Calderdale Council and City of Bradford Metropolitan ... · \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\LEEDS\JOBS\121000\121525-00\121525-49 CALDER VALLEY RAIL LINE STUDY\0 ARUP\0-11 TRANSPORTATION\0-11-8 REPORTS\C

$Page 1: Calderdale Council and City of Bradford Metropolitan ... · \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\LEEDS\JOBS\121000\121525-00\121525-49 CALDER VALLEY RAIL LINE STUDY\0 ARUP\0-11 TRANSPORTATION\0-11-8 REPORTS\C$
Ove Arup & Partners Ltd

Admiral House

Rose Wharf

78 East Street

Leeds

LS9 8EE

United Kingdom

www.arup.com

Calderdale Council and City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council

Calder Valley Line - Making the Most of the Asset

Final Report

121525-49

Issue | May 2011

This report takes into account the particular

instructions and requirements of our client.

It is not intended for and should not be relied

upon by any third party and no responsibility is

undertaken to any third party.

Job number 121525-49

Calderdale Council and City of Bradford Metropolitan District

Making the


Calderdale Council and City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council Calder Valley Line - Making the Most of the AssetDraft Report

121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011

\\GLOBAL\EUROPE\LEEDS\JOBS\121000\121525-00\121525-49 CALDER VALLEY RAIL LINE STUDY\0 ARUP\0-11 TRANSPORTATION\0-11-8 REPORTS\CV FULL FINAL ISSUED REPORT REDACTED.DOCX

Contents

Page

1 Introduction 1

1.1 Background 1 1.2 Strategic Role of the Calder Valley Line 2 1.3 Calder Valley Line Baseline Report 2 1.4 Purpose of this Study 3

2 Developing the Strategic Vision 5

2.1 Introduction 5 2.2 Existing Situation 6 2.3 Network Constraints 8 2.4 Emerging Rail Policy Framework 12 2.5 Main Themes Emerging from the Stakeholder Workshop 16 2.6 Timetable Study 19 2.7 Chapter Conclusions 22

3 Outputs from the Timetabling Study 23

3.1 Main Themes 23 3.2 Methodology 23 3.3 Interim Timetable Option 24 3.4 Proposed Long Term Timetable Specification 26 3.5 Variant Timetable Options 28 3.6 Potential Impact of Timetable Specification 31 3.7 Chapter Conclusions 33

4 Infrastructure Requirements 34

4.1 Introduction 34 4.2 Platform Capacity at Leeds 34 4.3 Signalling Headways 34 4.4 New Stations 35 4.5 Todmorden West Curve 35 4.6 Bradford to Manchester Journey Time Improvements 36 4.7 Bay Platforms 37 4.8 Freight Loops 38 4.9 Capital Costs 38 4.10 Chapter Conclusions 40

5 Rolling Stock Strategy 41

5.1 Introduction 41 5.2 Existing Situation 41


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


5.3 Interim Timetable - Rolling Stock Required 41 5.4 Preferred Timetable - Rolling Stock Required 42 5.5 Opportunities for Procurement of Additional Rolling Stock 43 5.6 Enhancing the Quality of Existing Rolling Stock 44 5.7 Longer Term Options to Enhance Rolling Stock 45 5.8 Chapter Conclusions 46

6 Station Facilities and Accessibility 47

6.1 Introduction 47 6.2 Context 47 6.3 Waiting Facilities at Stations 48 6.4 Opportunities to Expand Car Parking 49 6.5 Improved Bus / Rail Integration 52 6.6 Chapter Conclusions 56

7 Demand and Revenue Modelling 57

7.1 Background 57 7.2 Modelling the Impact of Timetable Revisions 58 7.3 Results of the Timetable Changes using MOIRA 59 7.4 New Journey Opportunities From Burnley 60 7.5 New Stations 60 7.6 Summary of the Demand and Revenue Forecasts 62 7.7 Ticketless Travel 62 7.8 Impact of the Interim Timetable Options 62

8 Scheme Appraisal 63

8.1 Introduction 63 8.2 Revenue Benefits 63 8.3 Highway Decongestion, Accident and Environmental Benefits64 8.4 Journey Time Benefits 65 8.5 Rolling Stock Refurbishment 65 8.6 Wider Economic Impacts 65 8.7 Rail Service Operating Costs 66 8.8 Station Operating Costs 67 8.9 Capital Costs 67 8.10 Financial and Economic Appraisal for Preferred Timetable

Specification 67 8.11 Sensitivity Tests 68

9 Conclusions and Recommendations 70

9.1 Introduction 70 9.2 Short Term 70 9.3 Medium to Long Term 71 9.4 Business Case 73


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


9.5 Stakeholder Engagement 73 9.6 Managing Risks and Dependencies 74 9.7 Requirements for Further Work 75


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011

\\GLOBAL\EUROPE\LEEDS\JOBS\121000\121525-00\121525-49 CALDER VALLEY RAIL LINE STUDY\0 ARUP\0-11 TRANSPORTATION\0-11-8 REPORTS\CV FULL FINAL ISSUED REPORT REDACTED.DOCX Page 1

1 Introduction

1.1 Background Arup has been jointly appointed by Calderdale and Bradford Councils in conjunction with West Yorkshire PTE (Metro) to understand how improvements to the Calder Valley Line can support their strategic vision for economic growth. Both Councils, along with the other Districts, Metro and Greater Manchester PTE that are served by the Line, have ambitious plans to deliver sustainable (low carbon) housing and employment growth. Improving rail connectivity between Leeds, Bradford, Halifax, Rochdale and Manchester forms an important component to help deliver their economic strategies. The proposed study corridor is shown in Figure 1.1.

Figure 1.1: Calder Valley Line Study Area

Source: Arup proposals

A Project Steering Group has been established to manage this study and co-ordinate consultation with wider stakeholders. The Project Board includes representation from the following organisations:

Bradford Council;

Calderdale Council;

Burnley Council;


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Kirklees Council;

Lancashire County Council;

Rochdale Council;

Transport for Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire Passenger Transport (specifiers of the Northern Rail franchise as co signatories in their role as ITAs);

Network Rail;

Northern Rail;

TransPennine Express;

Open access operators (Grand Central Railways, plus the proposed Alliance Rail).

1.2 Strategic Role of the Calder Valley Line The Leeds City Region Connectivity Study1 highlighted a number of constraints affecting the route, compared with other rail corridors. A Baseline Report was then completed in 20102 to highlight the constraints affecting the Calder Valley Line. The Calder Valley Line connects three of the largest cities in the UK, serving a catchment of around two million people, with the population projected to grow by more than 20% between 2010 and 2031 in some authorities. The Calder Valley Line connects the Leeds and Manchester City Regions that employ 2.7 million people, making the city regions fundamental to the economic success of the north of England. The cities of Leeds and Manchester alone generate approximately 420,000 and 310,000 jobs respectively.

The lack of spare capacity on the parallel road network to accommodate the future housing and employment aspirations mean it is even more important to address the weaknesses affecting the Line. Improvements to the existing rail services would help to connect people to jobs and local amenities more effectively as part of a wider transport strategy for the corridor. Addressing the current constraints could reduce journey times, enhance service quality and simplify the timetable, helping to bring places closer together via a sustainable, low carbon transport mode.

1.3 Calder Valley Line Baseline Report The Baseline report highlighted some of the current constraints:

slow speeds towards Leeds compared with other corridors highlighting a major gap in strategic connectivity between the main centres;

function of the route is poorly defined, given the lack of a multi-tier timetable, for example, a mixture of limited stop and stopping trains;

1 Leeds City Region Connectivity Study (June 2010). Prepared by Arup for the Leeds City Region Partnership (http://www.leedscityregion.gov.uk/research-and-publications/transport/) 2 Calderdale Line Making the Most of the Asset Baseline Analysis Report (October 2010). Prepared by Arup for Calderdale Council


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


evidence of suppressed demand from several stations relative to the size of the catchment;

self-contained nature of the timetable restricts the scope for journey opportunities beyond Leeds or Manchester;

connectivity gaps exist, for example towns in the Upper Calder Valley to Huddersfield were identified, given the lack of alternative bus services;

overcrowding problems affecting peak services to both Leeds and Manchester, although it is noted these may be under-stated;

poor quality rolling stock compared with other transpennine rail corridors;

timetable results in irregular gaps between services at certain stations;

poor integration between local bus services and railway stations and insufficient car parking spaces;

ad-hoc approach to developing the timetable does not provide an effective framework to incorporate aspirations or accommodate the planned housing and employment growth.

Patronage growth during the last 10 years from most stations on the Calder Valley Line in West Yorkshire is lower compared with other rail corridors. Whilst the Yorkshire and Humber Route Utilisation Strategy and more recently the Northern RUS have partially addressed some of the limitations affecting the route, further work is needed to identify and deliver a package of improvements to transform the Calder Valley Line to help meet the economic aspirations. A response to Network Rail has been prepared by stakeholders regarding the current proposals set out in the Northern RUS.

1.4 Purpose of this Study One of the main objectives of this study is to develop a Strategic Vision for the Calder Valley Line. Improving the rail linkages to the Leeds and Manchester City Regions will help to generate significant economic benefits, as demonstrated by research conducted by the Northern Way3 as well as contributing towards low carbon reduction plans. There are several important milestones that could offer a framework to develop the Line, including

proposed changes to the franchising regime that will affect Northern Rail along with the new franchise from September 2013;

the McNulty Value for Money Rail Review;

the development of the Northern Hub;

the ‘open access’ service proposals for the Line;

electrification proposals that could facilitate rolling stock cascades.

3 "Strengthening Economic Linkages between Leeds and Manchester: Feasibility and Implications" (November 2009). Prepared by Spatial Economics Research Centre for Northern Way (http://www.thenorthernway.co.uk/page.asp?id=797)


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


A phased timetable of improvements is required that takes account of the above changes and opportunities. Emerging proposals to develop the Calder Valley Line must be linked to a coherent wider set of objectives to demonstrate how they complement and support the delivery of wider policies. The work to develop a Strategic Vision for the Line comprises several components:

development of an initial timetable specification to assess the potential scope to amend the current service patterns;

complete an initial assessment of the incremental change in demand and revenue that could be generated by the above proposals;

examine the implications arising from current station accessibility and any requirements to procure additional rolling stock;

prepare a framework to engage with wider stakeholders and promote the benefits from the potential enhancements.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


2 Developing the Strategic Vision

2.1 Introduction In order to develop the timetable proposition and identify possible revisions to support overarching objectives, it has been important to consider the data presented in the Baseline Analysis Report as well as information and plans from several other sources. The following sections specify the study objectives and main points emerging from the information considered. Figure 2.1 illustrates how information has been combined to formulate the timetable structure.

Figure 2.1: Study Context

Key:

YHRUS: Yorkshire and Humber Route Utilisation Strategy;

NR: Network Rail;

NWRUS: North West Route Utilisation Strategy;

L&C RUS: Lancashire and Cumbria Route Utilisation Strategy;

VFM: Value for Money study currently being conducted by Sir Roy McNulty to try and reduce the cost base affecting the railway.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


2.2 Existing Situation

2.2.1 Current timetable

Figure 2.2 illustrates the off-peak service pattern that currently operates on the Calder Valley Line. The route is relatively self-contained, with just two stopping trains per hour beyond Leeds and an hourly stopping train west of Manchester Victoria to Wigan Wallgate. There is interaction with services using the Huddersfield Line, plus the route to Burnley Manchester Road and Lancashire.

The current structure of the timetable is relatively confused. In contrast to other Trans-Pennine rail corridors, there are a no ‘limited stop’ trains between the major stations. As a result, the overall journey times are relatively slow. Furthermore, the gap between service departures from some stations is irregular. This can be inconvenient and confusing for passengers and severely restricts the opportunities to integrate trains with local buses.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Figure 2.2: Calder Valley Line - Existing Stopping Patterns (Off Peak Period Eastbound Direction)

Source: National Rail Timetable, each line represents 1 train per hour (tph)


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


2.2.2 Characteristics of the Existing Passenger Journeys

The existing passenger usage was analysed during the Baseline report. The main conclusions have been summarised, since the patterns have been used to help shape the development of the proposed timetable specification:

self-contained journey patterns, with few trips beyond Leeds or Manchester;

stations between Hebden Bridge and New Pudsey generate a higher percentage of trips towards Leeds compared with other destinations;

stations between Moston and Walsden have a higher percentage of trips towards Manchester compared with other stations;

Todmorden is a “watershed” station with a broadly similar percentage of passengers travelling towards Leeds or Manchester;

there are relatively few trips to Wakefield and Huddersfield from stations on the Calder Valley Line;

journey patterns from Calder Valley Line stations in Central Lancashire are generally self-contained, with only Burnley and Accrington generating significant flows towards Leeds. Demand towards Manchester is very low from these stations, reflecting the lack of direct journey opportunities;

peak period trains to / from Manchester and Leeds suffer from overcrowding.

2.2.3 Recent Improvements

Several improvements for the Calder Valley Line have recently been delivered:

Some of the six extra trains funded by Yorkshire Forward and Metro (the Yorkshire 6 Project) operate on the Calder Valley Line. The conversion of the ‘Oldham Loop’ to Metrolink means five units have been diverted to strengthen other Calder Valley services in Greater Manchester;

train service frequency improvements were delivered including 3tph between Manchester and Leeds following the December 2008 timetable change. This has been achieved by linking trains between Hebden Bridge and Leeds with Rochdale to Manchester Victoria services;

Network Rail infrastructure schemes:

Mill Lane Junction and Halifax renewals;

Signalling improvements at Elland and Greetland;

Platform lengthening at Mills Hill, Smithy Bridge and Littleborough.

2.3 Network Constraints The current Calder Valley Line suffers from a number of significant constraints, including line speeds, headways, signalling capability and network capacity constraints as illustrated in Figure 2.3. Service performance is also poor compared with the average for the rest of the Northern Rail franchise.

Calderdale Council and City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council Calder Valley Line - Making the Most of the Asset Draft Report

121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Figure 2.3: Calder Valley Infrastructure Characteristics


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


2.3.1 Platform and Line capacity at / approaching Leeds and Manchester Victoria

The lack of platform and line capacity, particularly at Leeds and to a lesser extent at Manchester Victoria, restricts the opportunities to enhance the timetable, especially in the short term. At Leeds, the capacity provided by 2001 capacity enhancements has been absorbed following the rapid patronage growth and subsequent timetable changes. Ways to provide further capacity at Leeds station will need to be considered particularly as there are aspirations for improvements in service frequencies on other Lines. Solutions will need to be developed to support these aspirations.

The Calder Valley Line trains terminate at Manchester Victoria in the bay platforms. Trains cross the whole layout, thereby reducing line capacity. The station capacity would increase if trains operated as through services, but there are other network constraints west of Manchester prevent this. In addition, the Oldham Loop between Manchester Victoria and Rochdale has also been closed since 2009 and is currently being converted into a light rail route as part of Phase 3 of Metrolink.

2.3.2 Track Layout at Bradford and Rochdale

The track layouts at Bradford Interchange and Rochdale also limit potential timetable options. At Bradford Interchange, trains need to reverse and there are conflicting movements as all trains must cross the track layout. The layout at Rochdale is a further constraint, since the lack of a centre bay platform means trains are required to run to continue via Rochdale East Junction before terminating, thus conflicting with westbound trains.

2.3.3 Platform Lengths and Train Capacities

Rolling stock capacities on certain sections of the Line are insufficient to meet current demand, with peak hour services to/ from Leeds and Manchester very overcrowded. The crowding problems affecting Leeds may be under-stated, since the counting equipment used to compile the load factor analysis presented in the Baseline report resets when trains reverse at Bradford Interchange (thus excluding any through passengers). Despite this limitation, some trains towards Leeds still have standing passengers, with overcrowding between New Pudsey and Leeds. Furthermore, high peak trains between Leeds and Mirfield via the Calder Valley are affected by crowding. Crowding problems affecting trains towards Manchester Victoria generally occur on departure from Rochdale. Opportunities to address this overcrowding are constrained by platform lengths at selected stations and the limited availability of rolling stock. Internal configuration and the time taken to load/unload trains also leads to delays.

2.3.4 Line Speeds

The maximum line speed between stations is 70mph, although there are a number of locations where speeds are significantly lower. Low junction turnout speeds are a contributory factor. Mill Lane Junction near Bradford, the approach to Halifax station, Milner Royd Junction and Rochdale station are affected by line speeds


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


less than 40mph, resulting in slower journey times. Current tolling stock has a maximum speed of 90mph, but there is nowhere on the route where this speed is achieved.

2.3.5 Signalling Headways

Part of the route are operated by Track Circuit Block signalling, including Leeds to Milner Royd Junction, Hebden Bridge to Smithy Bridge and Vitriol Works Signal Box west of Mills Hill to Manchester Victoria. The remainder of the route is controlled by Absolute Block signalling. The headways (gap between trains) vary from 2.5-3 minutes on the approaches to Victoria and Leeds stations to 6 minutes between Hebden Bridge and Milner Royd Junction, and up to 6.5 minutes between Mill Lane Junction and Halifax. The lengthy signalling headways affecting parts of the Line restricts capacity and constraints the opportunities to develop the timetable.

2.3.6 Infrastructure Characteristics

It is useful to highlight the stopping trains between Manchester Piccadilly and Leeds operate as two separate services running from Huddersfield. Stopping trains from Leeds terminate at Huddersfield in bay platforms, whilst there is a loop at Huddersfield for Manchester services. This type of track layout offers flexibility by ensuring local stopping services do not conflict with the faster trains. In contrast with the Huddersfield Line between Leeds and Manchester, the Calder Valley Line now has no intermediate stations suitable for terminating trains (previously trains used to terminate at both Halifax and Hebden Bridge), so the stopping pattern is developed to reflect these constraints. Furthermore, there are a number of single line sections including:

Bradley Junction to Bradley Wood Junction;

Colne and Blackpool South Branches;

Bolton to Blackburn;

Single track at Daisyfield Junction near Blackburn.

The above issues represent a significant constraint, given the current mix of trains. This also restricts the opportunities to introduce a multi-tier timetable that help to meet other objectives more effectively.

