Archived decisions

Contact: Michael Hedderly, ext 5492 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The South West Franchise Consultation Document was issued to stakeholders by the Department for Transport (DfT) on 7 November 2005 with a response deadline of 13 January 2006. The document will form the basis of the Invitation to Tender (ITT) which will be issued to short-listed bidders in March 2006. The new franchise is due to come into operation on 4 February 2007.

1.2 The Consultation Document specifies certain changes to the current service patterns and looks for bidders to provide solutions ranging from better use of, and improvements to, the configuration of rolling stock to multi-modal integration, managing connections better and increased revenue protection measures.

2. Proposals Affecting Hampshire

2.1 The DfT proposals contained in the Consultation Document cover additional station gating (specifically at Southampton Airport Parkway, Winchester, Aldershot, Andover and Fleet); access to stations and station car park expansion; and the development of the Lymington branch line as a Community Rail Line, subject to the setting up of a Community Rail Partnership.

2.2 So far as Hampshire is concerned however, perhaps the main impact of the proposals relates to altered train service patterns which would apply from December 2007. There are four timetable proposals which affect Hampshire passengers.

2.3 The DfT proposes withdrawal of the Wareham-Brockenhurst shuttle service serving small stations and absorbing these stops into extended Southampton and Poole services. Existing Waterloo-Southampton semi-fast trains would be extended to Bournemouth, and existing Waterloo- Poole services extended to Weymouth, doubling the frequency of through trains to the latter from principal Hampshire stations. The extended Poole service would take over stops at smaller stations from the current hourly through Waterloo-Weymouth train, which would be accelerated as a result. Subject to examining the detail of exactly how the smaller stations will be served, this change should be acceptable.

2.4 The DfT proposes to terminate at Exeter all through London-Paignton and Plymouth services on the route via Basingstoke-Andover-Salisbury. Currently several services are extended beyond Exeter to Paignton, Plymouth and (on Saturdays) even Penzance. The argument the DfT uses to justify its proposal is that these services duplicate other operators' services west of Exeter.

2.5 Without information on the extent to which these services are used by through passengers who would be inconvenienced by having to change trains, it is difficult to evaluate the proposal. It would be desirable to seek the retention of some through services on Fridays and at weekends to destinations beyond Exeter if viable usage of the through facility could be demonstrated.

2.6 The DfT proposes removal of direct services between Reading and Brighton via Winchester on the grounds that most trips are undertaken between intermediate urban areas rather than end-to-end through journeys. The current service of through trains is only once every three hours, an hourly frequency to Brighton being maintained by services originating at Basingstoke. The through Reading service has to be operated by a diesel unit as the line is not electrified north of Basingstoke. These trains are of lower seating capacity than the electric units on the Basingstoke-Brighton service and overcrowding is frequently experienced on sections of the route.

2.7 The County Council's view is that, given the importance of Reading as a transport hub and of its interconnection with others, the proposal needs further examination in the light of available statistical data before it is included in the ITT. This view is shared by SEERA officers.

2.8 The fourth of the DfT timetable proposals is undoubtedly the most contentious for Hampshire residents. The DfT proposes that instead of the current hourly service of through trains between Romsey and Totton, serving Chandler's Ford and all stations to Southampton Central via Eastleigh, a shuttle service between Romsey and Eastleigh only should operate in the new franchise. Thus passengers from Chandler's Ford would in all cases have to change trains at Eastleigh. Stops made at intermediate stations south of Eastleigh would be picked up by Waterloo- Poole services making additional stops.

2.9 The reasoning behind this proposal is that studies by Network Rail, the infrastructure operator, identify the Southampton area as one of the principal pinch-points where congestion on the network adversely affects performance. The DfT has therefore sought to `thin out' the number of train movements in the Southampton area and the Romsey-Totton service is a casualty of this approach. Furthermore (though not stated in the Consultation Document) the DfT proposal would result in a saving of one 2-car train unit out of the two currently needed to operate the service.

2.10 The County Council should vigorously resist this unacceptable proposal on the grounds that substituting a shuttle service between Romsey and Eastleigh will destroy the business which has been built up since Chandler's Ford opened, and which now accounts for some 3,000 passenger journeys per week, of which 92% are for stations between Southampton Airport Parkway and Totton. 79% of Chandler's Ford's customers are travelling to Southampton Central itself. Hampshire County Council was responsible for the re-opening of Chandler's Ford Railway Station in 2003 and it has exceeded the forecasts of passenger usage on which the case for funding was based.

2.11 On a journey of eight miles, when they already enjoy a through service, how many people are going to accept changing trains at Eastleigh in order to get to Southampton for work or for shopping or leisure? The result of implementing the DfT proposal would be a mass desertion from the train back to the car or to the frequent bus services on the route. It should be borne in mind that 41% of Chandler's Ford's passengers used the car for their journeys prior to the opening of the station in 2003.

2.12 It is understood that Eastleigh Borough Council and the Hampshire Economic Partnership are also both planning to formally object to this proposal. Southampton City Council is expected to take a similar stance.

2.13 A draft response to the full range of proposals contained in the Consultation Document will be circulated to Members within the next two weeks. The possible impact of the Chandler's Ford proposal was felt to be sufficiently serious as to merit special consideration in advance.

3. Impact Assessments

3.1 If implemented, the DfT's Chandler's Ford proposal would have a devastating impact on passenger business at the station itself, would lead to increased congestion on the road network locally and would produce an extremely negative impact on the image of public transport generally in South Hampshire. It is vital therefore that the proposal be vigorously resisted.

Recommendation

That the County Council expresses its opposition to the changes proposed in the Department for Transport's South West Franchise Consultation Document to the train service pattern affecting Chandler's Ford and seeks continuation of the present service of through trains to the Southampton conurbation.

740Rpt/MH