TRANSPORT AND WORKS ACT 1992 TRANSPORT AND WORKS (INQUIRIES PROCEDURES) RULES 2004 NETWORK RAIL (WERRINGTON GRADE SEPARATION) ORDER

Transcription

1 The Network Rail (Werrington Grade Separation) Order NR/PoE/1.1 TRANSPORT AND WORKS ACT 1992 TRANSPORT AND WORKS (INQUIRIES PROCEDURES) RULES 2004 NETWORK RAIL (WERRINGTON GRADE SEPARATION) ORDER NEEDS CASE SUMMARY PROOF OF EVIDENCE DAVID VERNON Document Reference Author NR/PoE/1.1 Network Rail Date 24 October 2017

2

3 CONTENTS 2.1 Scheme Context The ECML Connectivity Fund Strategic Policy & Guidance ECML Benefits Scheme Benefits... 8

4 1. INTRODUCTION My name is David John Vernon. I am a Partner at Carter Jonas, responsible for Infrastructure Consents and Stakeholder Management. Until recently (August 2017) I was employed by Network Rail as a Sponsor, with responsibility for the proposed Werrington Grade Separation scheme (the Scheme). My academic qualifications include a BA Honours degree in Town & Country Planning (Newcastle University) and a Postgraduate Diploma in Town Planning (Newcastle University). I am a chartered member of the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) and National Infrastructure Planning Association (NIPA). 2. GENERAL INTRODUCTION 2.1 Scheme Context The last decade has seen a huge growth in rail use across the UK with a 59% increase in passenger numbers from 1.04 billion people in 2004/05 to 1.65 billion in 2014/ Britain s railways play an essential role in supporting economic growth by enabling the safe, fast and efficient movement of passengers and goods into and between major economic centres and international gateways in an environmentally sustainable way The Scheme will, in combination with the other East Coast Main Line Connectivity Fund projects listed in my proof of evidence (NR/PoE/01), increase the capacity on the East Coast Main Line (ECML) to allow for up to two extra train paths per hour (tph) in each direction for long distance high speed trains (LDHS). The aim of the Scheme is to enable trains from the Stamford Lines to reach the Greater Northern Great Eastern Line (GNGE) without crossing the East Coast Main Line (ECML) on the level, thereby reducing the conflicting train movements that currently exist. 2.2 The ECML Connectivity Fund The Scheme is part of the Connectivity Fund which has been allocated 197m for funding Control Period (CP) 5 until 2019 and 50m for CP6 through to 2024 to deliver the necessary enhancements on the ECML The Connectivity Fund is managed by East Coast Programme Board (a collection of rail organisations and companies, including Network Rail and the Department for Transport). Page 4 of 12

5 Current Service Pattern There are currently 6 tph in each direction for long distance high speed (LDHS) passenger services on the ECML: 4tph run between London and Edinburgh, stopping at various stations along the route; and the other 2tph are the Leeds and Wakefield Westgate services The ECML is also frequently used by freight services, with up to 2 tph using the line from London to Peterborough and on to Doncaster and other locations in the North The GNGE Improvement Scheme (finished in June 2014) created a viable diversionary route for freight trains which would otherwise travel on the ECML, but which are unable to do so, for reasons such as capacity constraints or night-time maintenance work on the ECML. Future Service Pattern As part of the CP5 settlement, Network Rail was tasked with delivering additional capacity on the ECML for a further two LDHS passenger tph. The two extra paths will help rail operators serve new locations, and serve existing locations more frequently. Many of these are in the north of England, and the additional services are intended to help with the government objectives of creating a stronger North (the Northern Powerhouse), and bridging the physical and economical gap between the North and the South While there are aspirations for freight to grow, and for inter-urban services to have increased numbers of trains, they do not form part of the remit for the Connectivity Fund projects. Page 5 of 12

6 3. REGULATORY BACKGROUND 3.1 Strategic Policy & Guidance The DfT s White Paper Delivering a Sustainable Railway, July 2007 looked at the potential future challenges for the railway over a 30 year period and identified three long-term agendas: increasing the capacity of the railway; delivering a quality service for passengers; and fulfilling rail s environmental potential The three themes are carried through as a theme in all other strategic policy. The Scheme, in combination with all other Connectivity Fund projects, will help to deliver on all three of these aims. Page 6 of 12

7 4. THE BUSINESS CASE The Scheme does not have an individual business case as its benefits are linked with the delivery of the projects of the Connectivity Fund in combination The socio-economic appraisal sets out the estimated benefits of the Scheme and other Connectivity projects, with the current capital cost of 247million at GRIP Stage 1 (Project Inception). It has a Net Present Value (NPV) of 2459 million and a Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) of 3.8, representing a good value for money option, in accordance with the DfT's value for money assessment guidance. Page 7 of 12