2.3.7 Interaction with Other Services

Potential timetable changes for the Calder Valley Line need to be cognisant of the interface with other routes, including trains operating via the Huddersfield Line and services towards Blackpool North via Burnley Manchester Road. In particular, the requirement to avoid timetable conflicts between Bradley Junction and Huddersfield will affect the timings of Calder Valley trains. Furthermore, two services per hour are extended east of Leeds to York and Selby calling at all intermediate stations. The local services east of Leeds will need to interface with other long distance trains towards York and Hull. As a result, the choice of trains extended east of Leeds from Bradford and Halifax to provide essential network connectivity may need to be revised, since direct links to York are crucial.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


2.4 Emerging Rail Policy Framework The emerging rail policy framework forms another consideration when developing the strategy for the Calder Valley Line. Some of the most important issues are summarised below in sequential order:

2.4.1 Route Utilisation Strategies (RUS)

A suite of Route Utilisation Strategies affecting the Calder Valley Line have been produced by Network Rail. These documents set out short to medium term strategies to address current problems with packages of proposed interventions to address gaps. These interventions are summarised in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1: Summary of RUS Interventions

Document Context Interventions

North West RUS

Covers the Manchester journey-to-work area, the City lines into Liverpool Lime Street and routes from Manchester to Kirkby, Southport and Blackpool

Extending Calder Valley trains to Salford Central / Crescent to improve network connectivity

Higher line speeds between Manchester, Rochdale and Hebden Bridge to reduce journey times

Provision of a turnback at Rochdale

Train lengthening

Lancs/Cumbria RUS

Covers the railway north of the Line between Preston and Burnley as far as Carlisle, with the exception of the West Coast Main Line (WCML), and lines east of Skipton

Link Leeds - Hebden Bridge & Rochdale - Victoria trains to enhance through journey opportunities

Yorkshire and Humber RUS

Covers all routes in the Yorkshire and Humber region with the exception of the East Coast Main Line (ECML) and the Middlesbrough to Whitby branch line

Higher line speeds

Re-signalling and revised track layout at Bradford

A shuttle service between Halifax and Leeds, to alleviate overcrowding problems

Northern RUS Sets out the priorities for rail investment in the north of England for the next 20 years

Train lengthening for Rochdale commuter services

Line speed increases - 70mph through Castleton and 90mph Rochdale - Smithy Bridge

Alleviate peak crowding with two shuttles per hour between Halifax and Leeds (4 car trains)

Alleviate peak crowding between Rochdale and Manchester with two shuttles per hour (4 car trains)

Source: Network Rail


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Whilst there are a number of incremental improvements identified, there are no transformational changes that will address the limitations identified by the Baseline Report.

2.4.2 Local Transport Plan 3 The Greater Manchester 2011 Local Transport Plan Draft Long Term Strategy highlights the importance of increasing the number of rail passengers using services both within Greater Manchester and to Greater Manchester from neighbouring areas in order to support economic growth. The aim of the local authorities is to produce an agreed Rail Strategy for Greater Manchester that will set out the vision for bringing the network up to 21st century standards. The priorities of particular relevance to the Calder Valley Line include:

additional rolling stock to alleviate overcrowding;

improvements in network capacity – particularly related to the Northern Hub proposals;

upgrading Manchester Victoria station.

The West Yorkshire Local Transport Plan Draft Strategy for 2011-26 specifically proposes improving strategic connectivity through rail improvements. The document strongly supports the Northern Hub proposals and the opportunities this will provide for the Calder Valley Line. Furthermore, the document advocates investment in a small number of stations to improve park and ride facilities and enhance passenger and cycle storage facilities.

Both Manchester’s and West Yorkshire’s LTP3s include targets concerning rail patronage, low carbon trips and public transport satisfaction. Improving the offer on the Calder Valley Line will contribute to achieving these targets.

2.4.3 McNulty Value for Money Review

The Coalition Government has commissioned a study to assess how the costs of running the railway can be reduced, while continuing to invest in capacity enhancements and improving passenger satisfaction. Sir Roy McNulty is leading this review and interim findings were published in December 2010. The conclusions suggest a much stronger focus on cost reduction is required at all levels, with potential savings of £2.5-3.5bn per annum achievable by the end of Control Period 5 2019 (savings quoted at 2008/09 prices). These estimates are additional to the cost reductions already identified by the Office of Rail Regulation for Network Rail.

The potential cost savings that will need to be achieved highlights the importance of ensuring future proposals for the Calder Valley Line offer good value for money and are carefully aligned with wider policy objectives. With regional franchises including Northern Rail accounting for over 60% of the financial support from the Government, this reinforces the importance of these outcomes.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


2.4.4 Northern Rail Franchise

The current Northern Rail franchise has recently been extended by two years and is now due to expire in September 2013. However, it is expected the specification of the new franchise will differ substantially from the current format as a result of changes proposed by the Coalition Government. In December 2010, the Government confirmed the duration of future franchises will be extended. Furthermore, specifications will offer more scope for innovation. Following a consultation exercise the Government has made the following commitments:

in general, franchises are expected to last at least 15 years, with the duration of each determined individually dependent on the levels of investment required;

train service specifications will be simplified, giving bidders greater flexibility to develop the service specification, subject to certain core requirements;

the Government will evaluate the inclusion of contractually binding service quality benchmarks and targets;

a revised mechanism to reward operators for investment if the payback period is longer than their franchise term.

Revisions to the franchise regime proposed by the Government create an excellent framework to transform the Calder Valley Line and these opportunities need to be exploited when developing ideas to enhance the route.

2.4.5 Northern Hub

The Northern Hub is a £530m scheme developed by Network Rail in partnership with stakeholders to transform rail travel in the north of England and includes:

building a brand new section of railway at Ordsall, Salford (Ordsall Curve) that will connect Manchester Victoria with Piccadilly, enabling trains to stop at all three central Manchester stations (Victoria, Oxford Road and Piccadilly) and creating new journey opportunities. Funding for the first phase of this scheme (£85m) was confirmed in the March 2011 Budget, with development work commencing this year. Completion of the Ordsall Curve will enable TransPennine Express services from York and beyond to Manchester Airport will be re-routed via Stalybridge and Manchester Victoria, before using the new connection to reach Piccadilly and hence Manchester Airport;

major improvements to Manchester Victoria so it become a major interchange station;

new platforms at Manchester Piccadilly, Manchester Airport and Rochdale;

possible electrification from Manchester Victoria to Rochdale and Stalybridge, plus other improvements not directly relevant to the Calder Valley Line.

Prior to the completion of the Northern Hub there is likely to be scope for some incremental improvements for the Calder Valley Line. These improvements will need to be carefully planned to ensure interventions are future proofed and consistent with wider policy aspirations. Some of the changes which could be delivered following the completion of the Northern Hub are outlined below in Figure 2.4.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Figure 2.4: Northern Hub Enhancement Opportunities Proposed for the Calder Valley Line

However, our initial discussions with Network Rail regarding the Northern Hub have indicated there is some scope to influence the future timetable development of the Calder Valley Line. These ideas need to be developed in accordance with overarching themes set out in the remainder of Chapter 2.

2.4.6 Other Aspirations

Alliance Rail Holdings has developed two ‘open access’ proposals for new services that would operate the Calder Valley Line:

a 2 hourly service between Bradford Interchange and London Euston stopping at Halifax, Hebden Bridge, Rochdale, Manchester Victoria, plus selected stations on the West Coast Main Line to London. Services would be operated by high specification trains capable of speeds of 125mph (required for the WCML);

a 2 hourly service between Hull and Liverpool calling at selected stations between Hull and Leeds, then Bradford Interchange, Halifax, Hebden Bridge, Rochdale, Manchester Victoria, plus stations to Liverpool Lime Street. The timescales for the ORR to evaluate this proposal are uncertain.

If Alliance Rail Holdings do secure approval for both service proposals, this could deliver an hourly semi-fast service between Bradford Interchange and Manchester Victoria.

The Office of Rail Regulation has evaluated track access applications for the Euston service in competition with other proposals. In March 2011, the ORR announced they were minded to reject Alliance Rail’s initial proposals for the Bradford service. The decision letter stated the first submission did not include sufficient detail, whilst the re-submitted proposals required further discussion with industry stakeholders. The ORR is understood to be discussing Alliance Rail’s proposals, particularly from the perspective of three issues:


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Revenue: abstraction from the franchise operator (Northern Rail or its successor);

Performance: implications if trains incur delays on the WCML and these problems are imported onto the Calder Valley Line;

Rolling stock: private sector investment to procure new units will be required, although the efficiency of overall rolling stock deployment needs further work.

2.5 Main Themes Emerging from the Stakeholder Workshop

2.5.1 Background

A workshop with the project steering group was held on 1 February 2011 to consider the following topics:

review of the Baseline data;

study objectives and their relative priority;

main themes to be incorporated into the Strategic Vision;

development of an initial timetable specification to enable the Line to serve the existing and potential travel markets more effectively.

2.5.2 Study Objectives

Previous Strategic Priorities

Objectives to define strategic transport planning work in the Leeds and Manchester City Regions covering a 20 to 25 year period have been used as a starting point for this study. The five priorities identified in the North West include:

improved accessibility between regeneration areas and areas of opportunity;

a shift to more sustainable modes of transport within and between city regions;

reduce congestion and improved journey time reliability;

improved surface access to international gateways;

reducing carbon emissions in the city region

In addition to the above priorities, the Leeds City Region Strategy was based on the following interventions:

support economic competitiveness and growth;

improve access and connectivity to labour markets in key business centres;

deliver improvements to transport that will support housing growth;

reduce the economic gap between our region and other parts of the country;

reduce the risk of injury or death in a transport related accident.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Objectives for the Calder Valley Rail Line Study

Table 2.2 presents the overarching study objectives and sub-objectives along with main themes. The suitability of these objectives and their relative priorities for the Calder Valley Line was identified at the stakeholder workshop. The importance of the economy was highlighted as the primary objective, whilst improving journey time reliability and resiliency, enhancing access to locations that could deliver housing growth should also be supported. Other objectives identified by the DaSTS studies remained important, albeit as a lower priority. The workshop discussion also highlighted rail needs to fulfil functions that suit its characteristics.

Table 2.2: Study Objectives

Overarching Objectives

Sub-objectives Current Issues Intervention Themes

Support economic growth

Improve journey time reliability/resiliency

Poor quality rolling stock compared with other transpennine rail corridors

Improve train service reliability

Improve access to labour markets

Slow speeds towards Leeds compared with other corridors

Self-contained nature of timetable restricts the scope for journey opportunities beyond Leeds or Manchester

Lack of a multi-tier timetable

Support key employment sectors by providing fast, high quality services for business travel

Improve connectivity between strategic longer distance flows from the busiest stations to Leeds, Manchester and other major destinations in the North

Support commuter flows to Leeds and Manchester

Support housing growth

Connectivity gaps exist for example in the Upper Valley to Huddersfield.

Insufficient car parking spaces at railway stations

Support housing growth in locations adjacent to the railway by construction of new stations

Safety and quality of the environment

Encourage more physically active travel

Poor integration between local bus services and railway stations

Improve access using sustainable modes to stations

Improve safety – perceived / accident risks

Irregular gaps between services at certain stations

Improve safety at stations

Achieve a higher rail mode share to reduce accident rates

Improve the journey experience for passengers

Poor quality rolling stock compared with other transpennine rail corridors

Overcrowding problems affecting peak services to both Leeds and Manchester.

Improve service performance and quality


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Table 2.2 (cont): Study Objectives

Overarching Objectives

Sub-objectives Current Issues Intervention Themes

Equality of opportunity

Cutting gap in economic growth rates between different areas

Connectivity gaps exist for example in the Upper Valley to Huddersfield.

Facilitate economic growth / regeneration from new rail markets, connecting areas of socio-economic need with major employment locations will help to address these constraints by the introduction of new journey opportunities

Social inclusion

Lack of a multi-tier timetable

Irregular gaps between services at certain stations

Improve links from the Upper Calder Valley to employment and education locations, for example, Huddersfield

Reduce carbon emissions

Cut the level of CO2 transport emissions and their impact on the environment

Poor integration between local bus services and railway stations

Evidence of suppressed demand from several stations relative to size of the catchment

Achieve a higher rail mode share

Source: Arup proposal, adapted from the DfT guidance

2.5.3 Funding and Timescales The Strategic Vision for the Calder Valley Line should incorporate a phased, flexible delivery plan. The timescales for implementing various components of the Vision will inevitably vary depending on the complexity and cost, so a phased delivery plan is needed to provide the necessary flexibility.

The Coalition Government announced funding for several rail schemes in October 2010 (including £85m for the Ordsall Curve in March 2011). However, the availability of monies for other proposals during the next few years will be severely limited as a result of the wider spending cuts. The development of modest, incremental improvements that unlock capacity bottlenecks, optimise the existing assets and complement other strategic projects is essential.

Potential enhancements need to interface with other renewals for signalling and track to ensure investment is delivered efficiently. The following timescales have been defined:

Short Term: measures delivered before the end of the Northern Rail franchise (September 2013);

Medium Term: proposals to be delivered by 2019. This timescale coincides with the completion of the second phase of electrification schemes in the North West, Scotland and on the Great Western Main Line as well as the end of Network Rail’s Control Period 5;

Long Term: proposals to be delivered after 2017.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


2.5.4 Main Themes Table 2.3 summarises the potential interventions discussed above and their likely implementation timescales.

Table 2.3: Intervention Themes

Timescale Interventions

Short Term

More convenient bus links to railway stations

Expansion of car/cycle parking availability at selected stations (subject to third party funding)

Package of enhancements at stations - waiting areas, CCTV, cycling parking etc (subject to third party funding)

Opportunities for incremental timetable improvements

Possible new railway station at Low Moor

Medium Term

Revised timetable/stopping patterns to address slow journey times and low frequencies

Train lengthening

Refurbish rolling stock interiors to enhance the on-board experience

Measures to alleviate commuter overcrowding towards Leeds and Manchester to alleviate overcrowding

Revise the internal seating layout to increase capacity

Selected new rail stations

New rail services from Burnley / East Lancashire via Todmorden to Manchester

Incremental infrastructure schemes to address capacity bottlenecks

Long Term

Improved connectivity to destinations beyond Manchester Victoria

Infrastructure schemes, eg, line speed increases / junction changes

Other infrastructure schemes to tackle capacity bottlenecks

Better links to Huddersfield from the Upper Calder Valley

2.6 Timetable Study

2.6.1 Overarching Principles

The Baseline report, reiterated in the summary of issues presented in Section 1.3, highlighted the current limitations of the timetable, with the lack of clockface departures from selected stations, plus a lack of differentiation between the faster and stopping trains identified as the main constraints. The specification of a ‘multi-tier’ timetable could help to address some of these constraints, by enabling average speeds to be increased and a regular interval service pattern introduced. The opportunities to deliver new stations using the existing timetable framework are also constrained.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


The existing network constraints that have been identified mean that some compromises may still be required. For example, most stations on the Calder Valley Line benefit from direct trains to Leeds and / or Manchester, but this service pattern takes little account of the low numbers travelling between these station pairs. Potential trade-offs were discussed at the stakeholder workshop, for example, the introduction of faster trains between the principal stations, versus the impact if the service pattern from smaller stations needed to be revised.

2.6.2 Main Themes

The workshop discussion highlighted the following themes that should be used to inform the timetable development. Table 2.4 summarises these themes to meet some of the study objectives presented in Table 2.2. In addition to the spatially specific themes, a number of generic interventions will be incorporated, including:

to improve train service reliability;

better opportunities to access railway stations using sustainable modes and encouraging more sustainable movement patterns generally;

better safety for passengers;

higher rail mode share for trips served by the Calder Valley Line.

Table 2.4: Summary of the Main Themes

Theme Potential Solution (s)

1 Supporting commuter flows to Leeds and Manchester

Extra peak trains

Train lengthening

Low Moor new station

Revising the internal layout to increase seating densities

Laisterdyke new station

2 Improve connectivity between strategic stations and Leeds / Manchester / other major destinations to enhance labour mobility

Revised stopping patterns

Line speed increases

Junction improvements

Signalling upgrades

Selected infrastructure schemes to segregate local and limited stop trains

Electrification 3

Supporting major employment sectors located in the city centres with fast, high quality services for business travel

4 Facilitating economic growth / regeneration, connecting areas of socio-economic need with major employment locations

Introduce new journey opportunities to destinations beyond Manchester Victoria

New rail services from Burnley via Todmorden to support regeneration and employment growth

5 Supporting housing growth in locations adjacent to the railway

Hipperholme new station Elland new station

6 Improve links from the Upper Calder Valley to major destinations including Leeds and Huddersfield.

Better links to Huddersfield

Faster journey times to Leeds

Source: Arup proposal


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Table 2.5 explains how the service proposals could be developed to support the themes. This service pattern could be supplemented by extra stops at selected stations during the peak to support commuting flows from the busiest nodes.

Table 2.5: Addressing the Service Proposals

Theme Service Proposal Other Comments

1

2tph between Rochdale and Manchester, plus 2tph from Leeds to Halifax serving intermediate stations

Extra peak shuttles could be introduced in accordance with RUS recommendations. Services should operate as 4-car sets to accommodate commuting flows. Trains may be extended beyond Halifax and Rochdale to improve network connectivity

2/3

2tph between Leeds and Manchester Victoria calling at a limited number of intermediate stations

Existing journey times could be reduced by amending the stopping pattern. Other reductions could be achieved by infrastructure solutions. Long term potential to extend services beyond Manchester Victoria to improve strategic connectivity as part of the Northern Hub.

4

2tph between Burnley / East Lancashire and Manchester Victoria via Todmorden

New direct services to Huddersfield from the Upper Calder Valley towns

Bradford to Dewsbury via Brighouse

Scheme requires the construction of the Todmorden Curve to create through journey opportunities. Proposal would also enable some trains beyond Rochdale to the diverted from the main line

Better interchange at Brighouse or Mirfield resulting from the introduction of the revised timetable. Introduction of new direct trains.

New direct journey opportunities that competes more effectively versus buses

5 Provision of new stations New stopping services via Bradford and Halifax to Leeds will create a framework to enable proposed stations at Low Moor, Hipperholme, Elland and Laisterdyke to be served more effectively

6a

Amend Blackpool North trains to operate via Brighouse to deliver faster journey to Leeds from the Upper Calder Valley.

Blackpool North service is diverted via Brighouse, with a limited calling pattern towards Leeds creating faster journey times for stations in the Upper Calder Valley.

6b New direct trains from Upper Calder Valley to Huddersfield

Introduction of a wholly new service



121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


2.7 Chapter Conclusions The following summarises the main conclusions emerging from Chapter 2:

1 The existing Calder Valley Line timetable has a number of fundamental constraints which will prevent housing and employment growth aspirations being supported in an effective manner

2 The timetable proposals must build on opportunities identified by the RUS documents and provide an effective framework to complement the opportunities arising from the Northern Hub

3 The revised timetable needs to be aligned with overarching strategic objectives identified by the steering group members including access to employment, connecting major business centres, supporting regeneration, facilitating housing growth and improving connectivity from rural areas

4 The service proposals identified by stakeholders included additional peak shuttles, introduction of limited stop services, new services between Burnley and Manchester Victoria via Todmorden, new direct services between the Upper Valley and Huddersfield and the provision of new stations.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


3 Outputs from the Timetabling Study

3.1 Main Themes The workshop considered the improvements that could be made to the Calder Valley train service. The main issues emerging from Chapter 2 included:

faster services and higher frequencies, especially from the principal stations to Leeds and Manchester;

clock face timetables to make departures easier to remember for passengers and support improved modal integration with buses;

introduction of a multi tier timetable to address the above two points;

new service from Manchester to Burnley via a reinstated Chord at Todmorden;

opportunities resulting from the Northern Hub project;

gap in the current service provision affecting the Upper Calder Valley to Huddersfield;

scope for extending services beyond Manchester Victoria to Manchester Airport and other strategic destinations in the North West;

various new stations including Low Moor, Hipperholme, Elland and Laisterdyke. Low Moor is assumed to be included in the baseline.

