final report - surrey...surrey county council southern rail access to heathrow final report final |...

Surrey County Council

Southern Rail Access to Heathrow

Final Report

Final | 21 December 2016

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 227787-60

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd 13 Fitzroy

Street London W1T 4BQ United

Kingdom

www.arup.com

Document Verification

Job title Southern Rail Access to Heathrow Job number

227787-60

Document title Final Report File reference

4-05 Arup Reports

Document ref

Revision Date Filename Draft Report.docx

Draft 1 16 Sep Description Initial draft for discussion

2016

Prepared by Checked by Approved by Farnaz Jahanshahi

Name Emma Forde Ian Hood Stephen Bennett

Toby Hetherington

Signature

Draft 2 18 Nov Filename Surrey SRAtH - Draft Report.docx

2016 Description First formal draft

Prepared by Checked by Approved by

Farnaz Jahanshahi

Name

Emma Forde Stefan Sanders Stephen Bennett

Toby Hetherington

Edward Dawes

Signature

Final 21 Dec Filename Surrey SRAtH – Final Report.docx

2016 Description Final report


Name Edward Dawes Toby Hetherington Stephen Bennett

Signature

Final Filename Description


Name

Signature

Issue Document Verification with Document

| Final | 21 December 2016

\\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\227000\227787 SURREY RAIL STRATEGY\227787-60 HEATHROW SOUTHERN RAIL ACCESS\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-05 ARUP REPORTS\REPORT\SURREY

SRATH - FINAL REPORT - DEC 2016.DOCX

Surrey County Council Southern Rail Access to Heathrow Final Report

Contents

Page

Executive Summary 4

1 Background and Context 7

1.1 Scope of Study 7

1.2 Study Approach 8

1.3 Stakeholder Engagement 9

2 Existing Situation 10

2.1 Connections 10

2.2 Accessibility 10

2.3 Mode Share 13

2.4 Issues for Surrey 15

3 Strategic Vision for Surrey 16

3.1 Development objectives 16

3.2 Opportunities 16

3.3 Strategic Vision for Heathrow Surface Access 18

4 Infrastructure Options and Costs 19

4.1 Option 1 – Western Alignment and Staines Chord 19

4.2 Option 1c – Western Alignment and Staines Chord with LX Removal 22

4.3 Option 2 – Egham Tunnel 23

4.4 Option 3 – Chertsey Link 24

4.5 Option 4 – Eastern Alignment 25

4.6 Other SRAtH Studies 25

4.7 Summary of Rail Infrastructure Options 29

4.8 Additional Infrastructure Option 31

4.9 Supporting Infrastructure Scheme Requirements 33

5 Capacity and Service Options 35

5.1 Current Situation 35

5.2 SRAtH Train Service Options 40

5.3 Alternative Service Options 44

5.4 Cross Heathrow Connections 49

6 Demand Assessment 51

6.1 Network Rail Demand Forecasts 51

6.2 Demand from Surrey 51

6.3 Future Growth 53

6.4 Demand beyond Heathrow from Surrey 56


\\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\227000\227787 SURREY RAIL STRATEGY\227787-60 HEATHROW SOUTHERN RAIL ACCESS\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-

05 ARUP REPORTS\REPORT\SURREY SRATH - FINAL REPORT - DEC 2016.DOCX


6.5 Validation of Network Rail Forecasts 60

7 Option Assessment 62

7.1 Value for Money 64

7.2 Summary of Options 65

7.3 Scheme Funding 67

8 Conclusions and Recommendations 68

8.1 Conclusions 68

8.2 Recommendations 70

Tables

Table 1: Other SRAtH Studies Summary Table .................................................... 28

Table 2: Infrastructure Options Summary ............................................................. 29

Table 3: Arup Cost Estimates ................................................................................ 31

Table 4: Comparison of Cost Estimates between Arup's cost point estimate and the Network Rail study range estimate. ................................................................. 31 Table 5: Comparison of current outer Windsor Line services to that in the ITT for the next South Western franchise. ......................................................................... 37

