Contact: Richard Stocks, ext 5202

1. Summary

1.1 The following decisions are sought:

(i) That the additional £1.2 million from the South West Hampshire Transportation Panel 2002/03 Capital Programme for the reopening of Chandlers Ford railway station be approved.

(ii) That the proposed programme be accepted.

2. Reason

2.1 To enable the proposals to continue to provide a high quality facility from the outset of the service.

3. Other options considered and rejected

3.1 Consideration was given to reducing the facilities to be provided at the station to fit the currently approved budget. This was rejected because it is felt important to provide a high quality station from the outset.

4. Conflicts of interest Declared by the Decision Maker or a Member or Officer consulted - none.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - not applicable.

6. Reasons for matter being dealt with if Urgent - not applicable.

Approved by: Date:

Councillor K B Estlin

7. Background

7.1 Under the powers of its Act of 4 July 1844, the London and South Western Railway's branch between Bishopstoke Junction (as Eastleigh station was then known) and Salisbury via Romsey was opened to passenger traffic on 1 March 1847, when Chandlers Ford railway station opened. The county map of 1850 shows Chandlers Ford consisting of a public house, a farm and the station. This probably explains the railway station's central location in the town. The Chandlers Ford railway station was closed for goods traffic on 4 May 1964, with passenger services being withdrawn on 5 May 1969, due probably to a lack of patronage as the service went to Portsmouth and not Southampton.

7.2 In 1989 studies were carried out into the expected traffic impact of the Knightwood Development, a 1,500 unit housing development. These assessments developed proposals for transportation schemes to mitigate against the traffic impact of the development. One of the cornerstones of the proposed public transportation schemes was the reopening of the railway station at Chandlers Ford. To this end an agreement was negotiated with Bloor Homes, developers of Phase I of the Knightwood Development, for a contribution of £600,000 towards the reopening of the railway station. This developer contribution was confirmed in a Section 278 Agreement in 1995 and by the former Roads and Development Sub-Committee on 17 January 2000. There is also an allocation of £200,000 from the South West Hampshire Transportation (SWHT) Panel capital programme for 2002/03, giving a total of £800,000 allocated. The current estimate for the proposed railway station is £1.65 million and this report reviews the scheme, its progress and programme, investigates different options and their costs, and proposes a budget of £2 million for the scheme.

8. Progress

8.1 Following the publication of the Integrated Transport White Paper in July 1998 negotiations commenced between the County Council and South West Trains (SWT) about a possible Rail Passenger Partnership (RPP). These discussions resulted in a firm proposal from SWT to run a service to Chandlers Ford, which is included in its franchise bid for this region. SWT is the preferred bidder for this region and this is due to come into operation in February 2003.

8.2 Following these commitments discussions were held with Railtrack which resulted in a feasibility study being carried out by Owen Williams Railways in 1999, completed in December 2000. This confirmed the technical feasibility of reopening the railway station. The proposals at this time were to provide a shuttle service between Chandlers Ford and Southampton Central via Eastleigh, stopping at all stations. This would require a revision to the signalling on this single-track line. The funding of this was not necessarily a problem as it would have been included in the track access charges for the service and therefore form a part of the RPP bid. This bid pre-qualified in October 2000 but, due to the recent number of serious and high profile rail accidents, Railtrack has taken the drastic action of taking control of all signalling resources in the rail industry and will not release resources for non-safety signalling. These resources are unlikely to be released for some considerable time, probably beyond the 2006/08 cut-off date for developer contributions. This means that the shuttle service between Chandlers Ford and Southampton Central via Eastleigh stopping at all stations option has had to be set aside.

8.3 The County Council and SWT have subsequently proposed an alternative hourly service (the South Hampshire Crossrail) which runs between Romsey, Chandlers Ford, Eastleigh, Parkway, Swaythling, St Denys, Southampton Central, Millbrook, Redbridge and Totton and back (see attached plan). In addition to local journeys, travellers would also have access to connecting trains to Winchester, London, Portsmouth, Bournemouth, Weymouth, Salisbury, South Wales and the West Country.

8.4 This will not require signalling but will require additional rolling stock but for limited additional patronage, thereby reducing the cost benefits. Nonetheless the RPP bid for this proposal pre-qualified earlier this year. The final RPP bid is being prepared by Mott MacDonald and is due to be made in late July 2002, enabling SWT to complete consultations on its timetable changes, which include the South Hampshire Crossrail proposals. The Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) will then make its decision within 13 weeks.

