There has been so much work going on recently ... much of it detailed work ... towards gaining and retaining an appropriate TransWilts train service ... that we haven't had the time we would like to update the wider group of people who support us within the community. So "here goes" ...
What should the service level be?
Train service provision is reviewed from time to time; populations move around, towns grow, jobs shift and work hours alter. Leisure requirements change, and the wider environment alters too and that can result in modal transport shift choices and requirements. So services specifications based on travel flows directions and volumes in 2002 may need to be changed for an appropriate service to run in 2012. What is an appropriate level of train service on the TransWilts line? We (in the community) have speculated over the years and concluded that a train every 2 hours was a reasonable (lowish) estimate. Network Rail's GWRUS published in March 2010 tested an hourly service and came up with a "benefit / cost" ratio of 2.1, and Wiltshire Council concluded that a service every 2 hours, rising to hourly in the foreseen future, would be aout right.
What is needed to change the current service level to an appropriate level?
Current services are signifcantly below the appropriate levels - there are just two services a day, poorly timed and described as "tokenistic" by the Train Operating Company. To raise this to a realistic level (hourly in the peaks, at least once every 2 hours through the rest of the day), extra trains would be needed.
|
December 2010, January 2011 and February 2011
A launch meeting - the Chambers of Commerce, Wiltshire Council, Network Rail, First Great Western, the Community Rail Partnership and Duncan Hames MP met - with an objective to map a route forward to:
a) Work out what extra trains would be needed and approximate timings
b) Get industry standardised, respected and unbiased reports prepared by experts on the business case and operational case
c) Solicit feedback from businesses and the public along the route of the line to provide extra potential user data
d) Lay the groundwork for the provision of the appropriate service in the event of positive evaluations
e) Evaluate potential future options (but outside the base case, which MUST stand on its own).
March 11th, 2011
Presentation / Launch of results / Update, hosted by Wiltshire Association of Chambers of Commerce, Trowbridge.
* 2 additional trains, initially of 1 carriage each, would be required for the base service as proposed.
* At this level, there are no significant extra infrastructure requirements - there is adequate track and signalling capacity.
* That track and signalling capacity is also sufficient when shared section at the North end is electified and more electric trains run.
* The council owned area at Melksham will need to become a paid car park for around 50 cars from day 1.
* The benefit / cost ratio is even better that Network Rail's figures - 2.4 using industry standard measures
* The industry standard measures are acknowledge to be extremely pessimistic due to the difficulty of extrapollating from the current token service
* With income for car parking at Melksham from Wiltshire Council, they will be able to guarantee an income for First to balance the books including a profit for First
* We are forecasting a loss in the first year as commuter traffic builds up; other traffic should build quicker.
* In the business survey, 92% of businesses agreed or strongly agreed that the TransWilts service would help their accessibility and competitiveness
* In the public survey, 664 respondents said that the TransWilts service would be a viable commute option for them
* 1500 out of 1600 public respondents said they would use the TransWilts for leisure journeys, totalling around 36,000 single journeys per year
* Questions in both surveys asked where respondent's home and work stations were, and verified that the reponses were quality local ones
* Free format inputs ("any other comments") were predominanly positive, but constructive and provide other useful pointers
* Our research reveals / confirms that the service would have significant effect up the corridor - community, business and sustainability.
* Effects spread to a wider corridor too - relieve chronic overcrowding on Westbury to Bath service (significant numbers will switch to direct rail service)
* A viable Salisbury < - > Swindon train service will cut road traffic through Pewsey and Marlborough
* A viable Trowbridge < - > Swindon train service will cut road traffic through Devizes and Avebury
* The case stands without a station at Wootton Bassett, but better with one there as a future step. Timetable allows for this
* The case for a station at Staverton (K&A Canal, major new housing area bewteen Trowbridge and B-o-A) looks good (still being checked)
* For an hourly service, extra signals would be required at Melksham to allow trains to follow at 8 minute headways
* For an hourly service, trains would need to run from the platforms which currently have no passenger trains at Salsibury
* After 2016 / Electricification, bay platform space at Swindon would be released that would allow an hourly service to run
Also:
* Integration with other transport modes - Cycling, Walking, Buses, and onwward train connection from Swindon, Westbury and Salisbury.