Table 6: Plain Line Planning Capacity Utilisation of Existing Infrastructure ....... 37

Table 7: Infrastructure and Train Service Combinations ....................................... 40

Table 8: Intermediate Station Stopping Pattern by Option .................................... 44

Table 9: Population Growth in Surrey. Source: TEMPRO data based on ONS 2008-based population projections ....................................................................... 54

Table 10: Heathrow Passenger Forecasts (mppa) – 2014-2050 ............................ 54 Table 11: Passenger and Employee Forecasts for Heathrow Northwest Runway . 55 Table 12: Annual Passenger and Employee Forecasts from Surrey ...................... 56 Table 13: Surrey Residents Commuting to London. Source: 2011 Census Data . 57

Table 14: Journey Time Comparison to Central London via London Waterloo vs

via London Paddington (Morning Peak Hour) ...................................................... 59

Table 15: Commentary on Network Rail forecasts ............................................... 60

Table 16: Option Assessment Summary Table...................................................... 63

Table 17: Option Scoring Summary Source: Arup analysis .................................. 64

Table 18: London/Surrey Benefit Cost Ratio Comparison .................................... 65

Figures

Figure 1: Study Approach ........................................................................................ 8

Figure 2: Surrey Rail Map. Source www.surreycc.gov.uk ..................................... 10

Figure 3: Heathrow Journey Time Mode Comparison. Source: DfT Connectivity Data ................................................................................................................... .... 11

Figure 4: Journey time to Heathrow by Car (AM PEAK) Source: DfT Connectivity Data ..................................................................................... ............. 12

| Final | 21 December 2016 \\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\227000\227787 SURREY RAIL STRATEGY\227787-60 HEATHROW SOUTHERN RAIL ACCESS\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-



Figure 5: Journey time to Heathrow by Public Transport (AM PEAK) Source: DfT Connectivity Data ..................................................................................................12 Figure 6: Modal composition of trips to Heathrow from Surrey ...........................13 Figure 7: Variations in airport trips mode share by locality ..................................14 Figure 8: Opportunities for Strategic Connections with SRAtH. Source: http://www.projectmapping.co.uk/Resources/London%20Rail%20v30.pdf ..........17 Figure 9: Option 1a and Option 1b: Staines Chord................................................20 Figure 10: Egham Level Crossings ........................................................................21 Figure 11: Option 2 Egham Tunnel .......................................................................23 Figure 12: Option 3 Chertsey Link ........................................................................24 Figure 13: Option 4 Eastern Alignment .................................................................25 Figure 14: Indicative London Borough of Hounslow alignment ...........................27 Figure 15: All NR Options .....................................................................................30 Figure 16: Option 2b/3b Weybridge Chord ...........................................................32 Figure 17: Schematic Weybridge station track layout diagram. Adapted from

source www.networkrail.co.uk ...............................................................................33 Figure 18: Current Outer Windsor Lines Train Service Map for high peak hour arrivals to London Waterloo, excluding inner Windsor Line services. .................36 Figure 19: Weybridge Chord option indicative schematic train service map. .......45 Figure 20: Surrey Service Enhancement (with Option 3) indicative schematic train service map. ...........................................................................................................46 Figure 21: Total Passengers per year from Surrey districts using Heathrow Airport. Source: CAA Survey Data, 2012 ..............................................................52 Figure 22: Heathrow Airport Employee Mode Share. Source: Heathrow Airport

Employee Survey Data, 2011 .................................................................................53 Figure 23: Heathrow Northwest Runway Proposal. Source: Taking Britain Further – Summary, May 2014 ..............................................................................55 Figure 24: Commuter Destinations from Surrey to London Boroughs. Source: 2011 Census Data ..................................................................................................58 Figure 25: Annual Heathrow Demand vs London Commuting Demand from

Surrey .....................................................................................................................61

Appendices

Appendix A

Arup Cost Estimates





Executive Summary

The key issues for surface access to Heathrow Airport from Surrey are that:

Car is the quickest mode of access to Heathrow from all towns in Surrey, with journey times on average ~40% faster than the equivalent journey by public transport. However, car journey times are unreliable due to high-levels of congestions especially during peak hours.