3.2 Methodology The proposals set out in this chapter comprise an outline Train Service Specification and are not a detailed timetable. This approach is appropriate, given the current status of proposals. It provides a sound framework to subsequently refine and develop these proposals as part of more detailed work. The nominated study area includes Manchester Victoria to Rose Grove, Heaton Lodge Junction and Leeds via Bradford Interchange. The route shown between Heaton Lodge Junction and Leeds via Dewsbury does not include all services, although these have been considered when formulating the Specification.

No consideration has been given to connecting through services beyond Manchester Victoria or Leeds at this stage since the future TransPennine Express timetable is still being finalised. Currently 2tph operate east of Leeds to Selby and York serving the intermediate stations and providing important connections. Trains between Wakefield Westgate and Selby via Huddersfield, Halifax and Leeds operate as a single service for operational resources. The viability of maintaining these through trains is dependent on timings of the East Coast Main Line services which influence arrival / departure times at Wakefield Westgate, plus the interaction with other services via Huddersfield. In response to these limitations, it may be more appropriate to operate the trains between Huddersfield and Wakefield as a self-contained shuttle, or link them to services via Brighouse if a resource efficient timetable can be produced.

Detailed operational analysis at Manchester Victoria, Leeds and Bradford Interchange has not been undertaken or detailed analysis of train loadings. The Specification has used the current Sectional Running Times except for the Todmorden Chord. The assumptions in the ‘Todmorden West Curve Study’ were


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


used instead. Network Rail ‘Rules of the Plan’ have been adhered to, except where enhanced infrastructure has been identified. At this early stage of the development of the proposals, no consideration has been given to optimising resources. A performance assessment has not been completed, so a RailSys analysis will be required to support the emerging preferred option(s) as part of subsequent work.

In the development of the timetable we have acknowledged the involvement of existing open access operators in future timetable specifications. However, the purpose of the timetable specification is not to decide which operators run individual train services, especially given the potential future involvement of Alliance Rail. These considerations will be determined as part of wider discussions with DfT and the Office of Rail Regulation.

3.3 Interim Timetable Option During the development of timetable options it became apparent that additional rolling stock would be required (this is considered in more detail in Chapter 5). Therefore, to minimise the initial requirements for additional rolling stock, an Interim timetable option has been developed which helps to support some of the objectives. The Interim option would require only three additional train sets, and is illustrated in Figure 3.1 (more detailed information is included in Appendix A).

An hourly service extension of a Rochdale train to Burnley Manchester Road and possibly other stations in East Lancashire could be introduced, subject to the timely completion of Todmorden West Curve. The service extension from Rochdale to Burnley would need to operate non-stop between Rochdale and Todmorden to avoid conflicts with other trains.

The proposed new station at Low Moor could be delivered to form part of the Interim timetable, subject to completion of the required technical feasibility and business case assessment work.

Capacity constraints at Leeds form one of the main factors influencing the interim timetable. It is understood there is insufficient capacity to increase current service frequencies, so the following service pattern is assumed:

4tph between Leeds and Manchester Victoria via Bradford Interchange;

1tph from Leeds via Dewsbury to East Lancashire and Blackpool North;

2tph local trains between Rochdale and Manchester Victoria, with 1tph extended to Wigan Wallgate;

1tph from Bradford Interchange to Wakefield Westgate via Huddersfield. The capacity constraints at Leeds mean the Wakefield Westgate to Selby trains need to be revised, since there is insufficient capacity approaching Leeds.

This could be delivered as part of the December 2012 timetable during the off-peak using units that could be secured via the Government’s High Level Output Statement agreement (this sets out the strategic outputs that Governments want the railway to deliver for the public funds they are prepared to make available). However, other rolling stock would need to be procured if this interim timetable was introduced for all day services before 2016. Loco-haul trains are available, albeit as an expensive solution.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Figure 3.1: Interim Timetable



121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


3.4 Proposed Long Term Timetable Specification Figure 3.2 shows the initial long term Timetable Specification developed (excluding the new station proposals). An hourly freight path between Heaton Lodge Junction and Gannow Junction and Manchester Victoria is not shown, plus the Grand Central Railways services between Bradford and London via Halifax.

Figure 3.2: Option 1 Initial Preferred Standard Pattern Timetable



121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


The current signalling capability restricts the service frequency from Walsden to hourly, unless other revisions to stopping patterns could be agreed. Services between Manchester and Burnley Manchester Road via Todmorden could be extended to other stations in East Lancashire, although no detailed specification is provided beyond Rose Grove. One of the services towards Burnley Manchester Road could be revised to incorporate the Colne to Blackpool South train. A shuttle service between Colne and Rose Grove would give connections from the branch line, whilst the other hourly service could be extended to Blackburn. The connections from the Upper Calder Valley to Huddersfield are relatively limited, necessitating a lengthy wait at Brighouse. This version of the timetable also does not fulfil the GMPTE aspirations for 3tph at Mills Hill. Further iterations of the timetable specification have been prepared to incorporate initial stakeholder feedback. Table 3.1 summarises the changes.

Table 3.1: Initial Preferred Timetable Specification

Station Comments

Leeds Platform availability at the station has not been examined, although additional platforms and / or

turn-back facilities will be required. Through services to Selby and York to be identified

Bramley Service frequency reduced from 3tph to 2tph. No through service to stations beyond Halifax

except to Huddersfield/Wakefield

New Pudsey Retains 4tph, although timings are not quite evenly spread. Could be addressed by stopping the

fast Leeds to Manchester Victoria service instead

Bradford Interchange Improved service with 6tph to Leeds and Halifax, plus 2tph fast to Manchester. New direct

journey opportunities to Dewsbury. There are no services to East Lancashire

Halifax Service improves with 6tph to Bradford and Leeds, plus 1tph to Leeds via Dewsbury (new journey

opportunities). There are no services to East Lancashire

Brighouse Now has 3tph to Leeds, albeit at uneven intervals. Journey times for the Leeds service via

Dewsbury are reduced compared with the current timetable, with a journey time of 20 -24 minutes

Sowerby Bridge / Mytholmroyd Extra hourly services to Bradford, plus train to Leeds via Brighouse with faster journey times.

2tph to Manchester. New journey opportunities to East Lancashire too

Hebden Bridge: Improved service pattern with 4tph to Manchester and Bradford and 5tph to Leeds

Todmorden 6tph to Manchester and 4tph to Bradford and Leeds. There are new services to East Lancashire but

the Leeds service via Brighouse has been removed

Walsden Retains its 1tph service to Leeds and Manchester

Littleborough & Smithy Bridge Littleborough gets an extra hourly service to Manchester compared with the current timetable,

which is extended to East Lancashire. Frequencies to / from Smithy Bridge unchanged


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Table 3.1 (cont): Initial Preferred Timetable Specification Proposals for Individual Stations

Station Comments

Rochdale 6tph to Manchester, plus 4tph to Leeds. No terminating services, so a turn back may not required

Castleton, Mills Hill & Moston Stations retain 2tph service, both trains operate to / from East Lancashire and Manchester Victoria

Manchester Victoria No consideration has been given to services patterns beyond Manchester Victoria, for example,

Manchester Airport and Liverpool assuming the Northern Hub is delivered

Source: Arup proposal. Cottingley and Ravensthorpe stations are not included as Calder Valley Line services do not serve these stations.

3.5 Variant Timetable Options Table 3.2 summarises changes to the timetable specification reflecting comments. Option 1 assumed a standard pattern timetable would form part of the overall proposals. A non-standard pattern was also developed to understand whether the same services could be operated (albeit at irregular intervals) without the requirement for signalling improvements (Option 3).

Table 3.2: Summary of the Variant Timetables

Option Summary of the Main Revisions

2 Reduction of 1tph serving Moston and Castleton

Minor changes to other journey times

3

Extra 2tph calling at New Pudsey (Leeds –Manchester Victoria services revised), with journey times revised

Extra 1tph calling at Mills Hill

Reduction of 1tph to Burnley Manchester Road / East Lancashire, with 1tph terminating at Rochdale. A single

track connection from the Calder Valley Line to Roses Line would be sufficient to support the hourly service

Reduction of 1tph to Moston (given its proximity to Metrolink and scope for faster journeys for other passengers)

Non-standard timetable pattern due to signalling constraints. One hourly service would need to be revised when

Grand Central Railways services operate since there is insufficient capacity until signalling is improved

4 As variant 2, except the services terminating at Rochdale are extended to Burnley Manc. Road / East Lancashire

5 As variant 3, but with a standard timetable pattern with signalling infrastructure upgraded



121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


There are no non-stop trains between Leeds and Bradford Interchange in Options 3 to 5, since the 30mph permanent speed restriction at New Pudsey means the journey time penalty from an additional stop is relatively small (1 minute).

The demand analysis demonstrates that the benefits from adding an extra stop at New Pudsey outweigh the dis-benefits of extended journey times between Bradford and Leeds. As a result, the impact of these alternative timetables on demand and revenue has been examined, with the results presented in Chapter 7. The demand analysis indicates Option 5 (including the improved signalling) generates the highest number of new rail journeys and revenue and as a result becomes the Preferred Timetable Specification as illustrated by Figure 3.3 (see Appendix A for more details).


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Figure 3.3: Preferred Timetable Specification


Notes: It may be possible to allow a second service to stop at Walsden if the Mytholmroyd stop is removed on one of the trains between Leeds and Manchester. Selected services could be extended beyond Manchester Victoria to Liverpool and Manchester Airport as part of the Northern Hub


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


We have been unable to incorporate stakeholder aspirations to increase frequencies between Wakefield and Huddersfield into the Timetable Specification. In response to the low passenger usage noted in the Baseline report, along with the competing network capacity constraints between Huddersfield and Mirfield (especially given the aspirations for additional TransPennine Express services), it has not been possible to accommodate this aspiration.

The timescales for introducing the interim and preferred timetables will be dependent on the availability of rolling stock and this is discussed in Chapter 5.

3.6 Potential Impact of Timetable Specification

3.6.1 Interface with Strategic Study Objectives

It is useful to review how the Timetable Specification presented in Figure 3.3 help to support the objectives presented in Chapter 2. These are summarised below:

improved rail service performance: the timetable specification has been developed in accordance with the Rules of the Plan and this should help to improve route punctuality, particularly as the Calder Valley Line is currently one of Northern’s worst performing routes;

improved connectivity between the main centres: second hourly limited stop service between Bradford and Manchester will strengthen connectivity;

commuting flows to / from Leeds and Manchester: separate local services to Leeds and Manchester will help to provide sufficient capacity;

higher rail mode share and this will particularly help to reduce accidents: revised timetable will help to attract new rail passengers and encourage modal shift, including transfer from car to rail;

improved access from the Upper Calder Valley to Huddersfield and Leeds: proposed timetable specification will reduce journey times to Leeds by around 10 minutes, whilst the higher train frequencies will improve connections to Huddersfield via interchange at Brighouse or Dewsbury.

3.6.2 Comparison of Journey Times and Frequencies

The preferred timetable specification offers the journey times and frequencies for the major stations summarised in Table 3.3. The results indicate the actual journey time savings are relatively modest for some flows, for example, Bradford to Manchester. However, the frequency improvements with 2 fast services per hour are very important and more passengers would benefit from these improvements. The benefits resulting from the introduction of the revised timetable from Brighouse and Hebden Bridge to Leeds are also apparent, with a reduction of 10-15 minutes. The removal of the direct trains from Bradford / Halifax to East Lancashire means actual journey time increases by over 15 minutes but the number of trips affected is very small.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Table 3.3: Train Frequency and Journey Time Comparison (Existing and Preferred Option)

Station Pairs Train Frequencies per hour Fastest Journey Times

(minutes) Differences (minutes)

Current Preferred Current Preferred

Bradford to Manchester 2 4 60 58 -2

Bradford to Burnley 1 1 (with interchange) 43 61 +18

Halifax to Blackburn 1 1(with interchange) 48 66 +18

Hebden Bridge to Leeds 4 5 49 39 -10

Brighouse to Leeds 2 3 36 20 -16

Rochdale to Leeds 3 4 70 68 -2

Halifax to Manchester 2 4 48 43 -5

Source: Arup estimates

3.6.3 Overview of Timetable Specification for Individual Stakeholders

Table 3.4 summarises the strengths and weaknesses that would be delivered by the proposed Preferred Timetable Specification, from the perspective of individual local authority District stakeholders. This assessment does not consider the aspirations for new stations: these are examined in chapter 4.

Table 3.4: Overview of Timetable Specification for Stakeholders

Stakeholder Positive Impacts Negative Impacts

Bradford

Introduction of second hourly limited stop trains to Manchester, plus additional semi-fast services. 6tph to Leeds

Removal of direct trains from Bradford to East Lancashire. Potential to interchange at Hebden Bridge, but journey times extended by over 15 minutes

Calderdale

Introduction of second hourly limited stop trains to Manchester, plus additional semi-fast services. 6tph to Leeds. Services from the Upper Valley towns improved, especially to Leeds

Removal of direct trains from Halifax to East Lancashire. Potential to interchange at Hebden Bridge, but journey times extended by over 15 minutes. Signalling constraints restrict the scope to increase frequencies from Walsden unless other stopping patterns are revised

Burnley Opportunity to operate 2tph between Burnley and Manchester via Todmorden

Potential deliverability issues – this topic is examined in Chapter 4

Source: collated by Arup


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Table 3.4 (cont): Overview of Timetable Specification for Stakeholders

Stakeholder Positive Impacts Negative Impacts

Kirklees

Introduction of a new fast hourly service between Dewsbury and Leeds will deliver benefits. New through journey opportunities to East Lancashire

Aspirations to increase frequencies between Huddersfield and Wakefield cannot be incorporated into the Timetable Specification, given the competing infrastructure capacity constraints elsewhere on the network.

Leeds Combination of faster journey times and higher frequencies to most stations

Reduction in service frequency from Bramley, although this impact can be offset by the high frequency bus service

Manchester Combination of faster journey times and higher frequencies to most stations

Reduction in service frequency from Moston, although this impact can be offset by the alternative Metrolink services

Rochdale Combination of faster journey times and higher frequencies to most stations

Some of the smaller stations have fewer through trains towards Leeds

Source: collated by Arup

3.7 Chapter Conclusions

1

Preparation of a regular interval timetable specification that includes trains with a limited stopping pattern between the main stations, supplemented by other trains to connect intermediate stations, plus further local services to support commuting flows. Services could operate using a clockface pattern if signalling improvements are delivered

2 Work to develop the timetable specification into a more detailed proposition, plus an assessment of the performance risks that would result from the proposals is required using Railsys

3 Further work is needed to refine the proposed timetable for services towards East Lancashire.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


4 Infrastructure Requirements

4.1 Introduction The purpose of Chapter 4 is a strategic review of the potential infrastructure schemes that may be required to support the proposed Timetable Specification highlighted in Chapter 3.

4.2 Platform Capacity at Leeds The Yorkshire and Humber RUS indicates 6tph will operate between Halifax and Leeds. The Preferred Timetable Specification presented in Chapter 3 has been developed based on these assumed frequencies. However, there are potential risks associated with delivering the higher frequencies, given the wider network capacity pressures affecting the west facing bay platforms at Leeds. Our initial analysis suggests there is no capacity to accommodate a higher service frequency to / from Leeds via the Calder Valley Line compared with the current 4tph in each direction via New Pudsey. Further work is needed to confirm this issue. Additional platform capacity at Leeds station and / or a bay platform east of Leeds may therefore be required. It is understood that Network Rail is currently undertaking a timetabling study to address short term capacity bottlenecks at Leeds Station. This study will be completed in June 2011 but is unlikely to deliver significant increases in capacity.

4.3 Signalling Headways The route is controlled from a mix of modern Integrated Electronic Control Centre / Power Signal Box (IECC/PSB) and manual cabins. The headways on the route are:

Manchester Victoria to Thorpes Bridge 2.5 minutes;

Thorpes Bridge to Vitriol Works 4 minutes;

Vitriol Works to Smithy Bridge Absolute Block;

Smithy Bridge to Hebden Bridge 4 minutes;

Hebden Bridge to Milner Royd Junction Absolute block, an Intermediate Block Signal (IBS) exists on this section;

Milner Royd Junction to Halifax 5 minutes down & 5.5 minutes up;

Halifax to Mill Lane Junction 6 minutes down and 6.5 minutes up;

Mill Lane Junction to Bradford Interchange 2.5 or 3.5 down and 2 minutes up;

Mill Lane Junction to Holbeck Junction 5 minutes;

Holbeck Junction to Leeds 3 minutes.

The Absolute Block signalling sections have the most detrimental impact on capacity. However, the section between Dryclough Junction and Mill Lane Junction also needs upgrading to deal with the proposed service frequencies. If these improvements are not delivered, 6tph in each direction between Leeds and Bradford could not operate, plus the Grand Central Railways services. Ideally, the


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Calder Valley Line from Thorpes Bridge Junction west of Moston and Mill Lane Junction south of Bradford should be upgraded to 4 minute signalling headways.

The aspirations to deliver these signalling improvements needs to be developed and refined, particularly to ensure the proposals are carefully aligned with the wider Network Rail programme of renewals. This is a very important assumption, since aligning these maintenance and renewal schedules with the stakeholder aspirations to improve signalling is needed to minimise costs. Network Rail is currently putting together a business case for the Bradford track and signalling modifications and is trying to extend this scheme to cover the Halifax signalling area (no costs for this work are currently available). Castleton Down Loop is also being re-incorporated into the re-signalling schemes rather than converting it to a siding.

4.4 New Stations Various stakeholders have highlighted their plans and aspirations for new stations, including Low Moor, Hipperholme, Elland and Laisterdyke. Low Moor is included with West Yorkshire’s LTP3 2011-2014 Implementation Plan and has committed funding. A high level assessment of the infrastructure requirement has been completed and the following summarises the main conclusions:

Low Moor: the signalling capability between Bradford and Halifax is sufficient to accommodate a new station at Low Moor;

Hipperholme: the proposals for Low Moor are further advanced than Hipperholme. If the station to the south of Bradford is delivered first, signalling improvements will be required to support a new station at Hipperholme;

Elland: the proposed timetable revisions via Brighouse could provide a framework to enable this new station to be delivered without requiring any modifications to existing signalling. The fast hourly service that operates via Brighouse could be revised to call additionally at Elland to offer an attractive service to Leeds;

Laisterdyke: the signalling capability between New Pudsey and Bradford would need to be upgraded to accommodate a new station on this part of the network.