8.5 Following Railtrack's unwillingness to provide signalling resources for the project, the County Council and SWT decided to commission a consultant to take over Railtrack's role of project managing and completing the feasibility design to give an estimate confidence of +/- 10% and prepare the design and build tender documents. Steven Frankham Associates was commissioned to carry out this work. As a substantial amount of design work has been done for the feasibility study and estimates, Frankham's brief has been extended to carry out the detailed design and the preparation of a construction only tender. Plans of the current proposals will be displayed at the meeting.

8.6 The current design shows the inclusion of a footbridge in the project. This is shown as being a stepped bridge. During the design process a ramped bridge using 1:20 ramps for disabled users was investigated. The distance to be travelled by the disabled user over the ramped bridge would be further than using Hursley Road and Bournemouth Road footway and the proposed ramp for the Toynbee School cycle scheme. For this reason the stepped bridge was deemed acceptable. The provision of a lift has been investigated at the station but there is insufficient room on the platform (northern) for the steps and the lift.

8.7 The land on which the station will be built is owned by Railtrack and Eastleigh Borough Council. SWT is negotiating with both these parties for the relevant leases for the land. SWT will also be responsible during the franchise period for the maintenance of the station with it becoming a franchise asset at the end of the franchise.

9. Benefits

9.1 Chandlers Ford Railway Station is positioned centrally in Chandlers Ford. As such there are approximately 22,000 people living within 2.5 kilometres (1.5 miles) of the station (1991 census returns). The station currently has the fourth highest population catchment for a station in Hampshire. The service will also link Eastleigh and the other suburbs of Southampton to the industrial/employment areas of Chandlers Ford, and Chandlers Ford with other areas of employment. This is particularly important for the 15% of households in Chandlers Ford, 25% within 0.75 miles of Eastleigh Station and 28% within 0.75 miles of Swaythling and St Denys stations which do not have access to a car.

9.2 In terms of public transport links there are four bus routes with stops within five minutes walk of the railway station. The proposals will include for a bus turning area and studies are continuing into a bus link between Shannon Way and School Close which would take buses from Valley Park/Knightwood past the station.

9.3 The development of cycle links in Chandlers Ford is continuing but one of the main east-west links through Chandlers Ford, the Valley Park to Toynbee School cycle route, will go right past the station. There will be 10 cycle lockers and 15 Sheffield Stands provided at the station. This will provide space for 40 cycles in total.

9.4 The above information has been used to model the likely passenger numbers for the proposed service. This model predicts that there will be 700 passenger movements per day in the first year of the station's operation, which is estimated to be 70% of demand, rising to 1,000 movements a day in the sixth year when the station realises its full potential. This compares well with Hedge End Railway Station which has 600 movements per day.

9.5 The Strategic Rail Authority require that the RPP bid identifies the financial benefits, the saved money from reduced congestion and accidents, pollution, health improvements, etc. The current benefits to service support costs ratio is 2:1 over the initial six year return period that the SRA views these benefits. This equates to a saving to society in the order of approximately £3.8 million. Therefore even with the capital costs of the station of £2 million the predicted year six benefits for the station would be £1.8 million. The average year on year benefits at today's prices would be £0.5 million.

10. Programme

10.1 An MS Project Gantt chart is attached as Appendix 1.

10.2 The current preferred date to reopen the station is 18 May 2003, the start of the summer 2003 timetable. At the June 2002 timetable conference SWT made a bid for the timetable and is consulting on this basis (see paragraph 8.4 above).

10.3 To achieve this opening date a number of critical stages have to be passed with very little float in the programme:

(i) The detailed design needs to be completed in sufficient detail to enable it to be submitted to Her Majesty's Rail Inspectorate (HMRI) before the tender is let. Whilst the County Council can build the station without this approval the station cannot open without it. The risk of not having these approvals is that there may be costly remedial works or additions to the contract. Having said that, the station is of a simple design on a line with very few train movements at this time, with no radical design elements. Therefore the risks in this case are small. Notwithstanding this, there will still be a requirement for a pre- opening inspection by the HMRI.

(ii) The works programme is currently anticipated to be six months. This will obviously be confirmed when the contractor is appointed. This will require the works to start on-site in the middle of November 2002 and for this the tender period will need to start by late August 2002.

(iii) The construction period will be running over the Christmas and Easter periods with the attendant loss of work during this time.

(iv) Due to the current low frequency of trains on this line and the significant White Periods (times clear of timetabled train services) the rail possessions will only need six months lead in. Due to the nature of the works two possessions will be required: one to remove the current platform face and one to swing the prefabricated bridge in place, if funding for the bridge is available. The possessions will need to be booked in following the approval of this report.

(v) As noted above, the RPP bid will be made in late July 2002 with the SRA notifying the County Council of the decision in October 2002. The contract will be awarded shortly afterwards. Delays in this process would affect the start of the works.