Rail journey times to Heathrow are often over double that of the

equivalent car journey and in many districts in Surrey there is no viable rail alternative to the car/taxi;

As a result, car and taxi remain the dominant modes for passenger and employee trips to Heathrow airport from Surrey, contributing to congestion on the local and strategic road networks. This congestion creates pollution from road transport that affects air quality as well as creates implications for road safety.

The scope of this study is to use existing empirical evidence in order to robustly

assess options for the provision of a rail connection between the South West rail network and London Heathrow Airport, as outlined in Network Rail’s “Southern

Rail Access to Heathrow Feasibility Study” report published in December 2015.

It reviews the core options assessed in the Network Rail report alongside other southern rail access proposals and comments on whether the key statements and claims are reasonable.

The outputs are advice and recommendations to Surrey County Council (SCC) on the preferred infrastructure and service pattern combinations that should be

considered for further development. The conclusions of our review, informed by engagement with key stakeholders, are provided below.

The Southern Rail Access scheme supports Surrey’s rail

development objectives

Overall, SRAtH supports Surrey’s rail development objectives by enabling:

A fast and direct rail link to the airport from Surrey that increases its attractiveness as a prime location for global and national businesses;

Connectivity between the county and the 70,000 jobs that exist in and around

the airport, helping to further drive economic growth; An alternative to road-based modes for travel to the airport, helping to

reduce the number of vehicles using the road network which would significantly improve localised air quality; and

An improved public transport linkage and increases in county rail capacity

that helps to accommodate sustainable population growth.

| Final | 21 December 2016 Page 4 \\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\227000\227787 SURREY RAIL STRATEGY\227787-60 HEATHROW SOUTHERN RAIL ACCESS\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-



However in developing and supporting the SRAtH scheme, it is important to ensure that it can be demonstrated to provide good value for money, be affordable to public and private stakeholders, and have acceptable impacts in Surrey.

Specific outputs are required from the Southern Rail

Access scheme

Our review of previous studies indicates that the following outputs should be achieved in order to fully meet Surrey’s rail development objectives:

New rail infrastructure between the South Western rail network and Heathrow Airport that provides for direct rail services between Surrey and Heathrow Airport;

Fast and frequent rail services between Surrey and Heathrow Airport, with fast

defined as reliable journey times between Woking and Heathrow of 30 minutes or less, and frequent defined as four trains per hour;

Potential to run directly beyond Heathrow to Old Oak Common (for

interchange to HS2 in future) and to London Paddington (for connectivity to central London); and

Sufficient stopping points in Surrey to provide convenient access for

travellers to Heathrow from all parts of the county.

There are options that have the potential to deliver these outputs

for Surrey

Based on the available information from the different studies, there are infrastructure / service option combinations that appear to have the potential achieve the outputs identified above.

The option that appears to have the best overall business case and benefits for Surrey is Option 1c Western Alignment plus Staines Chord with the Egham level crossings removed or replaced. This is because it has:

The lowest cost infrastructure solution; The potential to be delivered incrementally (i.e. the link to Heathrow and

Staines Chord can be delivered first, providing 2tph to Surrey in the peak period and 4tph off peak, and this can be increased to 4tph in the peak when the level crossings are removed or replaced;

The potential to operate a range of service options that best serve key areas

of Surrey/Hampshire and unlocking further potential for growth; A mix of fast and semi-fast services (exact stopping points to be determined);

and A potential new connection to London Paddington with competitive journey

times to existing London Waterloo services.