The delivery of these new stations, subject to the necessary financial and economic business case reviews, would be consistent with the objective identified in Chapter 2 of supporting housing growth in locations adjacent to the railway.

4.5 Todmorden West Curve The reinstatement of Todmorden West Curve is required to allow direct trains from the Calder Valley Line towards Burnley Manchester Road and East Lancashire. The curve would be located east of Todmorden station between the end of the viaduct and the line running north-west towards Burnley Manchester Road from Hall Royd Junction. A GRIP Stage 1-2 study has been undertaken to explore options for re-instating the curve. The main objective of the project is to support economic growth in the sub-region by introducing an improved rail service between the Burnley area and Manchester. The overall scheme is expected to alleviate suppressed demand, stimulate modal shift and new travel


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


opportunities, increasing fare box revenue and providing societal benefits from faster journey times and reduced road congestion.

A desk top study shortlisted three options, using engineering, operational, safety, performance and financial criteria for evaluation. Each option comprises a new single bi-directional line plus appropriate signalling:

Option 1 Tight Curve Radius;

Option 2 Wide Curve Radius;

Option 3 Switches and Crosses (S&C) crossing on the bridge.

Options 2 and 3 have been chosen for more detailed evaluation. The crossing for Option 2 is not located on a bridge (thus reducing the maintenance requirements), but Option 3 would offer simplified operational performance. A preliminary programme indicates the curve could be re-instated by 2014 subject to funding availability. The estimated costs for the two preferred options range between £7.5m and £9.2m subject to further refinement of the business case.

The preliminary findings have been reviewed and a financial and economic business case is currently being prepared. If the business case indicates more than one train per hour would be advantageous, there may be merits in reviewing the proposed track layout and examining the suitability of a double track alignment. The operational constraints associated with a single track section would be exacerbated by other timetabling bottlenecks that affect the Calder Valley Line elsewhere. A double track alignment would also help to future proof the scheme to accommodate expected demand, whilst the alternative track layout may also cut maintenance costs.

The indicative timescales to deliver the scheme assume a Transport and Works Act Order will not be required. This assumption may be reasonable, assuming all the land is within Network Rail ownership and there no Public Rights of Way or statutory undertaker’s equipment affected. However, the scheme could potentially require planning permission (dependent on the existence of Permitted and General Permitted Development Rights). If planning permission is required, the timescales may be extended if objections are received from the public living close to the proposed alignment. Furthermore, it may be necessary to renew the signalling equipment adjacent to the site, and this could extend the suggested timescales.

The proposal to introduce new direct rail services between Burnley and Manchester would support one of the priority study objectives identified in Chapter 2. The new services would help to facilitate economic growth and regeneration by connecting areas of socio-economic need with major employment locations.

4.6 Bradford to Manchester Journey Time Improvements

A diagram illustrating the proposed layout changes at Bradford Interchange and Mill Lane Junction was received from Network Rail. The amended layout appears to be sufficient to meet proposed timetable specification, albeit signalling information was not provided to validate this conclusion.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


A GRIP 1 study was undertaken as part of the Northern Hub to develop options to reduce journey times between Manchester and Bradford. The Calder Valley Line is constrained by local topography, with several intermediate tunnels and viaducts. Existing journey times between Manchester and Bradford are 59 minutes, and there is a perception these timings do not meet customer requirements. The aspiration for a future journey time of 50 minutes was specified. The following infrastructure schemes were identified to reduce journey times:

Hebden Bridge to Milner Royd Junction to 80mph;

Halifax to Mill Lane to 80mph;

Rochdale and Halifax stations;

Smithy Bridge Level Crossing;

Weasel Hall Tunnel;

Castleton 70 mph;

Rochdale to Smithy Bridge 90mph.

Modelling work estimated that this package of measures could save about 4 minutes in each direction. To achieve the future journey time aspiration, this full package of measures, along with the removal of all intermediate stops would be required. However, the size of the rail market between Bradford and Manchester is insufficient to justify this type of service, and this could prevent the delivery of other timetable changes. The estimated capital costs for the scheme are £139m. As a result, the preliminary financial appraisal indicated a weak value for money case.

An alternative approach to addressing the infrastructure constraints is the development of schemes in locations affected by particularly low line speeds. This may offer better value for money. For example, the speed at Milner Royd Junction is just 40mph, whilst trains can approach Halifax at just 30-40 mph. Furthermore, there is a 30mph restriction between Laisterdyke and New Pudsey. Some sections also had higher line speeds during steam operation, including Thorpes Bridge to Castleton and Hebden Bridge to Milner Royd Junction, so a study would be required to ascertain whether a higher speed was still practical.

4.7 Bay Platforms The potential for constructing a bay platform at Rose Grove has been examined. It is possible to operate the services using the current layout. However, reinstating the east facing centre bay platform or introducing bi-directional signalling on both lines between the station and Gannow Junction could improve operations, especially if a shuttle to / from Colne is introduced. There appears to be no other requirement emerging from the Preferred Timetable Specification that other bay platforms are required. For example, the Rochdale bay platform may not be required if the longer term service pattern was delivered, although it may be advantageous for the purposes of network resiliency.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


4.8 Freight Loops The existing freight loops at Castleton in the Down direction and Vitriol Works in the Up direction should be retained since they provide improved timetable resiliency.

4.9 Capital Costs Figure 4.1 shows how the infrastructure improvements described above would impact on the constraints of the Calder Valley Line, and these have been subsequently shown as issues marked through in red to highlight they will be resolved. The capital costs associated with these infrastructure improvements are as follows:

Bradford Remodelling £3.0m (Source Strategic Business Plan);

Bradford to Hebden Bridge Resignalling £10.0m (Arup estimate);

Vitriol Works to Smithy Bridge Resignalling £5.0m (Arup estimate);

Todmorden Chord £9.2m (Based on cost of Option 3 in Network Rail 1/2 Report);

Low Moor station £5.4m (Based on the costs included in LTP3 2011-2014 Implementation Plan);

Hipperholme station £7.5m (Arup estimate).


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Figure 4.1: Impact of Infrastructure Improvements


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011



1 A range of infrastructure schemes are required to support the proposed timetable, including additional platform capacity in the Leeds area.

2 The proposed Todmorden Curve may need to be delivered as a double track link connection from the Calder Valley Line to the East Lancs Line, especially if trains operate more regularly than hourly intervals. A turnback at Rose Grove is required.

3 Signalling improvements to achieve 4 minute headway would be required to deliver a clockface timetable. Improvements between Vitriol Works to Smithy Bridge, Hebden Bridge to Dryclough Junction and Dryclough Junction to Mill Lane Junction are required

4 Benefits from GRIP 1 line speed improvements appear relatively modest, given the scale of journey time reductions and the indicative capital costs. Solutions to address locations with very low line speeds may offer better value for money


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


5 Rolling Stock Strategy

5.1 Introduction The preparation of a rolling stock strategy for the Calder Valley Line forms a fundamental part of the process to develop the route. A summary of the number of trains used currently and the requirement for the Preferred Option is presented.

5.2 Existing Situation Table 5.1 outlines the units required to operate the current service pattern (December 2010). As noted earlier, there are aspirations to introduce peak hour shuttle services between Halifax and Leeds which would be incorporated into future timetables. The additional rolling stock required to operate these extra trains will be procured as part of the High Level Output Statement, although the timescales for delivery are uncertain. The general shortage of diesel rolling stock currently available until various rolling stock cascades have been completed means the opportunities to either strengthen existing services or introduce new or more frequent services is very limited.

Table 5.1: Existing Rolling Stock Requirements (December 2010)

Service No of Trains Notes

Leeds-Manchester 11

Selby-Leeds-Halifax-Huddersfield-Wakefield Westgate

6

York-Blackpool North 7

Colne-Blackpool South 4

Wigan-Manchester Victoria-Rochdale 3

Todmorden-Manchester Victoria 1 Morning Peak Only

Total 32

Source: Arup calculation. Two units could be saved if Rochdale local services are self-contained.

5.3 Interim Timetable - Rolling Stock Required The number of additional units required to support the interim timetable has been estimated. The improved timetable between Leeds and Manchester means trains operate more intensively and this reduces the duration of turnarounds. The extra services proposed in the interim timetable could be operated with three more units. The opportunities to procure the extra trains during the short term are very limited. A small number of extra units could be procured for the Northern Rail franchise (subject to ongoing value for money assessments), but these trains may not necessarily be deployed on the Calder Valley Line during the peak. However, operating the improved timetable during the off-peak period could provide an interim solution, rather than just leaving the extra trains in a depot during the daytime. Alternatively, it may be possible to introduce a small number of loco-hauled services on suitable routes, for example, the Settle to Carlisle Line. This would allow a small cascade of units, releasing other trains for the improved


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Calder Valley Line services. However, there is no funding available to procure the relatively expensive loco-hauled trains.

5.4 Preferred Timetable - Rolling Stock Required The draft timetable proposed in Chapter 3 will require some additional units compared with the current requirement. Table 5.2 outlines the rolling stock requirements, with some services to East Lancashire and beyond shown, since these ideas optimise rolling stock efficiency. Compared with the current timetable, a total of nine additional train sets would be required.

The combined service from Leeds to Manchester Victoria uses three more units in the Preferred Timetable Specification compared with the current timetable. Rolling stock utilisation is improved as a result of the extra hourly service. The Leeds to Blackpool North service uses five of the train sets currently deployed on the York to Blackpool North route. The York-Leeds-Halifax-Leeds service would use two of the other train sets from the Blackpool North route, plus a further three train sets. The rolling stock requirements for the Selby to Wakefield Westgate service via Leeds, Halifax and Huddersfield is unchanged. The Manchester Victoria to Blackpool South service via Burnley Manchester Road requires four train sets from the current Colne to Blackpool South route plus an extra train set.

The Wigan-Manchester Victoria-Blackburn service uses the three train sets from the current Wigan to Rochdale service together with the morning peak set from Todmorden. An extra train set is still required, but it may be possible to eliminate this by integrating the service with another Wigan to Manchester train to achieve efficiencies. The Colne to Rose Grove service requires one train set which could be eliminated by diverting the Manchester to Blackburn service to Colne. If this and the Wigan service train set could be saved the 2tph operating via the Todmorden Curve towards East Lancashire would only cost one train set.

Table 5.2: Proposed Rolling Stock Requirements

Service No of Trains

Notes

Leeds-Manchester Victoria (limited stop) 6 8 minute turnarounds at Manchester and 13 minutes at Leeds

Leeds-Manchester Victoria (semi fast) 8 27 minute turnarounds at Manchester and 30 minutes at Leeds

York-Leeds-Halifax-Leeds 5 30 minute turnarounds at York and 10 minutes at Leeds

Selby-Leeds-Halifax-Huddersfield-W’field W’gate 6 30 minute turnarounds at Selby and 20 minutes at Wakefield

Leeds-Blackpool North 5 15 minute turnarounds at Leeds and 45 minutes at Blackpool

Manchester Victoria-Blackpool South 5 10 minute turnarounds at Manchester and 5 minutes at Blackpool

Wigan-Manchester Victoria-Blackburn 5 10 minute turnarounds at Blackburn and 50 minutes at Wigan.

Colne-Rose Grove 1 19 minutes turnaround at Rose Grove and 5 minutes at Colne

Total 41

Source: Arup calculation


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


5.5 Opportunities for Procurement of Additional Rolling Stock

The Coalition Government has recently announced funding for a number of electrification schemes. The delivery of these schemes could stimulate a rolling stock cascade, thus creating opportunities to secure the additional nine units plus spares that would be needed to resource the timetable proposals outlined in Chapter 3. Stakeholders need to lobby for the timely delivery of the electrification schemes described below to facilitate the wider cascade of rolling stock. Furthermore, they will need to demonstrate why the rolling stock is needed specifically for the Calder Valley Line, especially as competition for the cascaded rolling stock will be intense, particularly from other PTEs.

5.5.1 Rail Electrification in the North West

Funding has been confirmed for two electrification schemes in the North West:

Liverpool to Manchester via St Helens Junction and Newton le Willows (to connect with the WCML), delivery in 2012/13 (Phase 1);

Liverpool to Wigan, Manchester to Preston via Bolton and Preston to Blackpool North to be delivered in 2015/16 (Phase 2).

The completion of Phase 1 will deliver the following benefits:

release about nine TransPennine Express units from Manchester Airport to Scotland, although these are likely to be used on other routes;

cascade 4-5 units between Manchester Airport to Liverpool Lime Street trains via St Helens Junction operated by Northern Rail.

The second phase comprises further electrification between Liverpool and Wigan, Manchester and Blackpool North via Bolton. Other Class 185s will become available, along with about 16 diesel units comprising Class 14X, 15X and 180 units.

5.5.2 Rail Electrification in Scotland

In addition to the electrification schemes in the North West, Transport Scotland has also announced a range of proposals to electrify some of the busiest routes in the Central Belt between Glasgow Queen Street, Edinburgh, Stirling and Cumbernauld. The current implementation timetable prepared by the promoter indicates the scheme is due to be completed by the end of 2016. About 30 diesel units could become available (for example, Class 156 or 158s) as a result of the electrification programme.

5.5.3 Great Western Main Line Electrification

In November 2010, Transport Secretary Philip Hammond also gave the go-ahead for the Great Western Main Line to be electrified between Oxford via Didcot and Newbury to London within the next six years. A further announcement on 1 March 2011, gave the go ahead to electrify from Didcot Parkway to Bristol Temple Meads and Cardiff Central, plus the link to Bristol Parkway from Bristol


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Temple Meads. A cascade will commence, releasing Class 165 units to replace other units (Class 14X/15X) in the Bristol area for use in the North.

5.5.4 Implications of the Electrification Proposals

The Class 185 units released following the completion of the electrification schemes in the North West are likely to be deployed on existing TransPennine Express services via Huddersfield to help address existing overcrowding problems. However, some of the Class 14X / 15X units cascaded following the electrification schemes in North West, Great Western Main Line, plus the Class 156/8 units from Scotland could be re-deployed to help fulfil the new service aspirations.

A cautionary note regarding the likely timescales needs to be highlighted. There is a complex series of dependencies which will need to be fulfilled. The availability of these cascaded trains is initially dependent on the procurement of new trains for the cross-London Thameslink services. In turn, this will facilitate the cascade of Class 319 units to the North West and the Great Western Main Line, thus releasing the existing diesel units. A similar process of cascades is also needed in Scotland. There are a number of risks affecting the potential timescales and this would clearly have a detrimental impact on the projected timelines described above.

Stakeholders will need to use the results from the financial and economic appraisal to demonstrate the importance of the extra trains for the Calder Valley Line. Lobbying for the extra trains should commence in a timely manner, particularly as the Department for Transport may be evaluating competing bids for the rolling stock from other stakeholders.

5.6 Enhancing the Quality of Existing Rolling Stock In addition to identifying potential opportunities to procure additional rolling stock, the scope to improve the quality of existing units also needs to be considered. The Baseline report demonstrated a number of current factors could be potentially addressed:

Reliability;

Passenger experience.

5.6.1 Rolling Stock Reliability

The rail industry uses ‘miles per casualty’ (MPC) data to compare the performance of different types of rolling stock. The miles per casualty figure illustrates the average distance travelled by rolling stock between incidents that incur a delay of at least five minutes.

Data for 2010 published in Modern Railways (January 2011) indicates the Class 14X / 15X units that are typically deployed on the Calder Valley Line achieve about 6,000 miles per casualty. This compares relatively poorly versus other comparable routes:

the Class 170 and 185 units operated by TransPennine Express achieve 13,000 and 17,100 MPC respectively;


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


the Class 15X / 159 units operate by South West Trains achieve up to 45,000 MPC. However, the depot staff at Salisbury where these trains are maintained are only responsible for a single type of unit and this contributes to the very high levels of reliability achieved;

other Class 15X units maintained by depots with responsibility for more than one type of train also achieve nearly 9,000 MPC (East Midlands Trains).

The analysis demonstrates there is considerable scope to achieve improved rolling stock reliability when compared with other similar types of trains. Measures to improve reliability would help to improve customer perceptions.

5.6.2 Passenger Experience

The improved Calder Valley Line timetable is likely to be operated by a mixture of Class 15X units given its relative speed, with Class 14X trains used for short distance services in Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire. There is scope to enhance the customer experience offered by the existing Class 158 fleet. The current onboard facilities for passengers are relatively poor and unlikely to attract business users, given the lack of first class seating, availability of refreshments, and power sockets. A package of measures could be implemented to improve the passenger experience.

The combination of timetable changes, along with measures to enhance the rolling stock quality, can help to attract new passengers, particularly those who currently travel by car. The scope to attract business users forms an integral part of a more detailed overall financial business case that will be required as part of further work. A dedicated fleet of Class 158 units to operate the limited stop services between Leeds and Manchester needs to be identified so a refurbishment programme can be completed to deliver the objective for higher service quality. Two train operators provide useful comparators illustrating the scope for changes:

South West Trains has refurbished their Class 15X fleet operated between London Waterloo and Exeter, including the availability of first class, refreshments and facilities for charging laptops etc. It is understood the opportunity to attract passengers paying higher fares formed an important part of the overall business case;

East Midlands Trains has completed a similar package of improvements to the Class 158 units deployed between Norwich and Liverpool.

A business case for the refurbishment package needs to be prepared, with the measures delivered and funded as part of the forthcoming Northern Rail franchise.

5.7 Longer Term Options to Enhance Rolling Stock

5.7.1 Other Rolling Stock Cascades

In addition to the committed funding to electrify selected routes discussed in section 5.5, proposals for other in-fill electrification are being developed which could benefit the Calder Valley Line. Electrifying the line from Guide Bridge to Leeds and York via Huddersfield has been examined as part of the Network Rail Electrification Route Utilisation Strategy, and a positive business case was


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


demonstrated. This could enable the TransPennine Express services between Manchester Airport / Liverpool and York to operate using electric traction, potentially facilitating a further rolling stock cascade, which could enable Class 185 units to be cascaded to the Calder Valley Line. However, unless infrastructure improvements are delivered to raise the line speeds, the benefits are likely to be relatively modest, assuming the Class 158s are refurbished as discussed above.

