Network Rail, South East route: Sussex area route study - draft for consultation
If you would like to comment on the Network Rail 30 year 'strategy' document please go to:
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/long-term-planning-process/south-east-route-sussex-area-route-study/
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/long-term-planning-process/south-east-route-sussex-area-route-study/
Please send your comment to:
To Network Rail: SussexRouteStudy@networkrail.co.uk
Unfortunately responses have to be in by 13th Jan 2015! They say it had been publicised since the 15th Oct but Network Rail seemed not have let anyone know about it! Thanks to Railfutures its existence was tracked down!
Here is Sussex Diary's comments the study:
Date: 09/01/2015
The report titled itself as the Sussex Area Route Study, but much of the 200 odd pages are devoted to areas outside Sussex. Is this just a re-badged report about the London rail system cobbled together to give the impression of public consultation in Sussex?
The report is signed off by two senior directors - Paul
Plummer, Group Strategy Director and Dave Ward, Route Managing Director (South
East Route) saying that the document sets out the strategic vision for the
future of this vital part of the rail network over the next 30 years but it
offers no significant proposed improvements on the East Coast way or West Coast
way lines throughout Sussex nor does it offer significant options to the
high-risk strategy of a single Brighton mainline route. If this is the best
that Network Rail can offer for the next 30 years then we are in serious
trouble in Sussex.
The 200 page report seems to have the ‘ring’ of an internal industry report inward looking
on its own systems and taking no account of actual and potential external
changes which may have an impact on the rail system. For example, and I may
have missed a reference, but the report does not refer to what the effect would
be if a second runway at Gatwick is developed (whether one agrees with the second runway or not consideration should be given to the possibility).
There is no reference to consulting organisations like
South Downs National Park or local authorities who would be able to give input
regarding the possible demographic and population changes over the plan period.
Surely, population growth areas will have an impact on the demand for rail
services. Likewise, the report does not refer to proposed trunk road
developments which been announced recently by the government. Again these
developments would have an impact on how people use public transport and they
should be taken into account. The Office for National Statistics shows a growth
of 8.4 million people in the UK over 20 years to 2035. Demographic changes are predicted showing the
percentage of older people will rise over the 20 year period to nearly 9% of
the total population. I can't see these older people commuting to London but the
report takes no account of this change or the overall population change in the
south east.
Improving travel across Sussex:
Travelling across or
around Sussex isn't quick or easy. Roads are congested, bus services are slow
and finish early, and rail routes do not all link up. Network Rail could make
significant improvements to the working and leisure lives of residents as well
as helping achieve greater sustainability and lowering CO2 emissions.
Change the current ‘high risk’ strategy of a signal north/south BML
route:
The Network Rail
report should be looking at improving travel across Sussex not just up one
strategically vulnerable link to London via Haywards Heath & Gatwick.
Anything happening on this north/south route creates havoc across the whole
south coast system. This ‘all eggs in one basket’ is full of risks and should
be mitigated with the improvement to other routes.
Change the focus to look at ‘local travel’ requirements in Sussex:
Although the survey
covers the south coast area, sadly the Network Rail consultation focuses on
capacity to London, ignoring the need to promote local economic growth by
providing faster services between south coast towns like Chichester, Worthing,
Brighton, Lewes, Eastbourne and Hastings, and access from places like Uckfield
and Tunbridge Wells and the Weald to the South Coast for jobs and education and
tourist travel.
Network Rail need to
urgently address the above and certainly not wait until 2043!
Network Rail should urgently look at improvements in Sussex and not just to and from London:
Network Rail should urgently look at improvements in Sussex and not just to and from London:
·
Wealden residents can only get work or
education in Lewes or Brighton by congested roads and slow bus services
·
Uckfield Line commuter services take 20
minutes longer than equivalent journeys on the Brighton Main Line
·
Newhaven needs regeneration but has
only two through trains to London
·
Trains from Eastbourne, Lewes,
Worthing, Hove and Brighton to London are overcrowded
·
The major employment and tourist centre
of Brighton is dependent on a single over utilised rail link from London
·
Journey times between Hastings,
Brighton and Worthing are too long
Action is needed to address the above
in the next 10 years not the next 30!
The Uckfield to Lewes Link:
The Department for
Transport has published the Network Rail report
on the Brighton Main Line, capacity challenges and options for improvements. The DfT agree with the recommendation that
Lewes-Uckfield re-instatement could make a longer term contribution to capacity
on the Sussex route.
This short link should
be re-instated in the next 10 years and not just left as an idea floating in discussion papers in 2043! Such a
development will have many benefits, including:
- direct train services between Kent, Surrey,
the Weald, Lewes, and Brighton for education and jobs
- faster more reliable services between the
Weald and London
- direct trains between London and Newhaven,
supporting regeneration
- additional trains from Brighton, Eastbourne
and Lewes to London, relieving the Brighton Main Line
- visitors will still be able to reach Brighton
when the BML is closed, maintaining the visitor economy
- reduced traffic congestion around Lewes and
Brighton.