An alternative option is the Heathrow Southern Rail scheme which has a higher cost but potential to also have a good business case and provide similar benefits to




Surrey. This option uses the same infrastructure as Network Rail option 3, but the

service pattern has faster services to Heathrow (non-stop from Woking) and runs

beyond Heathrow to Old Oak Common and London Paddington. This scheme:

Avoids level crossing issues completely; Provides fast service patterns to Heathrow and beyond; and Has higher costs due to the viaduct route, but could potentially offer good

value for money if journey time improvements are substantial over the long.

This option does have limited connectivity to stations within Surrey, due to the

reliance on the operation of limited-stop service patterns. This could can be

resolved by assessing the potential for additional station stops and to more

precisely ascertain what effect these would have on overall scheme value for

money and service journey times. A review should also be undertaken into

whether a viaduct or tunnel would be the best type of infrastructure for this

option, taking into account land impacts and mitigation costs.

There is a need for further testing of these options on a consistent

basis

One of the issues from our review is that the infrastructure options have been

tested with different service pattern options. For example, Network Rail generally

tested infrastructure options with stopping services to Heathrow whereas

Heathrow Southern Rail tested infrastructure options with fast services to

Heathrow and beyond. Both parties used different assessment tools and this is

reflected in the range of benefit cost ratios reported in the option assessment.

The infrastructure/service options identified above need to be tested on a

consistent basis so that infrastructure options can be consistently compared using similar service patterns, and service patterns can be optimised using

consistent infrastructure options. This means using the same demand forecasting tool and the same service patterns for different infrastructure options.

Given the above, our recommendations for Surrey County Council are as follows:

Engage with stakeholders to build support for the SRAtH scheme – this includes Surrey County Council political leadership, Surrey boroughs and districts as well as neighbouring authorities (e.g. Hampshire) and relevant LEPs);

Promote supporting schemes needed to enable SRAtH – the schemes

identified in this report required to enable SRAtH, such as Woking flyover and station improvements, as these also have a benefit for main line services to Waterloo;

Engage with scheme promoters to undertake further development of

SRAtH options – this would include testing and assessment of the options

identified in our conclusions on a consistent basis to determine the optimum infrastructure and service combination for Surrey. This may require Surrey and its stakeholders to commission this work themselves.




1 Background and Context

The Surrey Rail Strategy was completed and published in September 2013. The

Rail Strategy enables Surrey County Council (SCC) to understand how best to

influence key decision makers in the rail industry, to develop its thinking on

credible investments in rail infrastructure, and to make the best case for

investment in local rail infrastructure. The ultimate objective is to secure the

required investment in the county’s rail network aligned with the overarching

development objectives for Surrey. The priority options identified in the Surrey

Rail Strategy include promoting a future direct rail access solution to Heathrow

Airport from Surrey.

In October 2013, Arup completed a study into Surface Access to Airports for SCC. The objective of the study was to identify proposals for strategic investment that the County Council, working with partners, could plan and deliver.

The study recommended short-medium term actions which focused on reducing

car and taxi trips to the airports, developing express bus services to both Heathrow

and Gatwick airports, and optimising existing rail services to Gatwick airport on the North Downs Line.

In the long term, recommended actions included further enhancement of the

express bus network, engaging with stakeholders to develop southern rail access to Heathrow Airport, developing an upgrade of the North Downs Line, and

supporting these measures with marketing and awareness campaigns.

In the Airport Commission’s Interim Report (December 2013), it recommended

that the Government should work with Network Rail to undertake a detailed study

to find the best option for enhancing rail access into Heathrow from the south to

encourage modal shift towards more environmentally sustainable forms of

transport at Heathrow as well as to optimise the airport’s operations within its

current capacity constraints.

Network Rail completed a feasibility study in December 2015 to identify potential

market, train service and infrastructure options for a connection to Heathrow Airport from the south to enable potential funders to decide as to whether further

development work should be undertaken on the scheme.