5.7.2 Electrification of the Calder Valley Line

Electrification of the Calder Valley Line should form part of a longer term strategy for the Line. Benefits could also be generated if the network between Rochdale and Manchester Victoria was electrified. This would create opportunities to create further cross-Manchester journey opportunities, given the other lines due for electrification in the North West. Electrification between Rochdale and Manchester could be delivered as part of the Northern Hub.

If the Huddersfield Line was electrified (described above), this could strengthen the case for delivering similar improvements between Huddersfield and Leeds via Halifax. Journey times, service quality and reliability could be significantly improved if services were operated using electric traction. The improved journey times could also improve the case for new stations, since journey time differences between the stopping and faster services would be reduced. Following the electrification of the route from Halifax to Leeds, and Rochdale to Manchester, the middle section of the Calder Valley Line could then be electrified. This represents a longer term aspiration and a separate business case would need to be prepared to examine these benefits.


1 Three additional units will be required to operate the Interim timetable, but the shortage of units could mean this proposal can only operate initially during the off-peak period

2 Nine additional units would be required to operate the Preferred timetable. This requirement would be reduced if the extra trains needed for the proposed shuttles between Halifax and Leeds, and Rochdale and Manchester are included.

3 There are a number of options available to procure the additional units following the completion of electrification schemes in the North West, Great Western Main Line and Scotland. A complicated rolling stock cascade will be required, and this complexity increases the potential risks of delays affecting the overall timescales

4 Stakeholders need to urgently engage with the Department for Transport setting out the requirements for additional rolling stock. There is likely to be strong competition with other stakeholders for the diesel units, so establishing an effective dialogue with the DfT will be important

5 A package of measures should be developed to refurbish units deployed on the trains with a limited stopping pattern. This ideas include measures to enhance the on-board facilities for business passengers

6 Other rolling stock improvements could be delivered in the longer term. There may be scope to introduce higher specification units as a result of other cascades, for example, electrification of the TransPennine corridor via Diggle. A phased package of electrification for the Calder Valley Line has also been identified, linked to the Northern Hub.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


6 Station Facilities and Accessibility

6.1 Introduction Station accessibility and facilities are a fundamental part of the journey experience and influence the choice of mode. Chapter 7 describes the incremental change in journeys that could be achieved, so improving access to stations via car and public transport along with station facilities will be essential to ensure the patronage forecasts can be achieved. This is particularly important for the Calder Valley Line as many stations serve a dispersed catchment. The topography means that walking and cycling are not convenient for some passengers to access the station. The forecast increase in trips could necessitate improved access to the station, additional car parking availability and / or improved waiting facilities if the timetable changes mean stations fulfil a more prominent role as an interchange. Addressing this issue also helps to support the overarching objective identified in Chapter 2 to improve sustainable access to stations and enhance passenger safety.

The busiest stations in terms of passenger footfall, along with the stations benefiting from the most significant timetable changes should form the main focus for accessibility improvements and better station facilities. This chapter reviews the current station facilities, car parking and bus-rail integration, and examines the opportunities to deliver improvements. Site visits were conducted on a ‘neutral’ day (Tuesday) to examine the availability of current spaces. Bus interchange has been assessed by examining routes and destinations served and the connection times, whilst a proforma of station facilities was collated.

6.2 Context The Baseline report highlighted that the availability of car parking is limited at many stations along the Calder Valley Line, with no spaces available before the end of the AM peak period. For example, surveys conducted by Metro indicate Halifax station car park is full by around 7am. The average number of spaces per station on the Calder Valley Line is around 25% less compared with other routes in West Yorkshire. The availability of parking at Calder Valley Line stations in Greater Manchester is similar to the average for the rest of the PTE area, but interestingly is about 50% lower compared with West Yorkshire.

The Leeds Rail Growth Package business case sought funding for extensions to rail station car parks at a number of stations within West Yorkshire, including Sowerby Bridge, Todmorden and Mirfield. However, proposals to extend these car parks have been dropped due to funding constraints and the inability to identify cost savings. The draft West Yorkshire Local Transport Plan 3 identifies car park extensions at Sowerby Bridge, Todmorden and Mirfield as priorities, subject to appropriate public and stakeholder consultation.

The draft Greater Manchester Local Transport Plan 3 Strategy document identifies ‘the need for more car-parking and improved passenger facilities at stations’ as a priority. The delivery of additional capacity for park and ride at stations will be pursued as funding allows. In addition, train operators will be encouraged to provide more parking at rail stations as part of forthcoming rail franchises. However, no specific schemes are identified. The emerging Core Strategy for


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Rochdale proposes park and ride improvements at Rochdale, Mills Hill, Littleborough, Smithy Bridge and Castleton stations.

6.3 Waiting Facilities at Stations

6.3.1 Existing Facilities

Table 6.1 shows facilities currently available at stations on the Calder Valley Line. This shows that all stations have either a shelter or a waiting room available. All stations except Moston have seating available too. Cycle parking is provided at most stations, although standards vary with some stations having lockers and CCTV coverage. Only the busiest stations have ticket offices and staff present.

Table 6.1: Main Facilities Available at each Station

Station Cycle storage

Ticket office

Self service machines Staff Toilets Seating Shelter Waiting

room CCTVShop/Cafe

Bramley ● ●

New Pudsey ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Bradford Int. ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Halifax ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Sowerby Bridge ● ● ● ●

Mytholmroyd ● ●

Hebden Bridge ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Todmorden ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Walsden ● ●

Littleborough ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Smithy Bridge ● ●

Rochdale ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Castleton ● ● ●

Mills Hill ● ● ● ●

Moston ● ●

Morley ● ● ●

Batley ● ● ● ●

Dewsbury ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Ravensthorpe ● ●

Mirfield ● ● ● ●

Brighouse ● ● ● ●

Deighton ● ●

Huddersfield ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Burnley Manc. Rd ● ●

Source: www.nationalrail.co.uk, GMPTE and Metro


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


6.3.2 Potential Station Improvements

By considering the availability of existing facilities it has been possible to identify stations that could benefit from improved facilities. These include:

New Pudsey: potential introduction of self-service ticket machines;

Bradford Interchange: the existing facilities may be sufficient given the estimated passenger usage. However, the additional train services to / from the station will mean the usage of platforms 3 and 4 will increase. These platforms have limited facilities and restricted canopy cover, so improvements would be advantageous. Platform 2 is extensively used by Grand Central Railways. It should be noted that the station is soon to receive station investment through National Station Improvement Programme to improve waiting facilities;

Brighouse: the introduction of a fast hourly service to Leeds could increase passenger footfall from the station (this issue is examined in Chapter 7), necessitating the delivery of improved facilities for example a ticket office, staff presence and toilets, especially given its role as a possible interchange;

Sowerby Bridge: the station will benefit from faster journey times to Leeds via Brighouse, plus an extra hourly service to / from Bradford and Leeds. Passenger footfall at the station could increase, necessitating the introduction of staff presence and a ticket office;

Todmorden: this station will become a more important interchange, with frequency improvements and new services to East Lancashire. It would be advantageous to have toilets available;

Burnley Manchester Road: this could become the main station in Burnley with up to 6 trains per hour. A staffed ticket office, improved car park provision and bus interchange will be required, particularly given the estimated levels of usage shown in Chapter 4;

Rochdale: this is one of the busiest stations on the Calder Valley Line, but the lack of cycle parking facilities at the station is an obvious gap;

Mills Hill: an extra hourly service to Manchester is proposed, and the extra patronage could justify the availability of a ticket office and staff presence.

It should be noted that Northern Rail are planning to install 100 ticket vending machines across their franchise, including many in West Yorkshire. Some of are expected to be installed at stations on the Calder Valley Line.

6.4 Opportunities to Expand Car Parking Site visits were undertaken to identify potential locations to expand car parking availability. Additional spaces are required to support the new rail demand. Some stations have vacant land nearby, whilst land will need to be acquired at others. Table 6.2 summarises the current parking availability and examines the feasibility to deliver expansions. The estimated increase in spaces is calculated using the area of available land and the current space density. Overall, an additional 770 spaces could be provided at Calder Valley Line stations with a further 135 spaces for the Huddersfield Line. This represents an increase of 125% and 56% respectively.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Table 7.2: Summary of Opportunities to Expand Car Parking

Station Trains

per Hour

Current No. of spaces

Potential to

Expand

Potential Extra

Spaces Comments

Cal

der

Val

ley

Lin

e

Bramley 3 18 0 No available land

New Pudsey 4 271 140 Land to the east of the existing car park between the station and the Owlcotes Centre

Bradford Int. 4 0 0 City centre location close to NCP car park

Halifax 4 32 0 Parking could be shared with Eureka, especially during the week.

Sowerby Bridge 2 56 (plus

on street) 60 Area of disused land to the east of the existing car park.

Mytholmroyd 2 0 (some on street) 40 Small area of disused land at the end of the

existing access road

Hebden Bri. 4 78 0 No available land

Todmorden 3 55 (plus on street) 45 Small area of disused land to the west of the

existing car park

Walsden 1 0 (some on street) 0 No available land

Littleborough 2 36 0 Site constrained by proximity to river and railway line

Smithy Bridge 2 20 45 Existing site constrained by canal and railway line, but land available across the road

Rochdale 4 0 (some on street) 140

A new car park and reconfiguration of on street parking was proposed as part of the GM TIF bid.

Castleton 2 19 0 No available land

Mills Hill 2 30 300 Land available to north west of station

Moston 2 0 0 No available land

Total 615 770

Hud

ders

fiel

d L

ine

Morley 2 15 10 Very limited land available so expansion may not be justified economically

Batley 2 20 0 Town centre location with no available land

Dewsbury 4 80 0 Town centre location with no available land

Ravensthorpe 1 0 0 No available land

Mirfield 3 35 125 Available land across tracks from current car park but there are a number of engineering constraints

Brighouse 2 65 32 Possible purchase of adjacent site

Deighton 2 0 0 No available land

Huddersfield 8 28 0 Town centre location with no available land

Total 243 167

Source: www.nationalrail.co.uk, Arup estimate


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


The location of potential additional spaces is limited to a small number of stations. Some extra parking spaces could be located at stations that may benefit from frequency improvements, for example, New Pudsey (extra 2tph), Rochdale (2tph), Todmorden (2tph), Sowerby Bridge (1tph), Mytholmroyd (1tph) and Mills Hill (1tph). No timetable changes are planned for Smithy Bridge and Mirfield, even though there is potential to increase the number of parking spaces. The nine stations with land available to potentially expand parking availability include:

New Pudsey: there is around 4,200m2 of disused land to the east of the existing car park, equating to about 140 extra spaces;

Sowerby Bridge: around 1,750m2 of land is available to the east of the existing car park, providing space for an additional 60 spaces. Some feasibility work has already been completed;

Mytholmroyd: about 1,200m2 of land to the east of the existing car park, which could provide an additional 40 spaces;

Todmorden: there is about 1,400m2 of land to the west of the existing car park, equating to an extra 45 spaces, with some feasibility work completed;

Smithy Bridge: about 1,300m2 of available land to the south of the station has been identified, offering about 40-45 extra parking spaces;

Rochdale: as part of Greater Manchester’s TIF bid, an additional 140 parking spaces were proposed, through a combination of developing a new car park on private land and the reconfiguration of on-street car parking;

Mills Hill: about 8,900m2 of available land could be developed to the north west of the station across the railway line. An extra 300 spaces could be provided, equating to a ten-fold increase compared with the current provision;

Morley: there is a small parcel of land available (310m2) to the east of the existing car park that could create an additional 10 spaces;

Mirfield: there is around 3,800 square metres of land to the north of the station on the opposite side of the tracks to the existing car park. This land could potentially accommodate an additional 125 spaces. Access to the platforms may be a significant constraint, especially access for people with mobility impairments.

The capital cost of providing car park extensions varies between £7,000 and £15,000 per space depending on the level of constraints affecting the site. Funding through the Local Transport Plan process may provide a potential solution. The LTP3 for West Yorkshire includes extensions at Sowerby, Todmorden and Mirfield. Work has also already been done on a lower cost car park extension for Mytholmroyd as well as a small piece of work at Morley. These identified car park extensions could potentially happen in years 1 to 3 of LTP3, subject to approvals. However, for the other car park extensions identified the restricted availability of funding could mean alternatives such as charging for spaces may need to be introduced to cover the capital costs.

As noted earlier, the next franchise specification could be extended to 10-15 years, rather than the current 8-10 years. This extended framework could facilitate increased opportunities to deliver these additional spaces, but extensive stakeholder lobbying is needed to ensure the proposals are included in the


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Invitation to Tender for the next Northern franchise based in the PTE specification.

6.5 Improved Bus / Rail Integration

6.5.1 Background

More effective bus-rail integration will improve accessibility to stations and meet strategic policy objectives by promoting social inclusion and environmental objectives. The Baseline report highlighted some of the current problems:

uneven gaps between rail services, which limits the opportunities to integrate with buses;

rural bus frequencies are low, and reduces the attractiveness of using buses to access the station. These issues may be exacerbated by the current funding pressures;

commercial operating regime for buses may restrict the scope for modal integration, as bus and rail timetables are currently developed independently of one another.

In contrast, countries including the Netherlands, Germany and Switzerland have integrated bus and rail timetables (referred to as a ‘pulse timetable’ in Switzerland). All buses in the locality of a station are diverted to collect rail passengers, with buses timetabled to arrive at the railway station around five minutes prior to a departure and will not leave until all interchanging passengers have boarded the bus. This has helped to promote public transport in rural areas.

It will be necessary to convince UK operators of the benefits from integrating bus and rail more effectively. These negotiations will need to reflect the characteristics of the commercial operating regime. Some of the tendered services can simply be revised to adopt closer integration with buses, and departures may need to be retimed to coincide with the amended railway timetable. The duration of services may need to be extended to support journey patterns more effectively.

The LTP3 Implementation Strategy (2011-2014) for West Yorkshire states that Metro will continue work on developing a Bus Quality Contract Scheme, while also working with bus operators to explore partnership approaches to improve bus services. Either approach would provide a framework for improving bus-rail integration.

The study area is sub-divided into a number of distinct areas for analysis:

Calder Valley Line between Leeds and Halifax;

Calder Valley Line between Halifax and Walsden;

Calder Valley Line within Greater Manchester;

Calder Valley services for stations on the Huddersfield Line.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


6.5.2 Calder Valley Line: Leeds to Halifax

Many stations in the West Yorkshire urban area serve relatively built-up catchments. Although these areas have extensive bus networks, levels of bus-rail integration vary considerably.

Leeds: although Leeds is served by a comprehensive network of services, many buses terminate at the bus station or another part of the city centre, thus necessitating a walk of 10-20 minutes. This restricts the opportunities for modal integration;

Bramley: the station is about 200m from bus stops on Stanningley Road, where buses (40, 40A, and 72) operate every five minutes towards Leeds. It may be possible to relocate stops closer to the junction of Stanningley Road and Swinnow Road to improve modal integration;

New Pudsey: the limited stop X6 offers departures every 20 minutes to Leeds, Bradford, Brighouse and Huddersfield and is the only bus directly serving the station. The X6 has a limited stop calling pattern, so the scope to serve the local catchment is limited. New Pudsey is around 300m from other bus stops on Bradford Road. Stops could be moved east of the Thornbury roundabout and a more pleasant walking environment on Owlcoats Lane created;

Bradford Interchange: there are buses to a wide range of destinations within the urban area and further afield. Interchange is convenient, as bus and rail are located adjacent to each other;

Halifax: only one service calls at the railway station, and the distance and topography to the bus station (600m walk uphill from the train station towards the bus station) makes the convenience of the interchange less attractive. The scope to divert buses to the train station needs to be examined through discussions with operators. However, the layout of the station forecourt will need improving.

6.5.3 Calder Valley Line: Sowerby Bridge to Walsden

Many stations in the Upper Calder Valley serve dispersed, rural catchments. Whilst some opportunities for car park extensions have been identified, improved complementary bus services are also required. These complementary improvements need to build on the high frequency service operating via the A646 from Halifax towards Hebden Bridge. Figure 6.1 illustrates current bus routes to railway stations within this area.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Figure 6.1: Bus Routes Serving Stations in the Upper Calder Valley

Source: Arup analysis of Metro Data

Sowerby Bridge: only one service between Rawson Wood and Norland calls at the station. Departure times of the 3 buses per hour (bph) are uneven, with a gap of 30 minutes between two services. The high frequency bus service via the A646 is about 350m from the station, so better pedestrian links are needed;

Mytholmroyd: service C operates hourly to Cragg Vale with departures adjacent to the station. The bus stops located on the A646 are around 150m from the railway station, and improved pedestrian links are required;

Hebden Bridge: the bus stop at the railway station offers hourly local journey opportunities as part of the MetroConnect network. The station is around 200m from bus stops on the A646.

Todmorden: the railway station is about 250m from the bus station with frequent services via the A646 / A58, plus a complementary network serving rural communities. Improving pedestrian links between the rail and bus station will help to achieve better modal integration. The timing of rural services may need to be revised to reflect the revised rail timetable;

Walsden: the station is adjacent to the A6033 which is served by hourly buses to Halifax and Rochdale. The opportunities for modal integration are limited given the hourly rail and bus services may lead to extended wait times.

6.5.4 Greater Manchester Stations

The following summarises the characteristics of bus / rail integration in Greater Manchester:

Littleborough: the bus stop adjacent to the station has 3bph towards Rochdale and 2bph towards Calderbrook. The stops on the A58 are about 150m away and offer a more frequent service;


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Smithy Bridge: the pattern of services is similar to Littleborough, with some services departing adjacent to the station and a higher frequency service via the A58. However, the walk distance to the A58 corridor is about 650 metres and less convenient for bus / rail interchange;

Rochdale: there are 6bph between the railway and bus stations (distance of 800m). The Metrolink extension is currently being constructed with the Rochdale via Oldham to Manchester line being converted to light rail, with an extension from the railway station to the bus station to be delivered in 2014;

Castleton: there are bus stops around 100m from the station with regular services towards Rochdale and Manchester city centre;

Mills Hill: bus stops around 50m from the station offer frequent services towards Rochdale, Oldham, Middleton and Manchester city centre;

Moston: there are buses adjacent to the station with departures every 5 minutes towards Rochdale, Oldham, Middleton and Manchester city centre and departures every 10 minutes to Oldham. The opportunities for modal integration may be reduced if a revised timetable is delivered, although the proximity of Metrolink will help to offset these impacts.