(vi) The Project Appraisal may need approval by the Executive Member for Policy and Resources on 12 September 2002 without knowing if the RPP bid has been approved to conform to the tender process, or the decision on the Project Appraisal could be delayed until the Executive Member for Policy and Resources decision day on 16 October 2002. The commissioning letter would then go out on 18 October 2002.

(vii) SWT makes the formal timetable bids on 18 October 2002, with Railtrack making a formal timetable offer on 22 November 2002. Whilst the Flexing Study has shown the service will fit into existing timetables, there is a small risk of another bid for the same timetable slot from Romsey or Totton or that the timetable will be altered by Railtrack.

(viii) The details of the scheme and the current estimates have yet to be discussed in detail at the SWHT Panel. Due to delays in the programme that waiting for the next Panel meeting would induce, it is proposed that the design and preparation continue, with the detailed proposals being taken to the Panel in October 2002 for information.

10.4 It is suggested that the proposed programme be accepted, as this will deliver the proposed scheme for the start of the summer 2003 timetable, providing maximum impact in terms of public relations.

11. Funding

11.1 The agreement with SWT is that the County Council will provide the new railway station at Chandlers Ford, whilst SWT will provide the train service and staff for the station, as well as professional services to deliver the reopened station with the County Council. The RPP bid will therefore give the additional funding required to run the service but it is not intended to fund the capital works of opening the station. The whole of the capital funding for the station will therefore need to be met by the County Council.

11.2 The County Council does not have any specific power relating to the provision of a railway station. However the Council does have the power, under Section 2 of the Local Government Act 2000, to do anything which it considers likely to achieve the promotion or improvement of the economic, social or environmental well-being of its area. Guidance confirms that it is for the local authority itself to decide whether any particular action would promote or improve well-being, taking account of its local circumstances and the wishes and needs of its communities. In the current case it is considered that the proposal would be a proper exercise of this power, having regard to a number of benefits that it will bring.

11.3 The original budget for the scheme has been developed from the £600,000 contribution from the Knightwood Development. The report from Owen Williams Railway estimated that the cost of the basic station without a building or footbridge was between £650,000 and £800,000, with the fully serviced station being between £1.3 million and £1.63 million. For this reason an additional £200,000 was added to the budget from the South West Hampshire Transport Strategy (SWHTS). These prices were based on the feasibility design.

11.4 The Steven Frankham's Associates work has developed the design to a more advanced stage and estimated the costs of the works to an error of +/-10%. The current estimates show the scheme costs of the station, Option 1, to be £1.65 million. If a lift or ramped bridge were included these costs would increase. A full summary of the costs is shown in Appendix 2. This will deliver the preferred high quality facility with a staffed station building and a footbridge between the reserved Bampton Court entrance and the station. This level of provision will maximise the patronage of the service.

11.5 Option 2 is to reduce the scheme to fit the available £800,000. This would give only the platform works required to safely operate the station, with no station building or footbridge. The car park would be the basic required with only an aggregate surface, surfacing to the footpath and disabled area, basic facilities for cyclists of a low cost shelter over cycle hoops, and no closed circuit television coverage. This would look very basic and probably be unattractive to the travelling public, and would therefore be unlikely to generate the anticipated passengers.

11.6 Option 3 is to focus on the essentials of the station without a station building and footbridge and reduce facilities for cyclists to a basic shelter over cycle hoops, whilst still providing cycle lockers. The cost of this option is estimated to be £1.3 million. Whilst this option would still generate passengers it could be argued that there would be less passengers using this station thereby reducing the year on year benefits to society of the scheme.

11.7 Option 2, of providing the station within the current budget of £800,000, is unlikely to significantly alter people's modes of travel due to the unattractiveness of the facility that would be provided. Option 3 without the footbridge and station building, whilst being £350,000 cheaper, could still provide an attractive facility. However, it would be more difficult in the future to provide the station building and footbridge whilst the train service is running. Also, this would inevitably cause disruption to the service. As there is further development work to be done on the station it is therefore proposed that a budget of £2 million is allocated to this project, and that the Executive Member for Environment approves an additional £1.2 million from the SWHTS 2002/03 capital programme for the work for Option 1.

12. Conclusions

12.1 The proposed reopening of Chandlers Ford railway station is an important element in the County Council's transport plans for the future, and as such forms part of the wider SHRT system. It is important for the station to have the maximum impact when opened. For this the station will need to be seen as the best possible value, attractive and secure to the travelling public, providing for their needs from the beginning. Option 1 provides for these needs and will provide a real asset to Chandlers Ford and a financial benefit to society generally.

7199/RDS

APPENDIX 2

Estimate Cost of Reopening Chandlers Ford Railway Station

Common costs to all options

Option 1 - full scheme

Option 2 - within £800,000 budget

Option 3 - basic station