1.1 Scope of Study

SCC commissioned Arup to review the Network Rail proposals for a southern rail connection to Heathrow Airport and advise on the preferred option(s) that should be supported.

The outcome of this study will be used by SCC to engage with key stakeholders such as the Department for Transport (DfT), Network Rail, Heathrow Airport

Limited, and local stakeholders such as businesses and borough and district

councils to secure the best outcome for Surrey in terms of connectivity to Heathrow Airport.




This study also considers the context of previous work completed as part of

the Airtrack and Airtrack-Lite projects as well as the work that Heathrow Southern Rail has been promoting and proposals developed by the London

Borough of Hounslow in relation to southern rail access to Heathrow.

The scope of this study is to use available data and reports to robustly assess the southern rail access to Heathrow Airport options undertaken by Network Rail and comment on whether their key statements and claims are reasonable.

The study also considers alternative options for southern rail access from Surrey to Heathrow and provides a high level assessment of their feasibility.

It should be noted that this study was largely completed before the Government’s announcement on a third runway at Heathrow in October 2016, so the impact of this announcement is not considered in detail in the assessment.

1.2 Study Approach

We have developed a high-level strategic approach, proportionate to the scale of the study, which identifies and assesses the preferred options (s) for southern rail access to Heathrow Airport. The study approach is illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Study Approach

Chapter 1: Background and Context

Scope of Study Study Approach Stakeholder Engagement

Chapter 2: Existing Situation

Connections Accessibility Mode Share Issues for Surrey

Chapter 3: Strategic Vision for Surrey

Development Objectives Opportunities Strategic Vision

Chapter 4: Infrastructure Options and Costs

Options 1- 4 Other Studies Options Summary Additional Options

Chapter 5: Capacity and Service Options

Current Situation Service Options Alternative Options Cross-Heathrow

Chapter 6: Demand Assessment

Demand Forecasts Demand from Surrey Future Growth Beyond Heathrow Validation

Chapter 7: Option Assessment

Value for Money Summary of Options Scheme Funding

Chapter 8: Conclusions and Recommendations Conclusions Recommendations

| Final | 21 December 2016 Page 8 \\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\227000\227787 SURREY RAIL STRATEGY\227787-60 HEATHROW SOUTHERN RAIL ACCESS\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-05 ARUP REPORTS\REPORT\SURREY SRATH - FINAL REPORT - DEC 2016.DOCX


1.3 Stakeholder Engagement

Local stakeholder engagement is an important part of this study to gain views on what access to Heathrow they would like to see. This includes assessing stakeholder views on the following issues:

Train service options;

Journey time vs station stops;

Options for dealing with level crossings; and

Alternatives to southern rail access (e.g. new park and ride facilities at M25 Junction 11 or Cobham services, Heathrow Hub proposals).

One-to-one consultation was carried out with Network Rail and Heathrow Southern Rail to fully understand their options and assessment.

Further consultation was undertaken through a half-day workshop, held on 8 November 2016. The stakeholder views expressed in the engagement are taken account of in our final recommendations.

The following stakeholders were consulted as part of this study:

SCC members;

SCC officers;

Surrey boroughs and districts;

Hampshire County Council;

Heathrow Airport Limited;

Heathrow Southern Rail;

London Boroughs: Hounslow, Wandsworth, Kingston, Richmond;

LEPs: Enterprise M3, Coast-to-Capital, Thames Valley;

Network Rail;

Stagecoach Rail; and

Transport for London.



2 Existing Situation

2.1 Connections

Figure 2 shows the existing Surrey Rail network, with the South Western Network

(red) operating out of London Waterloo, to destinations in South West London via

Hounslow, Richmond and Wimbledon and onward suburban/regional services to

destinations in Surrey including Staines, Guildford, Woking, Dorking and

Haslemere. The majority of services operate onwards to destinations in Hampshire

and Dorset such as Basingstoke, Reading, Southampton, Portsmouth and

Salisbury.