6.5.5 Selected Huddersfield Line Stations Served by Calder Valley Trains

The timetable specification presented in Chapter 3 includes a circular service towards Leeds calling at selected stations on the Huddersfield Line:

Brighouse: bus stops located adjacent to the station offer frequent departures towards Bradford and Huddersfield respectively, and these are supplemented by other stops about 125m from the station on Huddersfield Road. There is potential to relocate the Huddersfield bound bus stop so it is closer to the rail station. There are hourly buses to Elland, but a higher frequency service could provide an interim solution to improve public transport linkages between the two towns prior to the possible delivery of the new railway station at Elland;

Huddersfield: the bus station is around 300m from the railway station and offers journey opportunities to numerous destinations in the Kirklees area. A free bus currently operates every ten minutes provides connections between the bus and rail station;

Mirfield: the nearest bus stops are located on the A644 about 300m from the station, with journey opportunities towards Huddersfield, Dewsbury and Leeds;

Dewsbury: the bus station is about 250m from the railway station and offers services to destinations in North Kirklees. A free shuttle bus service currently operating at ten minutely intervals links the bus and rail station;

Batley: the nearest bus stop is around 120m from the station, with some services to Huddersfield, Dewsbury and Leeds. More frequent buses can be boarded from Batley bus station about 900m away;


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Morley: the station has relatively poor bus links, since the nearest stop with a frequent service is about 900m away. There are frequent buses towards Morley town centre and Leeds city centre.


1 The increased passenger usage means facilities at selected stations should be enhanced. For example, the introduction of cycle parking, toilets, staffing and ticket machines

2

There is scope to more than double the number of car parking spaces at stations on the Calder Valley Line to almost 1,400 spaces. The majority of additional spaces would be delivered at Mills Hill, Rochdale, New Pudsey, Sowerby Bridge, Todmorden, Smithy Bridge and Mytholmroyd. The number of parking spaces could be increased at Mirfield by 125. The feasibility of alternative funding sources needs to be evaluated, for example, Local Transport Plan

3

The revised timetable creates a framework to integrate bus services more effectively with rail. The regular interval rail timetable proposed would provide a more effective framework to help bus operators achieve this objective. In addition, there is scope to retime some local feeder services, particularly those operating at low frequencies. If passenger usage could be increased, this could help to make the financial case to extend the bus operating period.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


7 Demand and Revenue Modelling

7.1 Background There are several components to the demand and revenue forecasting methodology. The timetable changes proposed in Chapter 3 could deliver the following benefits:

Journey time reductions between certain station pairs, and some of these changes could be significant and achieve transformational changes in demand;

Wholly new rail demand generated by the introduction of new services, for example, the direct rail services from Burnley to Manchester;

Wholly new rail demand generated from the construction of new stations, for example, Low Moor, Hipperholme, Elland and Laisterdyke (a business case for Low Moor has already been prepared by Metro).

The flowchart shown in Figure 7.1 summarises the main components of the modelling methodology.

Figure 7.1 Main Components of the Modelling Methodology


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


7.2 Modelling the Impact of Timetable Revisions

7.2.1 Background

MOIRA software is normally used to estimate the impact of the incremental timetable revisions in terms of the changes in journeys and revenue. The software is widely used by train operators, Network Rail, the Department for Transport and their consultants to examine the change in revenue resulting from modest timetable changes. Elasticities are applied to the proportional change in Generalised Journey Times (GJT)4 to calculate the likely change in journeys and revenue. A copy of the latest MOIRA database has been obtained from Northern Rail for the purposes of this study.

7.2.2 Methodology – Incremental Changes in Journey Times

For the 100 largest flows identified by MOIRA to be affected by the proposed timetable changes, we have analysed the proportional changes in GJT resulting from the current and proposed timetable. The interim and preferred timetable specifications have been developed to all day service patterns, with adjustments for weekend demand. If the percentage difference in GJT is less than 10% as a result of the timetable changes, an elasticity of -0.9 has been applied, for example, a 10% reduction in GJT would lead to a 9% increase in demand. For the relevant flows, the forecast revenue and demand has been estimated using MOIRA based on the formulae shown below which is appropriate for modelling incremental changes.

/ =

.

/

7.2.3 Impact of ‘Transformational’ Journey Time Changes

However, the functionality of the MOIRA software means it is unlikely to fully represent the impact from the ‘transformational’ journey times that could be delivered for some stations by the timetable changes. Previous project work has demonstrated the elasticity based function used in MOIRA under-estimates some of the benefits if major timetable revisions are proposed. An alternative approach to supplement the MOIRA forecasts has been devised to avoid under-estimating the scale of the timetable benefits. Our analysis in the Baseline report also validates this assumption, since the trip rate per person from stations on the Calder Valley Line is lower compared with other routes. The introduction of major timetable changes could help to generate large increases in patronage and revenue.

7.2.4 Modelling Transformational Changes in Journey Times

The standard modelling methodology used in MOIRA does not fully take account of the transformational journey time savings. The introduction of direct journey opportunities, changes to the stopping pattern or higher frequencies between 4 Generalised journey time includes actual time spent travelling on each service, plus an allowance for wait time (depending on service frequency) and interchange penalty (if applicable)


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


stations could mean the percentage change in GJT is more than 10%. Instead of applying the elasticity of -0.9 to the proportional change in GJT as described above, alternative parameters have therefore been used.

Guidance in the Passenger Demand Forecasting Handbook has been examined to establish an appropriate elasticity value (August 2009)5. The advice suggests that if current speeds are relatively slow and a significant improvement is delivered, (including the removal of interchanges), elasticities of -1.5 may be appropriate. This elasticity has therefore been used in developing the ‘core’ set of forecasts.

Alternatively, Network Rail has undertaken modelling work to support the business case for the proposed Northern Hub. Some of these service changes could deliver significant journey time reductions, especially for wholly new direct cross-Manchester trips. As a result, an alternative modelling framework was prepared to estimate the likely impact of transformational journey times, since MOIRA would be wholly unsuitable for estimating these impacts. As part of this work, Network Rail developed a gravity model to derive a revised elasticity values. For stations with an origin or destination on the Calder Valley Line, the elasticity value calculated was -2.64. This assumption has been used as part of the ‘optimistic’ scenario and represents a possible upper range since the timetable changes proposed would not be directly comparable with the Northern Hub work.

7.3 Results of the Timetable Changes using MOIRA

7.3.1 Standard MOIRA Methodology

Redacted

7.3.2 Modelling ‘Transformational’ Journey Time Impacts

Redacted

7.3.3 Impact on Individual Station Flows

Redacted

5 Passenger Demand Forecasting Handbook (August 2009), Chapter C4


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


7.4 New Journey Opportunities From Burnley Redacted

7.5 New Stations Several new stations have been identified by the stakeholders. An outline business case has already been prepared for Low Moor station, and we have utilised the main conclusions. Likely demand and revenue has been estimated for the proposed station at Hipperholme and the methodology has been set out below.

7.5.1 Low Moor

A business case for Low Moor station was prepared by Steer Davis Gleave for Metro in 20086. A trip rate model was used to estimate the demand for the station based on the local population catchment. Several other stations in West Yorkshire have been used to benchmark the likely trip rate based on 800m and 2km catchments. It is assumed the station would generate about 540 return trips per weekday by 2015. About 70% of trips would be newly generated, with the remainder abstracted from other catchments. This equates to about 174,000 passengers a year, generating total revenue of £370,000. This implies an average yield per passenger of £2.13.

A review of the assumptions underpinning the business case has not been completed as part of this study, since the station forms part of the commitments to be delivered in the forthcoming Local Transport Plan 3 as a priority for Bradford Council and Metro.

7.5.2 Hipperholme

Demand forecasts were developed by Arup for the proposed new station. Four different market segments have been assessed as follows:

trips from proposed housing development in Hipperholme;

trips from proposed office development in Hipperholme;

new rail trips from the surrounding catchment based upon a significant improvement in the accessibility of the rail network;

abstraction of trips from existing rail stations.

7.5.2.1 Housing Development

The number of rail trips that are likely to be generated by the proposed housing development has been estimated using the information presented in Table 7.5. The population of the new development has been based upon the number of proposed new dwellings, an 85% occupancy rate and 2.4 occupants per dwelling.

Table 7.5 Assumed Trip Rates

6 Review of Low Moor Railway Station Business Case (March 2008). Prepared by Steer Davies Gleave for Metro.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Catchment Daily Trips

per 1000 population

Trip Rate per

resident*

Population Calculated Daily Rail

Trips

Calculated Annual Rail

Trips**

0-800m 25 0.025 1,697 42 13,239

* Trip rate from Table B6.2, PDFH, August 2002, ** based on an annualisation factor of 312.

7.5.2.2 Office Development

For the proposed office development, information from the TRICS database and the size of the proposed development has been used to establish the number of person trips likely to be generated by the proposed office development. Having calculated the total number of person trips, this was multiplied by the likely off-peak rail mode share (based upon the mode share for the Town ward in Halifax that surrounds the station) to provide an estimate of rail trips. The calculations indicate that 10 rail trips per day would be generated, which equates to 2,656 trips per year assuming an annualisation factor of 260. Trips to the office development would only comprise a small percentage of total trips.

7.5.2.3 New Rail Trips

In addition to rails trips generated by new development it is likely the station will generate entirely new rail trips. These new rail trips will not be abstracted from other stations but generated by the release of suppressed demand as a result of significant improvements in the accessibility of the rail network. To estimate the number of new trips that could be generated 2001 journey to work census information was analysed. For the wards of Hipperholme and Northowram and Shelf it has been assumed that the new station will increase rail mode share to a level similar to that of Town ward in Halifax (this being the ward that surrounds Halifax station). As a consequence it has been calculated that 112 additional rail trips could be generated per day which equates to 29,238 rail trips per year assuming an annualisation factor of 260.

7.5.2.4 Abstracted Demand

It is also likely that a station at Hipperholme will abstract demand and revenue from Halifax station. However, as this will not be new revenue for the rail industry it has not been included in the financial and economic appraisal.

7.5.2.5 Summary

Redacted

7.5.3 Other Proposed Stations

Two other potential stations have been identified by stakeholders at Elland and Laisterdyke. The timescales for delivering a station at Laisterdyke is relatively long term given the requirement to upgrade signalling capability between Bradford Interchange and Leeds, so it is not appropriate to assess the likely patronage at this stage. In contrast, it is understood the financial and economic


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


business case for Elland will be examined as part of a forthcoming Project Inception Report.

7.6 Summary of the Demand and Revenue Forecasts Redacted

7.7 Ticketless Travel Fare evasion (ticketless travel) occurs on Northern Rail services and means that the level of journeys and their associated revenues reported in MOIRA are underrepresented. The difference between ORR statistics and collated APC data is able to indicate the level of ticketless travel but as yet there is insufficient APC data to establish a robust relationship. Consequently, we can assume that the journeys and revenue predicted are conservative and are likely to increase with further enforcement activities and smartcard initiatives.

7.8 Impact of the Interim Timetable Options The analysis presented in Chapter 7 thus far assumes the Preferred Timetable specification is introduced. However, the discussion in Chapter 3 highlighted a phased implementation may be required. This phasing is needed, in response to the constraints affecting rolling stock availability and the requirement to deliver specific infrastructure schemes, for example, extra platform capacity at Leeds and the completion of the Todmorden Curve to facilitate new direct services from Burnley.

The demand and revenue could alter in response to the different components of the business case being delivered, including:

introduction of the Interim Timetable Specification, rather than the Preferred Timetable Specification;

introduction of 1tph between Burnley and Manchester rather than 2tph. The change in demand and revenue resulting from the frequency changes have been estimated using the proportional change in GJT.

Table 7.8 illustrates the impact of these alternative scenarios on forecast patronage and revenue. The overall impact of different potential permutations resulting from these interim service patterns are discussed and evaluated in Chapter 8 from an appraisal perspective. This means the incremental benefits and costs associated with the delivery of different phases of the Timetable Specification can be quantified.

Table 7.8: Summary of the Alternative Scenario on Demand and Revenue

Redacted


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


8 Scheme Appraisal

8.1 Introduction An appraisal spreadsheet has been developed to evaluate the economic benefits resulting from the Preferred Timetable Specification. The first part of this chapter describes the appraisal methodology for this specification, with the latter part considering the benefits and costs associated with a phased implementation.

In accordance with WebTag guidance, the appraisal has been prepared over a 60 year period, with prices discounted to a 2002 base and converted to market prices. Benefits and costs have been discounted at 3.5% per annum for the first 30 years of the appraisal, and 3.0% per annum thereafter. The economic benefits considered include:

Revenue benefits for timetable/service changes (these are likely to be higher in reality due to existing levels of ticketless travel);

Revenue benefits from new stations;

Highway decongestion, accident reduction and environmental benefits;

Journey time benefits for existing and new rail passengers;

Rolling stock refurbishment;

Wider economic benefits in terms of productivity and agglomeration impacts.

Crowding benefits have not been estimated, since these are out of scope of this commission. However, based on work undertaken for other rail planning projects, it suggests these benefits will be at least comparable to the revenue benefits generated by the proposed timetable and service changes.

8.2 Revenue Benefits The annual revenue estimates for each market segment presented in Chapter 7 have been used to inform the 60 year economic appraisal. These include:

Ramp up factors: these have been included, since it has been assumed that demand (and therefore the revenue) for the timetable changes and new stations will ramp up over a five year period. Separate ramp up factors have been assumed for the each market segment to take account of likely differences in user behaviour. The ramp up factors utilised are presented in Table 8.1. These are prudent assumptions compared with the standard parameters normally used and assume that the transformational impacts take longer to actually realise;


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Table 8.1: Ramp Up Factors by Market Segment

Ramp Up Factors

MOIRA (GJT <10%)

MOIRA (GJT >10%)

Burnley New station – Low Moor

New station – Hipperholme

Year 1 75% 50% 20% 20% 20%

Year 2 90% 75% 40% 40% 40%

Year 3 100% 90% 60% 60% 60%

Year 4 100% 100% 80% 80% 80%

Year 5 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Source: Arup estimates

Fare revenue growth: It has been assumed that by 2015 (assumed start year for the revised timetable) that fares will grow as Retail Price Index (RPI) +1% for the life of the appraisal period. This is a prudent assumption given Northern Rail fares have been increasing above RPI+1% in recent years and are set to increase further in 2012 for another three years.

Rail passenger growth: future year passenger growth assumptions have been based upon information presented in Tables 3.6 and 3.8 of the Northern Rail Utilisation Strategy prepared by Network Rail. These are summarised in Table 8.2 below. These growth factors illustrate percentage growth in rail passenger demand for the years 2014, 2019, 2024 and 2029 for a ‘high’ and ‘low’ growth scenario. We have assumed linear growth for the intermediate years, with no further growth beyond 2029. A ‘blended’ growth rate has been used to reflect the local trips to Leeds, Manchester along with the inter-urban journeys based on current trip patterns.

Table 8.2: Northern RUS Growth Factors

2014 2019 2024 2029

Leeds Low 8% 20% 31% 46%

Manchester Low 7% 18% 28% 41%

Leeds High 17% 36% 49% 66%

Manchester High 14% 31% 44% 58%

Inter Urban Low 11% 18% 25% 32%

Inter Urban High 18% 30% 39% 47%

Source: Northern RUS

8.3 Highway Decongestion, Accident and Environmental Benefits

To calculate the highway decongestion benefits, the outputs of the MOIRA modelling have been adjusted take account of the transformational impacts of the timetable changes not accounted for by MOIRA. WebTAG provides guidance on the percentage of trips assumed to transfer by car and we have applied this parameter to the MOIRA outputs to estimate the car kilometres removed from the network.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


The latest WebTag information was used to value these decongestion benefits over the 60 year appraisal period. The accident reduction benefits and and other environmental benefits using the guidance outlined in WebTag have been calculated. These benefits are also related to the number of car kilometres removed from the network.

8.4 Journey Time Benefits To calculate the journey time saving benefits for new and existing users, the outputs of the MOIRA modelling to extract estimates of journey time savings (£s) for new and existing users (for new users assuming the rule of a half) have been used. For new users these estimates have then been uplifted to take account of the transformational impacts of the timetable changes which are not accounted for by MOIRA. The Value of Time is assumed to grow year on year in accordance with WebTag guidance.

8.5 Rolling Stock Refurbishment To account for the proposed refurbishment of the existing rolling stock, it has been assumed that the benefits will be equal to 2.5% of fare revenue. This is in accordance PDFH 4.1 which states that a refurbishment may be worth 2.5% of fare if it improves levels of seating layout, ride quality, ventilation, ambience, noise and seating comfort. These uplifts would be in accordance with the significant improvement in rolling stock delivered.

8.6 Wider Economic Impacts In addition to conventional transport benefits, the proposed scheme will also generate beneficial wider economic impacts. This analysis produces initial estimates of agglomeration benefits which is expected to be the most significant of the four wider impacts as defined by DfT.

Agglomeration benefits refer to the productivity benefits resulting from more jobs being clustered together. The premise is that as more businesses co-locate they become more productive, creating higher levels of output per worker. Transport connections provide vital connections between major centres of employment. They determine how close businesses are in terms of time and cost. Reductions in time and cost act to bring businesses closer together, generating a productivity benefit to the economy. We have estimated the agglomeration benefits that could be generated using a simplified methodology based on the principles of the approach outlined in DfT’s latest guidance7. Agglomeration benefits are presented as an annual value for the year 2011 in 2002 prices (as in DfT Dataset) and in totality discounted over a 60-year time horizon.

The potential for the proposed scheme to generate agglomeration benefits is clear. It will significantly improve travel between major concentrations of employment in Leeds, Bradford, Halifax, Rochdale and Manchester. These are locations which possess a significant presence in the financial and business services sector that evidence suggests benefit particularly from agglomeration benefits. Leeds has the largest concentration of people employed in financial and business 7 TAG Unit 2.8: Wider Impacts and Regeneration (For Consultation, September 2009) and TAG Unit 3.5.14: The Wider Impacts Sub-Objective (For Consultation, September 2009).


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


services in the UK outside of London. In Manchester, almost one in three people are employed in finance, IT and other business services. Together, these two cities have almost 220,000 people employed in the sector providing an existing critical mass of activity of a form that can draw significant benefits from enhanced transport connectivity.

The analysis undertaken demonstrates that the proposed scheme generates significant agglomeration benefits - especially in relation to the scope of the intervention. Table 8.3 indicates the annual agglomeration benefits range from £8.6m to £9.5m (£141.9m to £143.5 in totality discounted over 60 years). These benefits are expected to accrue to businesses in the core employment locations served, and ultimately the national economy. They will support rebalancing of the economy and economic growth. These benefits equate to a 0.02% increase in study area GDP. This % uplift is larger than improvements planned for other Trans-Pennine corridors.