8 5. BENEFITS OF THE CONNECTIVITY PROJECTS 5.1 ECML Benefits The five principal benefits of the delivery of the Connectivity Fund to the ECML are: An increase in train capacity from 6 to 8 tph, further increasing numbers of trains and passenger seats between London and the North; Improved reliability as a result of the separation of services; More peak time seats, less crowded services; Shorter end to end journey times; and Improved operational flexibility. 5.2 Scheme Benefits The Scheme will provide the capability for freight and passenger trains to travel between the GNGE and Stamford Lines in both Up (toward London) and Down (toward the north) directions without having to cross the ECML, so reducing a key conflict on the rail network This will also result in a reduction of the number of trains having to brake and wait for a signal on the GNGE close to the junction with the ECML, and vice versa. The number of freight trains requesting to cross the ECML at this location will be reduced by approximately 75%. This will reduce journey times and the amount of braking/accelerating required by freight trains in the local area The removal of the current conflict at the point of crossing the ECML will support the increase in the capacity of ECML LDHS services from 6 tph in each direction to 8 tph in each direction, with associated benefits to journey time and socio-economic benefits along the line. Page 8 of 12

9 6. EARLY SCHEME DEVELOPMENT & ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED To date, operational solutions (signalling/timetabling) have been used to unlock capacity on the ECML, but it is not possible to timetable an additional 2 tph without removing the conflict that currently exists between freight and passenger services A number of different locations were previously considered, and these included assessments of at-grade versus grade-separated schemes. It was concluded that a grade-separated solution was preferred to remove the conflict The three principal locations considered for the provision of a grade-separated junction for the GNGE southern access (part of the GNGE Improvement Scheme) were: Options for a South Chord at Peterborough Station would facilitate better access to the March Lines (to Felixstowe and East Anglia) combined with a single-track, northbound, and a grade-separated link at Werrington, providing the required GNGE southern access; Options at New England, Peterborough (grade-separated junction within Network Rail land ownership); and Options at Werrington (including flyover and dive under options). South Chord Network Rail concluded that the South Chord options would not deliver the required output of appropriately segregating the freight and passenger services so as not to impact upon future capacity. Werrington would still have to be installed as a result of this option regardless. New England Network Rail considered options at New England, all of which were located within Network Rail land ownership and operational railway boundary: The work highlighted that the options at New England were much more costly than those at Werrington, and would involve large-scale temporary alignments for the ECML to generate the working space required for the construction of a dive under or flyover there Options at New England were therefore viewed more negatively on cost and operational grounds than those at Werrington Junction, and the high level environmental work undertaken did not provide a key differentiator. Page 9 of 12

10 Werrington Junction Network Rail considered at a high level both flyover and dive under gradeseparated options and concluded that both would deliver the required remit and when considering cost, operational and environmental factors together they were preferred over other options considered Therefore, in 2009 the GNGE Improvement Scheme identified Werrington as the location for further detailed development of a grade-separated junction should a new southern access be required to realise the benefits of other elements of the GNGE Improvement Scheme However, following further capacity and performance modelling in 2010, it was concluded that a grade-separated junction was not required in order for the freight capacity benefits of the GNGE Improvement Scheme to be realised Due to the work already undertaken by previous projects (including the GNGE Improvement Scheme), a significant number of alternatives had been considered in place of a grade-separated junction at Werrington. That work, and subsequent work for the Connectivity Fund, has demonstrated that the provision of a grade-separated junction at Werrington Junction is the only feasible option when it comes to operation, maintenance, cost and ability to satisfy the aim of de-conflicting moves across the ECML. 7. CONSULTATION Network Rail has consulted widely on this Scheme including formal consultation under the TWA Applications Rules Public consultation took a two stage approach for the general consultation exercise (between June 2014 and October 2015 and between August and December 2016) and a one stage approach for formal stakeholder consultation (between August and December 2016) Network Rail places great emphasis on ensuring that, so far as reasonably practicable, its transport investment priorities and measures also meet the requirements of aspirations of those affected by the proposals Meeting stakeholder requirements or aspirations was carefully considered against Scheme requirements. In addition, as with all development proposals, consultation illustrated that different stakeholders can have conflicting requirements. Page 10 of 12

11 Pre-application public consultation: June 2014 to October The phase 1 public consultation was based on two engineering options which were a flyover option passing over, and a dive under option passing under the existing ECML The key themes that emerged through the consultation feedback at this stage were support for the scheme, if it were to be a dive under, concerns regarding noise of existing rail traffic on the GNGE, and impacts on the local road network. All responses were considered and these helped inform the emerging proposals for the Scheme. Formal pre-application public and stakeholder consultation: August to December At this stage of consultation, the preferred option (the dive under) was presented to the stakeholders and the community Feedback at this stage tended to be centred on construction and operational impacts of the Scheme, effects on local rights of way, demolition of properties, and appearance of the final Scheme Dialogue with affected and interested parties has continued since consultation closed and following submission of the TWA, and I am confident that Network Rail has carried out a high level of consultation and engagement with both individuals and organisations affected by the Scheme. Further detail on the property-specific elements of objections and representations are considered in the proof of evidence of Mr Andrew Prowse (NR/PoE/6.2). Page 11 of 12

12 8. CONCLUSION My proof of evidence demonstrates that there is a clear and overwhelming need for the Scheme, and that it will deliver significant benefits to the railway users on the ECML, helping deliver national government objectives The Scheme will help to unlock the wider benefits of the Connectivity Fund and increase in train capacity on the ECML, realising an economic benefit to the nation of just under four pounds in benefit being generated for every pound spent We have considered alternative locations and solutions, but the Scheme as presented represents the preferred solution taking into account all relevant factors In conclusion, I have demonstrated that the Scheme is the only one which will deliver the operational and public benefits in the required timescales at an affordable price. Page 12 of 12