Heathrow Airport is located to the north of the existing Waterloo – Reading and Waterloo – Windsor Lines between Feltham and Staines.

The airport is currently served by London Underground services on the Piccadilly Line, as well as Heathrow Express (fast) and Heathrow Connect (stopping) services using the Great Western Main Line from London Paddington.

There is currently no rail connection between the South Western rail network

and Heathrow. The map shows the route of the existing airport connection bus and coach services that operate from Woking and Feltham stations.

Figure 2: Surrey Rail Map. Source www.surreycc.gov.uk

2.2 Accessibility

Analysis was undertaken on the existing level of accessibility to Heathrow airport from Surrey by car and public transport (including bus/coach). Connectivity data




from the Department for Transport (DfT) was used to identify the morning (AM)

peak journey times from each major rail station to the airport. The difference in journey times between each mode option were then calculated in order to identify

the extent of the existing constraints on access to Heathrow.

Connectivity data from the DfT was also compared against typical travel time ranges obtained from Google Traffic data.

The results showed that the fastest journey times were achieved by private car

from all of the destinations analysed. The car provided journey times to Heathrow

on average ~40% faster than the equivalent public transport journey. However,

due to severe congestion issues that exist on the local and strategic road network

surrounding the airport, the reliability of journey times by car remains poor, with

variations of nearly double the journey time in some cases.

Most of the public transport trips originating from stations within Surrey require

between 1-3 interchanges in order to reach Heathrow, which is likely to have a significant impact on overall journey times and deter people from using these

modes. The majority of rail-only trips to the airport require users to travel into and out of central London in order to pick up one of the existing airport services.

Figure 3: Heathrow Journey Time Mode Comparison. Source: DfT Connectivity Data

AM PEAK Highway Public Transport (08:00 – 09:00)

Journey time Journey time Journey time Interchanges

(mins) range

(mins)

required

Guildford 34 30-50 82 1

Woking 25 22-35 63 0

Epsom 44 40-80 98 3

Redhill 51 40-80 88 3

Staines 8 9-14 21 0

Farnham 42 35-60 120 1

Mapping the connectivity data by census output area is shown in Figure 4 and

Figure 5 and highlights the geographical coverage of differing accessibility

constraints for each mode choice. Most areas of the county can connect to

Heathrow within a 60 minute drive time, whereas by public transport most of the

county has a journey time of 120 minutes or greater. Journey times are improved

for areas within the major rail corridors, but are still significantly higher than that

of the equivalent car journey time from the same origin point.




Figure 4: Journey time to Heathrow by Car (AM PEAK) Source: DfT Connectivity Data

Figure 5: Journey time to Heathrow by Public Transport (AM PEAK) Source: DfT Connectivity Data




2.3 Mode Share

As a result of the relatively poor public transport accessibility from Surrey to

Heathrow, car and taxi currently account for almost 89% of total mode share

for trips to the airport from the county. The remaining 11% percent is made up

by bus/coach services and rail. The higher percentage of bus and coach trips 7%

compared to rail trips 4%, highlights the lack of a suitable rail connection and

competitive journey times to the airport by rail. These proportions are shown in

Figure 6 below.

Figure 6: Modal composition of trips to Heathrow from Surrey

Bus & Coach

Rail 7%

4%

Car

51%

Taxi

38%

These modal shares however differ spatially across Surrey, reflecting differing

levels of access and choice to certain modes and direct airport connections. Car

(51%) is the dominant mode for trips to Heathrow from Surrey, followed by taxi

(38%). Surrey Heath (69%) and Waverley (59%) have the highest private car

mode share to Heathrow Airport. 53% of airport passengers who live in

Runnymede and 45% who live in Spelthorne districts use taxi to get to the

Airport. Rail use is significant in Reigate and Banstead (25%) and Tandridge

(19%) reflecting relatively good access via the Brighton Main Line to Victoria

and the Underground to Heathrow. Bus/coach use is significant in Woking (21%),

Waverley (14%) and Guildford (9%) districts where access to the Woking RailAir

service is convenient.