Table 8.3: Agglomeration Benefit (2002 prices) 2015

Value

Agglomeration benefit (annual) £8.6m - £9.5m

As % of study area GDP 0.017% - 0.019%

Agglomeration benefit (discounted over 60 years) £141.9m - £143.5m

Source: Arup analysis

8.7 Rail Service Operating Costs To assess the changes in rail operating costs resulting from the timetable changes, the change in train kilometres has been calculated and multiplied by the average rail operating costs per kilometre for Northern outlined in the Rail Industry Monitor 2008 (£10.41 per km). In order to calculate the change in train kilometres the National Rail Timetable has been used to determine the distance between station pairs, whilst MOIRA has been used to assess the number of trains per day travelling between the station pairs (in each direction) for the existing and proposed timetable. Using this method the annual increase in rail operating costs has been estimated with the results shown in Table 8.4. A more detailed methodology to estimate the chabge in operating costs will be necessary to incorporate the specific timetable changes. For example the requirement for train crew may be reduced with operational efficiencies:

Table 8.4: Summary of Operating Costs

Annual Train Kilometres (millions)

Annual Operating Costs (£m)

Existing Timetable 4.9 50.8 Proposed Timetable (preferred option) 5.9 61.6 Difference 1.0 10.8

Source: Arup calculation. Table includes other services that could be affected by revisions to other Calder Valley Line trains.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Operating costs incurred by Northern Rail for stopping services at Low Moor and Hipperholme have been assumed to be marginal with an annual cost allowance of £10,000 per station included within the business case.

For the economic appraisal it has been assumed that the operating costs will increase in line with RPI each year.

8.8 Station Operating Costs For the new station at Hipperholme, an annual operating cost of £150,000 per annum has been applied, in line with industry standard assumptions. For the economic appraisal it has been assumed that the operating costs will increase in line with RPI each year.

8.9 Capital Costs In order to achieve the timetable improvements it is necessary to deliver some infrastructure improvement schemes. The high level outturn capital costs for these schemes has been estimated based on industry documentation and our experience of delivering rail improvement for comparable scheme as follows:

Bradford Remodelling £3.0m (Source Strategic Business Plan);

Bradford to Hebden Bridge Resignalling £10.0m (Arup estimate);

Vitriol Works to Smithy Bridge Resignalling £5.0m (Arup estimate);

Todmorden Chord £9.2m (Based on cost of Option 3 in Network Rail GRIP 1/2 Report).

In addition to the above enhancements there are capital costs associated with the provision of new stations at Low Moor and Hipperholme. For Low Moor station a cost of £5.4m is assumed (as per the costs included in LTP3 2011-2014 Implementation Plan) whilst for Hipperholme a capital cost of £7.5m in 2011 Q1 prices has been utilised which is consistent with outturn costs for other new stations in West Yorkshire.

In accordance with WebTag guidance an allowance for risk and optimism bias has been made in relation to the capital costs. A 30% risk allowance and 66% optimism bias has been assumed.

8.10 Financial and Economic Appraisal for Preferred Timetable Specification

Table 8.5 summarises the financial appraisal of the scheme. All figures are per annum assuming full maturity of demand following the introduction of the timetable changes and delivery of new stations at Low Moor and Hipperholme. Although the scheme does not generate a positive financial NPV this is not unexpected in light of the current subsidy of the Northern Rail Franchise. According to information from the Rail Industry Monitor (2008) only 26% of Northern Rail’s income is generated by fare paying passengers. The remaining income comes from grants and other additional items.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011

J:\121000\121525-00\121525-49 CALDER VALLEY RAIL LINE STUDY\0 ARUP\0-11 TRANSPORTATION\0-11-8 REPORTS\ISSUED REPORTS\CV FULL FINAL ISSUED REPORT

REDACTED.DOCX Page 68

Table 8.5: Summary of Financial Appraisal

Redacted

Source: Arup calculation

An economic benefit cost ratio for the scheme has been calculated and shows that the scheme offers good value for money. For the high growth scenario the scheme generates a BCR of 2.57:1 including the wider economic impacts. Even the low growth scenario would achieve a BCR of greater than 2.0:1. The results are shown in more detail in Table 8.6. The BCR is likely to be higher once crowding benefits and an uplift in ticket revenues (to account for ticketless travel) has been applied.

Table 8.6: Summary of Economic Appraisal

BCR (excluding WEIs) 1.05 0.82

BCR (including WEIs) 2.57 2.13

Source: Arup forecasting models

8.11 Sensitivity Tests

As highlighted earlier in the report, a phased implementation of the Preferred Timetable may be required in response to the scarcity of rolling stock. Table 8.7 summarises the different permutations of service options that could be introduced, relating to the Interim Timetable, the Preferred Timetable and alternative service frequencies to Burnley and East Lancashire. Understanding the specific costs and benefits associated with the schemes helps to identify the optimal phasing.

Table 8.7: Summary of the Sensitivity Tests

Timetable

Components

Sensitivity Test

1 2 3 4 5 6

Interim timetable √ √ √

1tph to Burnley √ √

2tph to Burnley √ √

Preferred timetable √ √ √

Source: Arup analysis. Assumes the removal of the impact of the new stations and high growth

scenario


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Source: Arup analysis. Assumes the removal of the impact of the new stations and high growth scenario

The benefits and costs associated with these sensitivity tests have been estimated, with the results presented in Table 8.8. The revenue results from the Interim Timetable, along with the adjustments to reflect the frequency changes for Burnley have been incorporated. The economic benefits have been revised using a pro-rata methodology, based on the percentage difference between the revenue for each service option. Changes in operating and capital costs have been estimated based on the specific timetable characteristics.

The analysis indicates that introducing the Interim Timetable on its own should be profitable with revenues exceeding the additional operating costs. The BCRs for the sensitivity tests including the Todmorden Curve and Burnley to Manchester services are lower compared with the Preferred Timetable but still return a healthy BCR. This analysis is only based on a high level consideration of the business case elements of the Burnley to Manchester services. However, the analysis suggests the new Burnley to Manchester services could contribute significantly to operating costs whilst generating only modest revenue (related to the size of the population within the station catchment), increasing the net cost to government and reducing the BCR. This is despite generating significant additional wider economic impacts.

This analysis indicates that further, more detailed work is required on individual elements of the Preferred Timetable, particularly the Burnley to Manchester services and new station proposals. It is understood some of this work is already been undertaking and this should help to inform the further development of the timetable specification.

It should be noted that Sensitivity Test 6 results differ for the high growth scenario results in Table 8.6 since the impact of proposed new stations is not included to ensure consistency of results.

Table 8.8: Summary of Economic Appraisal (£m)

BCR (excluding WEIs) 1.272 0.785 0.548 2.279 1.489 1.039

BCR (including WEIs) 2.365 1.225 1.678 4.237 3.450 2.540 Rolling Stock Requirements (units) 3 5 6 6 8 9

Infrastructure Schemes Required

Bradford Remodelling

Bradford Remodelling Todmorden

Curve Vitriol

Signalling

Bradford Remodelling Todmorden

Curve Vitriol

Signalling

Bradford Remodelling

Hebden Bridge and

Vitriol Signalling

All All

Source: Arup forecasting models. Please note that the analysis excludes the impact of new stations given the likely lag time to deliver these. It also does not explicitly take account of the costs for the remodelling of Leeds Station.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


9 Conclusions and Recommendations

9.1 Introduction There are opportunities to submit an application for Regional Growth Funding on behalf of stakeholders in Greater Manchester, Lancashire and West Yorkshire, so defining the overall proposition for the future Calder Valley Line services forms one of the main objectives for this study. The purpose of this Chapter is to collate the proposals outlined earlier in the report to form a coordinated Project Delivery Plan that describes the intermediate steps necessary to implement the Strategic Vision. The different components of the proposition are set out below, whilst the timelines to progress recommended actions and next steps are presented in a Project Delivery Plan shown in Appendix B. Network Rail, Northern Rail and the PTEs have been consulted on the implications of these proposals.

The Project Delivery Plan indicates that there are some elements of the Strategic Vision that can be taken forward in the short term, whilst others will need to be taken forward in the medium to long term since the requirement for feasibility work means implementation timescales are longer.

9.2 Short Term In the short term, the following elements of the Project Delivery Plan can be progressed:

Delivery of the Interim Timetable Specification changes and procurement of the required rolling stock;

Rolling stock refurbishment;

Improvements to station facilities;

Possible hourly service extension from Rochdale to Burnley Manchester Road assuming the timely completion of the Todmorden West curve;

Delivery of the Low Moor station (with funding via LTP3);

Car park extensions at selected stations.

An Interim Timetable has been developed that does not necessitate the level of rolling stock required by the Preferred Timetable Specification. This Interim Option would require only three additional train sets and is therefore likely to offer a shorter implementation timescale compared with the Preferred Option for this reason. The capacity issues at Leeds Station would also need to be addressed.

Service quality improvements could also be delivered to enhance the rolling stock fleet. A dedicated fleet of inter-urban units should be identified for the limited stop services between Leeds and Manchester Victoria, and a package of refurbishment measures delivered including first class accommodation, refreshments and power sockets. Several other train operating companies have successfully introduced similar refurbishments. Stakeholders should lobby for these proposals to be delivered as part of the next Northern Rail franchise.

The higher number of passengers expected to use stations benefiting from significant frequency and / or journey time improvements to be implemented in the longer term, creates a requirement to introduce a wider range of facilities. A


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


package of measures including cycle parking, toilets, staff presence and ticket offices could be introduced at selected stations in the short term as a separate workstream, incorporated as part of the next Northern Franchise.

A package to improve accessibility to selected stations will also be needed to complement the long term timetable changes and infrastructure enhancements. The analysis has highlighted opportunities to deliver an additional 770 car parking spaces at Calder Valley Line stations, principally at Mills Hill, Rochdale, New Pudsey, Sowerby Bridge, Todmorden and Smithy Bridge. Scope for an additional 125 spaces at Mirfield was also identified. These car park extensions can be delivered as a separate workstream, incorporated as part of the next Local Transport Plan.

9.3 Medium to Long Term In the medium to long term the following elements of the Project Delivery Plan can be progressed:

Delivery of the Preferred Timetable Specification changes and procurement of the required rolling stock;

Infrastructure upgrades including capacity enhancement at Leeds Station, delivery of Todmorden West Curve to allow services from Burnley and East Lancashire to Manchester (if this is not deliverable in the short term), signalling enhancements to support a regular interval timetable, line speed enhancements, other incremental improvements schemes and delivery of new stations;

Bus-rail integration following delivery of a regular interval timetable.

9.3.1 Timetable Development

The development of a revised Timetable Specification forms a fundamental component for the overall study, particularly as the current pattern fails to meet several objectives adequately. The proposed Preferred Timetable Specification comprises:

2tph between Leeds and Manchester Victoria via Halifax (limited calling pattern with a journey time of 81 minutes,), (Bradford to Manchester Victoria would be 58 minutes);

2tph between Leeds and Manchester Victoria via Halifax (semi-fast calling pattern with a journey time of 88 minutes,), (Bradford to Manchester Victoria would be 71 minutes);

2tph between Leeds and Brighouse via Halifax, with 1tph to Huddersfield / Wakefield Westgate and 1tph continuing to Leeds via Dewsbury;

2tph between East Lancashire and Manchester Victoria via Burnley Manchester Road and Todmorden (with a journey time of 45 minutes from Burnley to Manchester);

1tph between Leeds and Blackpool North via Dewsbury and Brighouse (limited calling pattern between Brighouse and Leeds).

This service pattern would broadly operate all day, with some minor changes during the peak, and a frequency reduction at evenings and part of the weekend.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Generally the timetable will create faster or new, more frequent journey opportunities for passengers. However, the proposed timetable would remove a small number of direct journey opportunities that are currently available, for example, Bradford and Halifax to East Lancashire, Bramley to Manchester, or some local stations in Greater Manchester to Leeds. However, the number of passengers that would be adversely affected by these changes is relatively small, as shown in Chapter 7. These dis-benefits are offset by new revenue generated from faster, more frequent trains between other stations. Network capacity constraints and the small number of passengers between Wakefield and Huddersfield mean the case for improved frequencies on this corridor are difficult to justify. Furthermore, signalling constraints prevent frequencies at other stations being improved, for example Walsden. Extra work is needed to identify the most suitable local train services to be extended beyond Leeds to York and Selby to maintain network connectivity. The choice of services to be extended will be dependent on the revised TransPennine Express timetable and the timing of train arrivals at Leeds.

The implementation of this timetable specification would help to provide a more effective framework to support the housing and economic growth targets being prepared by the stakeholders served by the Calder Valley Line. The introduction of the multi-tier timetable, as specified above, would support commuting, business and leisure travel patterns more effectively compared with the current services helping to reduce the reliance on other modes. Furthermore, the revised specification would help to support stakeholder proposals for new stations in a more effective way, subject to detailed evaluation of these business cases. There are two main components affecting the implementation of the revised timetable – a requirement to deliver selected infrastructure schemes and the procurement of additional rolling stock.

9.3.2 Rolling Stock

An additional nine units would be needed to operate the revised timetable specification compared with the current requirements. At present, there is a shortage of diesel rolling stock available. Phased electrification schemes planned for the North West, Great Western Main Line and Scotland should stimulate a cascade of diesel units and create an opportunity procure the extra units. Stakeholders will need to lobby with DfT in a timely and coordinated manner to outline their collective requirements, given the potential competition for the cascaded units. Although the initial timescales suggest these cascades will be completed by 2015/16, there are a number of potential risks that could delay this proposed timescale, and hence the availability of spare diesel trains.

9.3.3 Infrastructure Requirements

The draft Timetable Specification seeks to make best use of existing infrastructure. The supporting analysis has highlighted a number of potential capacity pinch-points that could affect the implementation of the Timetable Specification, most notably, the proposal to introduce 6 trains per hour to/from Leeds via New Pudsey in each direction. There are capacity constraints affecting the availability of west facing bay platforms at Leeds station, and it is uncertain whether the extra 2tph can operate to / from Leeds or the introduction of


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


new/revised platforms or a turn-back facility in an alternative location will be required.

The Timetable Specification has been developed that takes account of the existing signalling capability. It would only be possible to introduce a non-standard pattern timetable unless improvements were delivered, ie trains do not operate at regular intervals, unless the infrastructure is upgraded to allow 4 minute headways between trains.

The Todmorden West Curve also needs to be reinstated to allow direct trains between Burnley Manchester Road (with possible extensions to other stations in East Lancashire) and Manchester Victoria. Based on the likely demand (see below), a double track connection would offer better network resiliency to support the proposed 2tph service. The indicative timescales to deliver the scheme assume a Transport and Works Act Order will not be required. This assumption may be reasonable, assuming all the land is within Network Rail ownership and there no Public Rights of Way or statutory undertaker’s equipment affected. However, the scheme could potentially require planning permission (dependent on the existence of Permitted and General Permitted Development Rights). If planning permission is required, the timescales may be extended if objections are received. Furthermore, it may be necessary to renew the signalling equipment adjacent to the site, and this could extend the suggested timescales.

9.3.4 Bus Rail Integration

The regular interval pattern rail service timetable also creates a framework to integrate local bus services more effectively, especially to serve intermediate catchments. The departure times of Metro Connect bus services may need to be revised to reflect the amended rail timetable, with potential to extend the operational period of these buses once passenger usage has increased. Commercial services operating via A646/A6033/A58 could also be revised once the Preferred Timetable Specification is delivered to encourage improved bus-rail integration.

9.4 Business Case A robust economic business case is vital to underpin the proposals. Initial economic appraisal results indicate the scheme offers good value for money, delivering a BCR in the region of 2.5:1 for the core scenario. Separate business cases will need to be prepared to assess the feasibility of car park extensions and station facility upgrades.

9.5 Stakeholder Engagement To ensure the scheme proposals are developed and then implemented in a timely manner, the proposition will need to be collectively promoted by stakeholders. A stakeholder workshop has been held to discuss the study findings where an emerging consensus was identified. However, the stakeholders highlighted several areas where further work (and cooperation) is required to take forward the proposals including:

Continued liaison with the Northern Hub project team within Network Rail to ensure the proposals are aligned.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Working with the Todmorden Curve project team within Network Rail to ensure the Calder Valley Line proposals are not compromised.

Consider how the Calder Valley Line proposals will integrate and connect with other services;

Consideration of peak service requirements and timetable options;

Further promote modal integration as part of the scheme, for example, provision of car parking, bus/metrolink/rail integration and cycling and walking links;

Quality improvements in relation to stations and rolling stock should be pursued as key elements of the proposals;

Early engagement with DfT is required in relation to rolling stock requirements but also the content of the new franchise specification;

Further work is required to support the business case including research relating to non rail users and ways to achieve operating cost savings;

Discussions with Network Rail regarding the forthcoming programme of renewals, along with the opportunities for securing enhancements area also needed.

The service revisions will generate benefits for several geographic areas, so it is vital stakeholders in Greater Manchester, Lancashire and West Yorkshire co-ordinate to ensure the main messages are conveyed to a wider audience in a coherent manner.

9.6 Managing Risks and Dependencies There are numerous risks and dependencies associated with the delivery of complex rail planning projects. Specific risks that have already been identified following discussions with stakeholders including Network Rail and these include:

the availability of platform and track capacity at Leeds Station;

The opportunities to route an additional hourly service via Dewsbury may be restricted as an extra 1-2tph are being considered to enhance TransPennine Express services. Trains will need to be flighted to address these capacity constraints ;

Certain resignalling schemes (eg Milner Royd, Hebden Bridge, Preston PSB) are not in the current Control Period 4 or Control Period 5 strategy;

The availability of rolling stock;

Issues relating to the Northern Hub project being promoted by Network Rail including:

As a result of the Northern Hub project there would be no capacity to use the east end bays at Manchester Victoria requiring trains to travel through to other destinations rather than terminating. Potentially this could mean services to destinations including Manchester Airport, Liverpool and Wigan.

Todmorden Curve is not included in the plans for the Northern Hub and Network Rail would like to consider the feasibility of improving


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


connectivity between Burnley and Manchester Victoria via Blackburn as alternative to the Todmorden Curve scheme.

More freight trains will have to route via Calder Valley as a result of the Northern Hub project.

The proposed phased Project Delivery Plan will be vital in managing these risks as it will help to raise the profile of the Line incrementally, and ensure the entire project is not dependent on the delivery of all components in a single package. However, the risks and dependencies will need to be monitored and mitigated through effective project and stakeholder management.

9.7 Requirements for Further Work The outputs from this study are intended to demonstrate there is considerable potential to transform the Calder Valley Line services. However, it is recognised that further feasibility work will be required to refine and develop these indicative proposals. The areas requiring further work include:

Complete other feasibility work needed for the medium – long term Vision;

Wider stakeholder engagement to promote the overall proposition summarised in Chapters 3 to 8 above and lobby for funding;

Engagement with Network Rail to ensure the proposed Timetable Specification gets incorporated into the wider framework for the proposed Northern Hub;

Develop the Timetable Specification into a more detailed output, supplemented by Railsys modelling to understand the performance risks. Engagement with the wider rail industry including the DfT is required;

Engagement with DfT to discuss the future rolling stock requirements for the route;

Confirmation of the infrastructure requirements needed to operate the proposed Timetable Specification, including signalling improvements, layout for the Todmorden West Curve, plus addressing platform capacity issues at the major stations including Leeds;

Refining the capital cost estimates for the infrastructure schemes, especially those schemes identified above;

Engagement with Network Rail to ensure the package of infrastructure enhancements is aligned as closely as possible with forthcoming renewals to maximise the value for money aspects;

Refining the financial and economic business case, including an analysis of train loading patterns to ensure sufficient capacity is provided;

Initial feasibility design for the proposed car park extensions and suggested enhancements to station facilities;

Engagement with local bus operators to improve modal integration.


