain criteria.
The Government is proposing the following criteria which should apply for station relocation schemes;
1. The new station should be located a short distance along the same railway line as the old station;
2. The station is being relocated as part of an enhancement scheme where either or both of the following applies;
a. The facilities at the new station are of a modern-day equivalent to, or higher specification than those of the old station, including accessibility measures;
b. There will be an improved quantum of services from the new location;
3. The distance to travel to gain access to the new station for pedestrians is not significantly increased for the majority of people living within a radius of 800 metres of the old station;
4. The distance to travel to gain access to the new station for road users is not significantly increased for the majority of people living within a radius of 2 kilometres from the old station.
5. The old station will not be closed before the new station is ready to come into operational use. For the avoidance of doubt, it would be acceptable that an overnight changeover between locations occurs.
6. The new station serves an area where housing has developed and would better serve that community without disbenefit to the community that the old station initially served.
Proposal 2 - Reductions in a multiple track railway within a station
Section 392. of the Railways Act 1993 exempted the discontinuance of the operation of a part a multiple track railway between any two places on the network from closures provisions, provided that the railway line in question would continue to be at least a single track between those two places.
The Railways Act 2005 has not adequately captured this provision as a Minor Modification.
A multiple track could be reduced to a single track currently as an eligible Minor Modification on any part of the network other than if a section runs through a station.
Section 352. of the Act can be used if the part of the network does not consist of a station or a station in use, whilst Section 353. can be applied where the track does no more than serve a station or Light Maintenance Depot.
This has left a gap in the provisions where a multiple track railway runs through a station, but does not serve the station.
This additional description is designed to fill that gap and would allow schemes which may involve changes to the layout of track as part of a station remodelling scheme for example, to be treated as a Minor Modification rather than require a full closure as now.
Consultation questions
1. Should there be a maximum distance defined between the old and new stations? Each case should be considered on its own merits, but a distance of around 500m is considered to be a short distance. However, in some areas with small populations, a greater distance could also be considered to still have limited effect.
2. Should eligibility be extended to stations where facilities at the station are reduced, for legitimate reasons such as reduced patronage for example?
3. Should the eligibility also extend to schemes where two stations are combined into a single station?
4. How many of the criteria would need to be fulfilled in order for a scheme to be considered to have limited effect?
How to respond
Please reply to STAG at info@saveseverntunnel.co.uk and ensure that your views reaches us by the 27th November so they can be considered and included as appropriate in our response to the DfT.
What will happen next
A summary of responses submitted to the DfT, including the next steps will be published by 31st January 2009 on www.dft.gov.uk, paper copies will be available on request.
Question and Answer Brief
Below is a list of frequently asked questions about these proposals.
Q. What is a Minor Modification?
A. A Minor Modification is a physical removal of a railway facility, for example a structure on a station or a part of the operational network, which does not have a significant impact on the operation of the railway or passenger services. A Minor Modification requires a determination to be made by the Secretary of State under Section 35 of the Railways Act 2005. The Department for Transport has published guidance on the application of this part of the Network Modifications Closures. provisions of the Act and can be viewed at: www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/passenger/stations/.
Q. Will this mean that stations can close without consultation?
A. No. A local consultation would still be required as part of the Minor Modification process. A decision from the Secretary of State whether to allow the station to close as a Minor Modification would still be necessary.
Q. Does this mean that the government is planning a series of station closures?
A. No. This Order is being made to reduce regulation where stations are being replaced a short distance away by a new station. Without this Order, a Full Closure would need to be proposed which does not seem to be appropriate where there is no loss of a station from a community. If a station were to be proposed for closure without it being replaced, a full closure under the Act would be required.
Q. Is there guidance for the Closure process?
A. Yes. It can be found on the DfT website at: www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/legislation/sgd/railwaysclosuresguidancea.
Extract by STAG from the:-Railways Act 2005
(Extract -Section 35)35 Closures eligible to be treated as minor modifications
(1) The discontinuance of a railway passenger service is eligible to be treated as a minor modification so far as the service is a service on a stretch of line along which there is no station (or no station in use) and the circumstances are such that-
(a) trains that would otherwise use that stretch of line in travelling between two stations will instead pass along an alternative route; and
(b) passengers travelling on such a train will not be required to make additional changes and will not incur significant increases of journey times.
(2) The discontinuance of the operation of a part of a network is eligible to be treated as a minor modification so far as that part of the network consists in a stretch of track along which there is no station (or no station in use) and the circumstances are such that-
(a) trains that would otherwise use that stretch of line in travelling between two stations will instead pass along an alternative route; and
(b) passengers travelling on such a train will not be required to make additional changes and will not incur significant increases of journey times.
(3) The discontinuance of the operation of a part of a network is eligible to be treated as a minor modification so far as that part of the network consists of a stretch of track which does no more than serve a station or light maintenance depot, or some part of it, and the circumstances are such that-
(a) that part of the network is not necessary for the operation or use of a station, or part of a station, for the purposes of or in connection with the provision of railway passenger services; or
(b) the operation or use of such station or part of a station as is served by that part of the network is or has been the subject of a proposal which is a proposal for a minor modification.