Figure 7: Variations in airport trips mode share by locality



2.4 Issues for Surrey

Following the assessment of the existing situation, the key issues for surface access to Heathrow Airport from Surrey are considered to be:

Car is the quickest mode of access to Heathrow from all towns in Surrey, with journey times on average ~40% faster than the equivalent journey by public transport. However, car journey times are unreliable due to high-levels of congestions especially during peak hours.

Rail journey times to Heathrow are often over double that of the

equivalent car journey and in many districts in Surrey there is no viable rail alternative to the car/taxi.

As a result, car and taxi remain the dominant mode for passenger and

employee trips to Heathrow airport from Surrey, contributing to congestion on the local and strategic road networks. This congestion creates pollution from road transport that affects air quality as well as creates implications for road safety.


\\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\227000\227787 SURREY RAIL STRATEGY\227787-60 HEATHROW SOUTHERN RAIL ACCESS\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-05 ARUP REPORTS\REPORT\SURREY SRATH - FINAL REPORT - DEC 2016.DOCX

Page 15


3 Strategic Vision for Surrey

3.1 Development objectives

To ensure that the best solution for improving rail access to Heathrow from

Surrey is promoted by SCC it is important to consider the overall context of

Surrey’s long term vision for travel.

In the Surrey Rail Strategy, the four rail development objectives for Surrey were identified as:

1. Maintaining global competitiveness

2. Driving economic growth

3. Reducing impacts on the environment

4. Accommodating sustainable population growth

In the Surface Access to Airports Study, access to Heathrow Airport was assessed against the above objectives.

3.2 Opportunities

In addition to addressing existing and future issues and gaps, southern rail access

to Heathrow (SRAtH) opens up a number of opportunities for the county to improve connectivity and integration with other current and proposed public

transport services within London and its surrounds.

For example, SRAtH could provide the following strategic connection opportunities for Surrey:

Heathrow Express services to and from London Paddington.

Piccadilly Line services to Hammersmith, Earls Court and other destinations within the west end and north of London.

Elizabeth Line (Crossrail) services (from December 2019) providing

frequent and direct journeys into and across Central London while also allowing for better interchange with national rail services from London terminals.

High Speed 2 services to the Midlands and the North through a new

interchange hub at Old Oak Common, reducing the requirement to travel into central London to interchange between rail terminals.

Western Rail Access to Heathrow services could start operating between

Heathrow and Reading via the proposed western rail access link currently being developed by Network Rail providing travel opportunities to Slough, Maidenhead and Reading.




Page 16


Figure 8 shows how the SRAtH scheme could provide a strategic link between the existing South Western and Great Western networks as well as the Heathrow Express, Piccadilly Line and Elizabeth Line services into London.

Figure 8: Opportunities for Strategic Connections with SRAtH. Source: http://www.projectmapping.co.uk/Resources/London%20Rail%20v30.pdf




Page 17


3.3 Strategic Vision for Heathrow Surface Access

Heathrow Airport is critically important to the Surrey economy in terms of both

passengers and employees. There were over 2 million passengers travelling to Heathrow Airport from Surrey in 2015, and it is estimated that over 10,000 Surrey

residents currently work at the airport.

It is clear that a strong market exists for surface access to the airport and should

therefore be a requirement to ensure that convenient and efficient access to the

airport is established in order to maintain and improve the county’s global

competitiveness for business and to sustain strong levels of economic growth.

The high levels of congestion on the existing local and strategic road networks

impact on road-based access to the airport (car, taxi, and bus/coach). In particular, the unreliability of journey times leads to lost time for individuals and businesses

who have to leave a greater time contingency for trips made in the peak.