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Appendix A: Timetable Specifications


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Interim Westbound Class 158 150 150 150 158 150 150 158 150 158 158

Selby York

Leeds 00:08 00:22 00:38 00:43 00:52

Leeds West Jn 00/09 00/23 00/39 00/44 00/53

Whitehall Jn 00/09½ 00/23½ 00/39½ 00/44½ 00/53½

Holbeck Jn 00/10 00/24 00/40 00/54

Bramley 00:29½ 00:59½

New Pudsey 00a18 00a34 00:48 01a04

Mill Lane Jn 00/24½ 00/40½ ← 00/54½ 01/10½

Bradford Interchange arr 00:26 00:42 (00:42) 00:56 01:12

2 2 4 2 2 2

dep 00:29 (00:51) 00:45 00:51 00:59 01:15

Mill Lane Jn 00/30½ → 00/46½ 00/52½ 01/00½ 01/16½

Low Moor

Hipperholme

Halifax arr 00:40½ 00:56½ 01:02½ 01:10½ 01:26½

1 1 1 1 1

dep 00:41½ 00:57½ 01:03½ 01:11½ 01:27½

Halifax RS

Morley 00a51

Batley 00:23 00:56

Dewsbury From 01a00½

Thornhill LNW Jn H'field 01/03

Mirfield East Jn 01/04

Mirfield 01a06½

Heaton Lodge Jn 01*13½

Bradley Wood Jn 00/39½ 01/16½

Brighouse 00:44 01:19

Elland

Greetland Jn 00/49½ 01/24½

Dryclough Jn 00/52 01/06

Milner Royd Jn 00/46 01/02 01/16 01/26½ 01/32

Sowerby Bridge To 01:04 To 01a29 01:34

Mytholmroyd Leeds 01a10 H'field 01a40

Hebden Bridge arr 00:52½ 01:12½ 01:22½ 01:35 01:42½

dep 00:53½ 01:13½ 01:23½ 01:36 01:43½

Hall Royd Jn 00/58½ 01/18½ 01/28½ 01/41 01/48½

Todmorden North Jn 01/22½

Stansfield Hall Jn 01/26½

Copy Pit From 01/31½ 01/49½ Burnley Manchester Road Burnley 01a39½ 01a57½

Gannow Jn 01/41 01/59

Rose Grove 01+43


Todmorden 01a01 01a15½ 01a21 To 01a31 To 01a51

Walsden 01:24 Man Vic B'pool

Littleborough 01/07 01a30½ 01/37 North 01a58½

Smithy Bridge 01:33 02:01

Rochdale East Jn 01/09½ 01/24 01/35½ 01/39½ 01+54 02/03½

Rochdale arr 01:10½ 01:25 01:36½ 01:40½ 01+55 02:04½

4 4 4 4 4 4

dep 01:11½ 01:26 01:37½ 01:41½ 01:56 02:05½

Castleton 01:29 01:59

Castleton East Jn 01/14 01/30 01/40 01/44 02/00 02/08

Mills Hill 01a35 02a05 02:12½

Vitriol Works

Moston 01:38 02:08

Thorpes Bridge Jn 01/22 01/40 01/48 01/52 02/10 02/18

Miles Platting 01/23 01/41 01/49 01/53 02/11 02/19

2 2 2 2 2 2

Manchester Victoria 01:28 01:46 01:54 01:58 02:16 02:24

Interim Eastbound 158 158 158 150 150 158 158 150 150


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Manchester Victoria 00:02 00:08 00:17 00:32 00:38 00:47

Miles Platting 00/05 00/11 00/20 00/35 00/41 00/50

Thorpes Bridge Jn 00/06 00/12 00/21 00/36 00/42 00/51

Moston 00:23½ 00:53½

Vitriol Works

Mills Hill 00a28 00a47 00a58

Castleton East Jn 00/12 00/18 00/31½ 00/42 00/50½ 01/01½

Castleton From 00:33 01:03

Rochdale arr 00:14½ B'pool 00:20½ 00:37 00:44½ 00:53 01:07

1 North 1 1 1 1 1

dep 00:15½ 00:21½ 00+38 00:45½ 00:54 01:08

Rochdale East Jn 00/16½ 00/22½ 00+39 00/46½ 00/55 01/09

Smithy Bridge 00:25½ 00:58

Littleborough 00/19 00a29 00/49 01a01½

Walsden 00:35

Todmorden 00a27 00a38½ 00a57 01a08½ 01a21½


Rose Grove 00+51

Gannow Jn 00/17 00/54 To

Burnley Manchester Road 00a19½ 00a56½ Burnley

Copypit 00/26½ 01/03½

Stansfield Hall Jn 01/09½

Todmorden North Jn 2 01/13½

Hall Royd Jn 00/28½ 00/36 00/40 00/58½ 01/10

Hebden Bridge arr 00:33 00:40½ 00:44½ 00:22 01:03 01:14½ To

dep 00:34 00:41½ 00:45½ From 01:04 01:15½ Man Vic

Mytholmroyd 00:48½ Leeds 01:18½

Sowerby Bridge 00a48½ 00a54½ 01a24½

Milner Royd Jn 00/40½ 00/49½ 00/55½ 01/10½ 01/25½

Dryclough Jn 00/52 01/06

Greetland Jn 00/51½ 01/08½

Elland

Brighouse 00:56½ 01a14½

1

Bradley Wood Jn 00/59 01/17

Heaton Lodge Jn 01*04½ 00:23

Mirfield 01a07 From To

Mirfield East Jn 01/08½ H'field H'field

Thornhill LNW Jn arr

Ravensthorpe 01:29

Dewsbury 01a12½

Batley 01:15½

Morley 01:21½

Halifax RS

Halifax arr 00:45 00:54½ 01:00 01:15 01:30

2 2 2 2 2

dep 00:46 00:55½ 01:01 01:16 01:31

Hipperholme

Low Moor

2 2 2 2 2 2

Mill Lane Jn 00/58 01/07½ 01/13 ← 01/28 01/43

Bradford Interchange arr 00:59½ 01:09 01:14½ (01:09) 01:29½ 01:44½

4 1 4 1 4 4

dep 01:02½ (01:17½) 01:17½ 01:32½ 01:47½

Mill Lane Jn 01/04 → 01/19 01/34 01/49

New Pudsey 01a11 01:26 01a41 01:56

Bramley 01a30 02a00

p2 p2 p2 p2 p2

Holbeck Jn 01/20½ 01/36 01/50½ 02/06

Whitehall Jn 01/21 01/30½ 01/36½ 01/51 02/06½

Leeds West Jn 01/21½ 01/31 01/37 01/51½ 02/07

Leeds 01:23 01:32½ 01:38½ 01:53 02:08½

To To

Selby York

a= Arrives one minute earlier

c= Arrives two minutes earlier


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


h= Arrives 4½ minutes earlier

p=Performance time

path=Pathing time

+=Empty coaching stock

/=Passing time

Engineering allowances shown in boxes

*=Waiting path


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Preferred Westbound Class 158 158 150 158 142 150 150 142 150 60TR‐40 60TR‐40 158 150 150 150 150

Leeds 00:01 00:01 00:10 00:16 00:31 00:30 00:40 00:46

Leeds West Jn 00/02 00/02 00/11 00/17 00/32 00/31 00/41 00/47

Whitehall Jn 00/02½ 00/02½ 00/11½ 00/17½ 00/32½ 00/31½ 00/41½ 00/47½

Holbeck Jn 00/03 00/12 00/18 00/33 00/42 00/48

Bramley 00:23½ 00:53½

New Pudsey 00:10½ 00a19½ 00a28 00:40½ 00a49½ 00a58

Mill Lane Jn 00/17 00/26 00/34½ 00/47 00/56 01/04½

Bradford Interchange arr (Flight 00:18½ 00:27½ 00:36 00:48½ 00:57½ 01:06

with 2 2 3 2 2 3

dep TPEX) 00:21½ 00:30½ 00:39 00:51½ 01:00½ 01:09

Mill Lane Jn 00/23 00/32 00:40½ 00/53 01/02 01/10½

Low Moor xx xx

Hipperholme xx xx

Halifax arr 00:33 00:42 00:55½ 01:03 01:12 01:25½

1 1 1 1 1 1

dep 00:34 00:43 00:56½ 01:04 01:13 01:26½

Halifax RS

Morley 00/06½ 00a38

Batley 00:23 00:43

Dewsbury 00a12 From 00a46½

Thornhill LNW Jn 00/14 H'field 00/49

Mirfield East Jn 00/14½ 00/50

Mirfield 00:52½

Heaton Lodge Jn 00/16 00*57

Bradley Wood Jn 00/19½ 00/31 00/59½

Brighouse 00:21 00c35½ 00h05½

Elland

Greetland Jn 00/26½ 00/40½ 01/10½

Dryclough Jn 00/59 00/43 01/13 01/29

Milner Royd Jn 00/28½ 00/38½ 00/47½ 00/58 00/58 01/08½ 01/17½

Sowerby Bridge 00a31 00:49½ 00:12 To To 00:46 To 01:19½ To

Mytholmroyd 00a55½ From H'field Leeds From Leeds 01a25½ Leeds

Hebden Bridge arr 00:37 00:45 00:58 Man Vic via Man Vic 01:15 via 01:28 via

dep 00:38 00:46 00:59 Halifax 01/06 01/06 01:16 Halifax 01:29 Dewsbury

Hall Royd Jn 00/43 00/51 01/04 01/12 01/12 01/21 01/34

Todmorden North Jn 00/46½ 01/18½

Stansfield Hall Jn From 00/50½ From 01/22½ 01*28 From

Copy Pit 00/49½ B'burn 00/55½ Colne 01/27½ 01/35 B'pool

Burnley Manchester Road 00a57½ 01a03½ 01a35½ South


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Gannow Jn 00/59 01/05½ 01/27 01/37 01/42½

Rose Grove 01:07½ 01:29 01:39


Todmorden To 00a53½ 00a57½ 01a06½ To To 01a23½ 01a29½ 01a36½

Walsden B'pool B'pool B'burn 01a39½

Littleborough North 00/59½ 01a05 01a14 South 01/21 01/29½ 01/35½ 01a46

Smithy Bridge 01:07½ 01:48½

Rochdale East Jn 01/02 01/10 01/17 01/24 01/32 01/38 01/51

Rochdale arr 01:03 01:11 01:18 01:33 01:39 01:52

4 4 4 4 4 4

dep 01:04 01:12 01:19 01:34 01:40 01:53

Castleton 01:22 01:43

Castleton East Jn 01/06½ 01/14½ 01/23 01/27 01/36½ 01/44 01/55½

Mills Hill 01a18½ 01a27 01a48

Vitriol Works 01/31

Moston 2 01:51

Thorpes Bridge Jn 01/13½ 01/26 01/35 01/36 01/43½ 01/56½ 02/02½

Miles Platting 01/14½ 01/27 01/36 01/44½ 01/57½ 02/03½

2 2 2 2 2 2

Manchester Victoria 01:19½ 01:32 01:41 01/40 01:49½ 02:02½ 02:08½


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Preferred Eastbound 150 60TR‐40 60TR‐40 150 150 150 158 150 158 142 150 158 60TR‐40 150 150 158

Manchester Victoria 00:08 00:12 00:27 00:35 00/37 00:46 00:57

Miles Platting 00/11 00/15 00/30 00/38 00/42 00/49 01/00

Thorpes Bridge Jn 00/12 00/16 00/31 00/39 00/44 00/50 01/01

Moston 00:18½

Vitriol Works 00/48

Mills Hill ← 00a23 00a44½ 00:55½

Castleton East Jn 00*12½ 00/18 00/26½ 00/37 00/48 00*53 00/59 01/07

Castleton 00:30 00:51½ →

Rochdale arr 00:20½ 00:33 00:39½ 00:54½ 01:01½ 01:09½

1 1 1 1 1 1

dep 00/15½ 00:21½ 00:34 00:40½ 00:55½ 01:02½ 01:10½

Rochdale East Jn 00/16 00/22½ 00/35 00/41½ From From 00/56½ 01/03½ From 01/11½

Smithy Bridge 00:25½ B'burn B'pool 01:06½ B'pool

Littleborough 00/21½ 00:29 00/37½ 00/44 North 01a01 01a10 South 01/15

Walsden 00:35

Todmorden 00/27½ 00a38½ 00a45½ 00a52 01a08½ 01a17½ 01a22


Rose Grove 00:34½ 00:48 01:06½

Gannow Jn 00/05 00/37 00/41 00/50 01/09 Burnley Manchester Road 00a39½ 00a43½ 01a11½

Copypit 00/13 00/46½ 00/50½ To To 01/18½

Stansfield Hall Jn 00/52½ Colne B'burn 01/24½

Todmorden North Jn 2 00/55½ 2 01/27½

Hall Royd Jn 00:23 00/30 00*30 00/40 00/53½ 01/00 00:30 01/10 01/23½

Hebden Bridge arr from 00:44½ To 00:16 00:58 To 01:04½ from 01:14½ 00:46 01:28

dep H'field 00/36 00/36 00:45½ B'pool Leeds 00:59 Man Vic 01:05½ Leeds 01:15½ Leeds 01:29

Mytholmroyd 00:48½ South via via 01:18½ via

Sowerby Bridge 00a54½ Halifax 01a12½ Dewsbury 01a24½ Halifax

Milner Royd Jn 00/41½ 00/41½ 00/55½ 01/05½ 01/13½ 01/25½ 01/35½

Dryclough Jn 00/43 00/59 01/13 01/29

Greetland Jn 00*49 00*49 01/01½ 01/15½ 01*44

Elland

Brighouse 01f08½ 01a20½ 01a49

1

Bradley Wood Jn 01/12 01/23 01/51½

Heaton Lodge Jn 01/56½ 01/56½ 01/25 01/53½

Mirfield Not Not To 01:56

Mirfield East Jn considered considered H'field 01/26½ 01/57½

Thornhill LNW Jn from here from here arr


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Ravensthorpe 01:29

Dewsbury 01a30½ 02a01½

Batley 02:04½

Morley 01/35 02a10½

Halifax RS

Halifax arr 00:45 01:00 01:10 (Flight 01:15 01:30 01:40

2 2 2 with 2 2 2

dep 00:47 01:01 01:11 TPEX) 01:17 01:31 01:41

Hipperholme xx xx

Low Moor xx xx

2 2 2 2 1 2

Mill Lane Jn 01/02 01/13 01/23 p1 01/32 01/43 p1 01/53

Bradford Interchange arr 01:03½ 01:14½ 01:24½ 01:33½ 01:44½ 01:54½

2 4 4 2 4 4

dep 01:06½ 01:17½ 01:27½ 01:36½ 01:47½ 01:57½

Mill Lane Jn 01/08 01/19 01/29 01/38 01/49 01/59

New Pudsey 01:14½ 01a26 01a36 01:44½ 01a56 02a06

Bramley 01a18½ 01a48½

p2 p2 p2 p2

Holbeck Jn 01/22½ 01/35½ 01/45½ 01/52½ 02/05½ 02/15½

Whitehall Jn 01/23 01/36 01/46 01/42 01/53 02/06 02/17½ 02/16

Leeds West Jn 01/24½ 01/36½ 01/46½ 01/42½ 01/53½ 02/06½ 02/18 02/16½

Leeds 01:25 01:38 01:48 01:44 01:55 02:08 02:19½ 02:18

a= Arrives one minute earlier

f= Arrives 3½ minutes earlier

p=Performance time

path=Pathing time

+=Empty coaching stock

/=Passing time Engineering allowances shown in boxes

*=Waiting path


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


Appendix B: Project Delivery Plan


121525-49 | Issue | 26 May 2011


2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Rolling StockInterim Rolling

Stock

Obtain

rolling

stock

following

cascade *

Long Term Rolling

Stock

Existing Rolling

Stock

Infrastructure Signalling

Line speed

improvements

Other incremental

infrastructure

schemes eg

Todmorden Curve

New Stations Low Moor

Hipperholme

Timetable Changes

Prepare interim

timetable based on

preferred Train

Service

Specification

Bid for

revised

train

paths

Deliver

timetable*

Prepare regular

interval timetable

based on preferred

Train Service

Specification

Station Accessibility Bus‐Rail Integration

Car Park Extensions

Station Facilities

Northern Rail Franchise Renewal

* Predicatd on availability of loco‐hauled trains (otherwise will be delivered 2016/17)

Obtain rolling stock following cascade

Engage with DfT

20192011 2012 2013 2014

3

2015 2016 2017 2018

Outline feasibility/design

Stakeholder Engagement

Timetable

Development

Engage with

Northern Rail and

DfT

Produce Business Case for Refurbishment

Package

Prepare business case and bid for rolling stock

Set up project with

Network Rail and

Northern

Set up project with

Network Rail and

Northern

Engage with DfT

Prepare business case and bid

for rolling stock

Set up project with

Network Rail and

Northern

Set up project with

Network Rail,

Northern, Metro and

Districts

Evaluate funding

sources

Evaluate funding

sources

Evaluate funding

sources

Evaluate funding

sources

Delivery

Prepare business case DeliveryLink to LTP3 objectives and

activities

Link to LTP3 objectives and

activities

Prepare business case

Deliver refurbishment package through new franchise agreement

Deliver timetable through new franchise agreementInclude timetable changes in

new franchise agreement

Liaise with bus operators

Northern Hub

Delivery

Assess feasibility of timetable

using Railsys and refine

financial case for timetable

Assess feasibility of timetable

using Railsys and refine financial

case for timetable

Set up project with

Network Rail,

Northern, Metro and

Districts

Evaluate funding

sources

Detailed Design

DeliveryRefine and prepare outline design Detailed Design

Outline feasibility/design

Outline feasibility/design Delivery

DeliveryDetailed Design

Delivery

Detailed DesignRefine and prepare outline design

Detailed DesignConsultation

Documents

Calderdale Council and City of Bradford Metropolitan ... · \\GLOBAL\EUROPE\LEEDS\JOBS\121000\121525-00\121525-49 CALDER VALLEY RAIL LINE STUDY\0 ARUP\0-11 TRANSPORTATION\0-11-8 REPORTS\C