(4) The discontinuance of the operation of a part of a network is eligible to be treated as a minor modification so far as-
(a) that part of the network consists of installations associated with any such stretch of track as is mentioned in subsection (2) or (3); and
(b) the circumstances are as mentioned in that subsection.
(5) The discontinuance of the operation or use of-
(a) a part of a network (other than track), or
(b) a part of a station, is eligible to be treated as a minor modification so far as the operation or use of that part of the network or that part of the station is not necessary for the operation or use of the network or station for or in connection with the provision of railway passenger services.
(6) Where it appears to the Secretary of State or the Scottish Ministers that closures of any description not specified in this section should, because of their temporary nature or limited effect on the provision of railway passenger services, be treated as minor modifications, the Secretary of State or, as the case may be, the Scottish Ministers may, by order, provide for closures of that description to be treated for the purposes of section 34 as eligible under this section to be so treated.
(7) It is the Scottish Ministers who may make an order under subsection (6) where the only closures to which the order relates consist in-
(a) the discontinuance of one or more Scotland-only services;
(b) the discontinuance of one or more cross-border services in relation to which no funding is provided by a railway funding authority other than the Scottish Ministers;
(c) the discontinuance of two or more services none of which is a service not mentioned in paragraph (a) or (b);
(d) the discontinuance of a network or part of a network that is wholly in Scotland; or
(e) the discontinuance of a station or part of a station that is wholly in Scotland; and it is the Secretary of State who may make such an order in any other case.
(8) An order under subsection (6) is subject to the negative resolution procedure.Crown Copyright
~end Section 35~
*please click on the links below to access Responses to
Wales RUS Consultation in micosoft word format
*please click on the links below to access Responses to
Timetable Consultation in micosoft word format
Network Rail Wales Route Utilisation Strategy -
Draft for ConsultationBackground
Following the Rail Review, the Department for Transport (DfT) specifies the outputs it wishes to buy from the railway system : -
(i) as input to the Office of Rail Regulation's (ORR) periodic review of Network Rail's funding and charges and
(ii) through the award of franchises to Train Operating Companies (TOCs).
Other funders, such as the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG), may seek to increment or decrement these infrastructure outputs.
In addition the Welsh Assembly Government is a co-signatory to the Arriva Trains Wales franchise and specifies those Arriva Trains Wales services which operate exclusively in Wales or which call at stations in England and Wales.
Network Rail leads the development of Route Utilisation Strategies (RUSs) with rail industry parties, balancing passenger and freight demand, and operational performance and cost, considering the potentially fundable aspirations of stakeholders.
Route Utilisation Strategies then inform the development and delivery of timetables and infrastructure maintenance and renewals for the network. They also underpin the development of future franchise specifications.
Purpose of the Wales RUS
The development of a RUS for Wales is required for a number of reasons. A key driver of the RUS is to inform the High Level Output Specification being prepared by the DfT for input to the Access Charges Review. This will enable the UK Government, the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) and the Office of Rail Regulation to make timely and well informed decisions on the efficient use of the network and identify opportunities to improve capacity and reliability of the network consistent with the route utilisation objective and in the light of agreed changes in rolling stock and timetables.
It will enable Network Rail to develop an informed renewals and maintenance programme in line with its customers' and stakeholders' aspirations for the routes in Wales. It will also enable the development of an optimum engineering access strategy that takes into account both cost issues and the impact on passenger and freight users of the maintenance and renewal activities on the railway.
The RUS process
· Analyse the current position for this route using a consistent framework (i.e. passenger and freight demand, capacity, capability and, if required, both infrastructure and operator performance). This will be a detailed baselining exercise which will involve a thorough audit of available data.
· Encompass the emerging requirements of DfT, Welsh Assembly Government and other stakeholders. In particular, the UK Government and Welsh Assembly Government are given an opportunity to clarify their understanding of the issues relating to the future development of the route in the light of our baseline analysis.
· Undertake a gap analysis to understand how the current situation for the route differs from the high level aspirations of stakeholders. The gap analysis will give rise to alternative scenarios for meeting their reasonable requirements;
· Consult informally with stakeholders throughout the rail industry and wider community to ensure that their aspirations are considered and where appropriate included within the analysis. Stakeholders will be regularly informed of progress through one of the RUS stakeholder groups.
· Prepare and cost alternative options for the route using appropriate criteria, modelling and analytical tools. At this stage we will also consider other funders' aspirations for incremental or decremental services.
· Consult formally with stakeholders and interested parties before fixing on a particular solution.
· Publish for Office of Rail Regulation review.
Publication of the Conclusion
Having considered all responses to the formal consultation document, the final RUS document will be published, incorporating the recommendations for consideration by funders. Network Rail will share the document with DfT and Welsh Assembly Government in advance of publication. The document will address the issues raised during the consultation period and provide an explanation of the conclusions.