* Leisure and Tourism will bring significant non-peak use of the line
* Strong community support - businesses, schools and colleges, council, individuals, rail groups ... even National Trust ;-)
* Strong need for the community to take 'ownership' and work with rail industry. Information, adoption of stations, suggestions and help.
Ok - so it's a sensible scheme - a "no-brainer". What are we waiting for?
The hurdles that must be cleared
1. There is a shortage of rolling stock and we need the blessing of the Department for Transport to use 2 carriages on this line. As our case requests no ongoing subsidy, and relieves overcrowding where passengers are currently denied boarding at Bradford-on-Avon, Avoncliff and Freshford (by taking doglegging passengers from Trowbridge and South to Chipenham and East) at 07:30, 07:50 and 08:29 (B-o-A times), it DOES answer the Department's request for stock to be used to relieve overcrowding. Furthermore, it's a far better option than adding the coaches onto Westbury -> Bath services, which could leave them underused for the rest of the day; they would be earning money all day!
2. We need to get any financial arrangements to cover the year 1 shortfall into place / perhaps a guarantee if we end up short on even the pessimistic forecasts.
3. We need to get the information / marketing / community / leisure use primed for a quick takeoff to build and retain the service
The rest of the year
16th March 2011 - we hope for Confirmation that the Community Rail Partnership is accepted as a full member of the association of Community Rail Partnerships
17th March 2011 - MPs to meet the Minister for Transport to ensure he's briefed on the case
[18th March 2011 - West Wilts Rail Users Group AGM (Duncan Hames MP talks)]
29th or 31st March 2011 - Meeting with Area Manager, FGW
29th March - Melksham Railway Developement Group meeting
Late March - Stock bid to Departmemt for Transport by FGW
Then work on major LSTF bid / second tranche for works around TransWilts
7th April 2011 - Performance Grant Bid by Community Rail Parnership including report and initial publicity funcing is decided
9th April 2011 - TransWilts Community Rail Partnership Working Group meeting
May 2011 - Part time Officer / Assistant level help for Community Rail Partnership
Early Summer - final stock allocation decision by Minister for Transport
Sundays 24th July to 4th September inclusive - proposed extra Trains running - 07:20 Westbury -> 08:05 Swindon; 08:15 Swindon -> 09:00 to Westbury and on to Weymouth
(A real marketing opportunity to let people know about what's coming. Will give day out to Weymouth, and day out to London, trips!)
Sunday 11th December - Opening of Melksham Station Car park and Rail Partnership facilities at Melksham Station
Sunday 11th December - New services start.
2012 and beyond
2013 - Bus interchange improvements at Melksham
2016 - Roll into next franchise
201x - step up to truely hourly service
201x - overcrowding leads to
201x - opening of Wootton Bassett Station
2016 - service adjustmets to fit in with retimed electric services
201x/2020 - opening of Staverton Station
FAQ
What has Changed?
- 7000 more homes in Salisbury, 7000 in Trowbridge and 7000 in Chippenham
- 2000 more homes already authorised in Melksham
- Business Development needed near Westbury and other regeneration
- Dramatic rise in price of oil, and oil shortages / scarcity in future
- CO2 / emission concerns
- 8% compound growth in general rail traffic
- The Community knows about its line
- Information System can sell the line
- Parallel roads even more clogged (yet more so if we get up to 750 lorries every 12 hours from Bath!)
- Wiltshire Council Parking Income available at Melksham Station
- Reliable operation of TransWilts Services on well scoped fuller timetable
Why such a good BCR?