Change the focus to promote growth in Sussex and not just encourage more
people to travel to London:
Brighton is the
largest employment centre in the South East outside London, the Weald has a
very high daily outflow of people for work, and Hastings has a high level of
unemployment. I agree with the Railfutures’ recommendations to promote economic growth in
East Sussex, namely:
- Uckfield-Lewes reopening to achieve affordable
and effective journey times between the Weald, the Sussex Coast and Brighton
- Faster travel and extra capacity between the
Sussex Coast and Gatwick, Croydon and London
- Electrification and other infrastructure which
expands services and connections, reducing journey times - by through
trains not changes
- Electrification of Marshlink and provision of Javelin
services via Ashford to achieve acceptable London-Hastings journey times
- Investment in a direct Coastway connection
between Polegate and Pevensey to reduce journey times to attractive levels
along the main coastal corridor, between Brighton, the Sussex Coast and
East Kent
- Coastway Metro service linking Eastbourne and
Hastings, with more stations.
Reopening the Uckfield
link should not have to wait until a new cross-London link is built, after
2043. Other rail developments show new lines being delivered in phases. I agree
with Railfutures’ proposals of an incremental approach to
improving services on the Uckfield line and extending services to the South
Coast.
1. Improve access. Improving access to stations, for example by building the new Uckfield station car park, will attract more passengers to use the route in preference to using the car or driving to other stations, relieving the Brighton Main Line and increasing the profile of the line with the rail industry, politicians and the public. The Wealden District Council gave planning approval for the new car park at Uckfield station on 3rd July 2014. The car park is expected to open late this year or early next.
2. Electrify. Electrification will enable longer trains to run on the Uckfield line without having to lengthen platforms at the smaller stations, will shorten journey times and will improve reliability. Local MPs, county councils and LEPs support the Railfutures’ response to the ORR draft determination that electrification would be better value for money.
3. Lewes ‘Horseshoe’. Recent events at Dawlish in Devon have shown the need for alternative routes to provide
network resilience. I agree with Railfutures in that a simple loop at Lewes,
following the A27 Lewes bypass will provide an alternative route between
Brighton and Haywards Heath without reversing. It would also avoid reversing of
the Lewes - Brighton shuttle service at Lewes, which might improve stock
utilisation, and would facilitate services via a reopened Uckfield – Lewes line
to Brighton. As Railfutures say, the radius of curvature is similar to that of
the new curve on the East London Line Extension at Shoreditch, which operates
without disturbing local residents. I understand from Railfutures that their
proposals do not affect the Railway Land Local Nature Reserve at Lewes.
4. Other benefits:
4. Other benefits:
·
33% more peak East Coastway - London
capacity without redoubling the Uckfield line
·
a direct hourly service between Kent,
Surrey, the Weald, Lewes, and Brighton for education and jobs, using the Lewes
Horseshoe
·
an off-peak diversionary route (along
with the Arun chord) to enable uninterrupted access for visitors to Brighton
when BML closed, protecting the Brighton economy. This would also make it much
easier for Network Rail to plan and implement the maintenance work which is so
necessary to keep the Brighton Main Line running.
·
reduced road traffic congestion around
Lewes and Brighton.
This simple proposal would not require any
additional ‘trains’ through East Croydon. It would be achieved by extending the
existing hourly Uckfield line service to and from Brighton, and extending the
current peak service in the intermediate half-hours to and from Seaford.
5. Redouble. I also agree with Railfutures in that clearing East Croydon and Clapham Junction bottlenecks and renewal of BML signalling scheduled by Network Rail for 2023 will allow 6 more BML trains per hour, 4 to Victoria and 2 to London Bridge. These London Bridge trains should run via a redoubled Uckfield line between London and the South Coast. The redoubling of the Uckfield line (at the same time as re-signalling in Control Period 7) would enable a more frequent service which would encourage more passengers to use the Uckfield line in preference to other routes. It would also give:
5. Redouble. I also agree with Railfutures in that clearing East Croydon and Clapham Junction bottlenecks and renewal of BML signalling scheduled by Network Rail for 2023 will allow 6 more BML trains per hour, 4 to Victoria and 2 to London Bridge. These London Bridge trains should run via a redoubled Uckfield line between London and the South Coast. The redoubling of the Uckfield line (at the same time as re-signalling in Control Period 7) would enable a more frequent service which would encourage more passengers to use the Uckfield line in preference to other routes. It would also give:
·
33% more peak capacity for both East
and West Coastway to London
·
direct trains between London and
Newhaven (avoiding splitting/joining Newhaven services at Lewes), supporting
regeneration
·
a direct twice hourly service between
Kent, Surrey, the Weald, Lewes, and Brighton for education and jobs, using the
Lewes Horseshoe
·
a greater level of network resilience
which would have enabled a service to be maintained when Balcombe Tunnel was
flooded.
.jpg)
+(814+x+442).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)