Access to the Wales RUS Document
The Wales Route Utilisation Strategy - Draft for Consultation can be accessed through the link below
Network Rail Wales RUS for Consultation.pdf
Your Views and Comments
You are invited to give your comments to the Severn Tunnel Action Group ideally before Tuesday 15th July. This is because Railfuture, The Wales Branch of the National Rail Campaigning Organisation have offered to consider to additionally include our response in their formal response to the consultation.
Please e-mail your response to info@saveseverntunnel.co.uk
Arriva Trains Wales December 2008 Draft Timetable
Arriva Trains Wales have provided us with their Draft December 2008 Timetable and we would welcome any comments or feedback to add to our response.
Introduction / Timetable Changes
In December this year Arriva Trains Wales will be introducing a new timetable on many of their mainline routes. Some of the changes are being made so that Arriva Trains Wales fully integrate their services with the new Virgin West Coast timetable.
There are however no significant changes proposed for the Severn Tunnel Junction services.
The key changes are as follows:
· Most Aberystwyth and Chester to Birmingham New Street services will be extended through to Birmingham International, providing new direct journey opportunities to the National Exhibition Centre and Birmingham Airport. The timetable is being designed with extra performance contingency, which should improve punctuality and prevent the need to regularly turn trains around at Wolverhampton.
· A new direct two hourly service from Holyhead to Birmingham New Street and International via Chester and Shrewsbury. This will replaces Arriva Trains Wales direct Holyhead to Crewe services.
· Connections with Virgin London services from North Wales will be at Chester instead of Crewe, where Virgin will be running an hourly service.
· Better spacing of trains along the North Wales Coast, giving a more even half hourly pattern in both directions for the majority of the day.
· Additional hourly shuttle trains between Llandudno and Llandudno junction in addition to the through Manchester services. These will connect at the junction with Cardiff / Birmingham services.
· Regular hourly Sunday services between Cardiff and Manchester, Chester and Manchester, Holyhead and Crewe and Shrewsbury and Birmingham, plus some extra journeys to Aberystwyth.
· Other changes are being made to services in West Wales to improve performance and provide a better match between capacity and demand, in which will help reduce overcrowding.
Engineering Work
You will notice that the timetable has been split in to three periods:
· A: 14th December 2008 to 25th January 2009
· B: 26th January 2009 to 22nd March 2009
· C.. 23rd March 2009 to 15th May 2009
They are split in accordance with Network Rail's datesets when Engineering Work may take place affecting Timetabled services.
Details of Engineering Work affecting Arriva Trains Wales Services is as follows: (Please note, as always there may be supplementary engineering work done through their Informed Traveller Timescales)
· Period A (14th December 2008 to 25th January 2009) - 00:05 SUN to 04:00 MON: Buses will replace trains between Chester and Llandudno Jn
· Period B (26th January to 22nd March 2009) - 23:50 SAT to 05:00 MON: Trains are diverted between Wolverhampton and Birmingham New Street. Trains may start / terminate Birmingham International due to pathing constraints.
· Period B (26th January to 22nd March 2009) - 23:40 SAT to 04:00 MON: Buses will replace trains between Llandudno Junction and Holyhead
· Period C (23rd March 2009 to 16th May 2009) - 00:20 SUN to 04:35 MON: Trains between Chester and Manchester will be subject to diversion, Intermediate stops will utilise bus replacement transport.
· Period C (23rd March 2009 to 16th May 2009) - 00:55 SUN to 11:50 SUN: Buses replace trains between Hereford and Cardiff Central
· Period C (23rd March 2009 to 16th May 2009) - 19:45 SAT to 06:30 MON: Buses replace trains between Wrexham Central and Bidston.
· Period C (23rd March 2009 to 16th May 2009) - 23:00 SAT to 04:25 MON Services between Crewe and Wolverhampton (via Stafford) will be diverted via alternative routes where possible.
The individual timetables can be accessed through the links below (The Severn Tunnel Junction services are in Table 132)
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Major Changes Poster - Dec 2008_3.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 101 SO AB.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 101 SO C.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 101 Sun AB.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 101 SUN C.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 101 SX.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 102 SO.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 102 Sun.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 102 SX.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 127 SO.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 127 SUN.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 127 SX.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 128 SO.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 128 SUN.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 128 SX.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 129 SO.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 129 SUN.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 129 SX.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 130 EWD.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 130 SUN.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 131 SUN AB.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 131 SUN C.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 131 Sx.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 132 SO.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 132 SUN.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 132 SX.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 75 SO.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 75 SUN A.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 75 SUN B.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 75 SUN C.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 75 SX.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 81 SO.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 81 SUN A.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 81 SUN B.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 81 SUN C.pdf
Arriva Dec 08 - May 2009 Draft Timetable Table 81 SX.pdf
Your Views and Comments
You are invited to give your comments to the Severn Tunnel Action Group before Tuesday 22nd July to enable them to be considered and included in our response as appropriate.
Please e-mail your response to info@saveseverntunnel.co.ukPlease Note this consultation applies to Arriva Train Wales only and not Arriva Cross Country or First Great Western services.