The figure has come out incredibly good from the industry renowned consultants MVA associates. Why? In contrast to some other services:
a) The majority of traffic will use the line all year; it is not busy in summer and empty in winter
b) There is strong leisure traffic and business traffic between towns all along the line
c) The line connects at both ends into other services at major towns - it is not running from a remote junction to a terminus station for a single town
d) The fare regime needs some tidying up, but fares per mile can stand being at a higher level than many lines in other areas
e) There are significant congestion gains - we are parelleling a busy road, not a fast dual carriageway
Why Salisbury?
The section from Warminster to Salisbury is about 20% of the line with no stations. Should we 'turn' at Warminster? No!
a) Salisbury is the tourist destination
b) Salisbury is the ongoing connection
c) Existing services on this section are lower than any other section of Cardiff - Portsmouth and are heavily overcrowded much of the time with short distance passengers
d) Wiltshire is a Unitary county and travel requirements between its main towns (Chippenham - Trowbridge - Salisbury) grow.
e) If trains are delayed in one direction, reversing at Warminster will cause know on delays in the other direction as the train can't be parked out of the way
f) See also Parkman report (2000?) and experience / figures from late BR figure (Roger Newman may have details)
g) Substantial commute, leisure and onward traffic - Westbury, Warminster and Dilton Marcsh (given through trains!) to Salisbury
h) No need to turn at Warminster as in past as we'll be using 153 / 150 / 158 units which are allowed (142 / 143 cannot go beyond Warminster)
Question also asked - should we go to Frome instead?
a) Salisbury rather than Frome is 'natural' for flows, but good connections to Frome / Yeovil / Weymouth are important
b) GOOD TO LOOK at extending planned 18:19 from Swindon to Frome (arr 19:25 - need to wait for 19:18 train to leave Frome for Bristol)
c) Services at 06:45 and 07:04 from Frome connect(ish) into planned Swindon services already.
d) Planned 17:35 from Swindon would connect to Frome (18:40 arrival)
e) Extending 22:07 Swindon to Westbury on to Frome would fill a service gap there. Don't know about this one!
What about White Horse / Wilton / Codford / Corsham stations?
Each extra station costs a lot of money, and slows the trains down from "regional" towards "local". They also reduce line capacity, especially where there will be expresses on the track. White Horse Trowbridge, Wilton and Codford / Wylye have all been mentioned - for business park traffic, for park and ride and tourist traffic, and as an A303 park and ride. Whilst none is ruled out, the cases don't appear to be made on a quick check at the moment, but nothing in our proposal stops them being looked at when the time is right. Corsham isn't on the TransWilts line, and the site of a possible station only had long distance expresses passing through. Marginal relief to Corsham may come from the TransWilts plans, by providing a new option for Corsham people heading south (park at Melksham / bus to Melksham) and by relieveing car park overflow at Chippenham as some traffic from there is abstracted to Melksham. We note that the GWRUS only just ruled out an hourly Bristol -> Chippenham service that would have passed through Corsham (and required an extra operational platform at Chippenham). If a station is provided at Wootton Bassett as part of the electrification, it would be worth recalculating the BCR for the Bristol -> Chippenham service, this time extended via a stop at Wooton Bassett (making that every 30 minutes) to Swindon, using an electric train. Note that the Swindon bay will no longer be required for reversing / holding Stroud Valley trains, as all such trains will run to / from London; it will just reverse 2 trains per hour - Swindon and (potentially) Bristol
Why Swindon?
a) Major flows from Melksham and south thereof - don't make people change at Chippenham.
b) Provide service through Wootton Bassett.
c) Infrastructure already in place; turning at Chippenham would add high capital costs
d) Relieve Sunday overcrowding on Chippenham - Swindon section (yes, really!) on Sunday afternoon
One of the major flows from Melksham is to Bath and Bristol. By changing altenately at Trowbridge and Chippenham, the proposed service give 22 services per day from Melksham via Bath to Bristol. Provide a printed / printable timetable, and the currently-awkward but major Melksham to Bristol flow will be well catered for.
All Pictures are on the TransWilts and towns that it serves - every town is represented. How many can you identify? |