There is therefore a significant case for a fast, direct and reliable public transport

link to the airport from Surrey. Both the Surrey Rail Strategy and the Surface Access to Airports Study concluded that Surrey County Council should support

the development of SRAtH in order to enable it to better meet its development

objectives outlined in section 3.1.

The strategic vision should therefore be to:

Support the provision of southern rail access to Heathrow airport from

Surrey to deliver a fast, direct and reliable public transport connection that

supports Surrey’s rail development objectives to maintain global

competitiveness, drive economic growth, reducing impacts on the

environment and accommodate sustainable population growth.

The SRAtH supports the county’s development objectives because it provides:

A fast and direct rail link to the airport from Surrey that increases its attractiveness as a prime location for global and national businesses.

Connectivity between the county and the 70,000 jobs that exist in and

around the airport, helping to further drive economic growth.

An alternative to road-based modes for travel to the airport, helping to reduce the number of vehicles using the road network which would significantly improve localised air quality.

An improved public transport linkage and increases in county rail capacity

that helps to accommodate sustainable population growth.

However in developing and supporting the SRAtH scheme, it is important to ensure that it can be demonstrated to provide good value for money, and be affordable to public and private stakeholders.




Page 18


4 Infrastructure Options and Costs

The following section reviews the infrastructure requirements for each option set

out in the Network Rail report1 and the proposals from Airtrack, Airtrack-Lite,

Heathrow Southern Rail and the London Borough of Hounslow. A summary is provided at the end of this section.

For each Network Rail option proposed (which offers direct access from the

airport to the south) Arup has developed an initial permanent way concept design

in order to develop high-level cost estimates for comparison with those in the

Network Rail report. It has not been possible to obtain detailed information from

Network Rail regarding their cost estimates and assumptions other than what has

been included the report.

The cost estimates developed are indicative and include a number of assumptions and clarifications. They do not consider the feasibility of construction for each

alignment and should be considered relative to each other in order to provide an indicative cost for each scheme. Details regarding each cost estimate and the

assumptions are outlined in Appendix A.

4.1 Option 1 – Western Alignment and

Staines Chord

Option 1a and Option 1b provides the minimum infrastructure required to establish a southern rail link to Heathrow T5 station. Option 1a only provides a

link towards London Waterloo whilst Option 1b provides a link towards the south, as shown in Figure 9.

1 Southern Rail Access to Heathrow Feasibility Study (Network Rail, December 2015).



Figure 9: Option 1a and Option 1b: Staines Chord

Option 1a comprises a new link between Heathrow T5 station and the Staines to

Windsor Line. From Heathrow T5 station box a double track alignment starting

in a tunnel and rising to surface level south of the M25 Junction 14 for

approximately 2300m has been assumed. The surface route follows the M25

alignment until diverging along the previous route of the Staines & West Drayton

Line towards the Wraysbury River, where the alignment joins the Staines to

Windsor Line. The junction to the existing network has been designed with an at-

grade double junction. Option 1a excludes the Staines chord towards the south.

In Option 1b, a new double track chord is included linking the Staines to Windsor

Line with the Waterloo to Reading Line south of Staines station in order to

provide rail access towards the south,. The new chord would require the

realignment of the A308, replacement of the entrance to Elmsleigh Shopping

Centre Car Park (replaced with a spiral type structure), redesign of the existing

bus station access, as well as realignment of the existing track in order to provide

an at-grade junction. The chord has been designed to miss A308 South Street as

much as possible.

The Network Rail cost estimate for Option 1a and 1b is between £800m and £950m, Arup’s cost estimate is £726m, slightly below the range presented in the Network Rail report. Although as noted in above we have not been provided with assumptions and cost details used in the Network Rail estimate.

4.1.1 Level Crossings

The level crossings within the Egham area are noted in the Network Rail report as being a significant constraint on rail capacity due to the impact of barrier down




times when there is an increase in service levels. One of the major concerns raised

with the original Airtrack scheme was the impact on local road traffic with the increase level of rail services operating through the route. Option 1b could result

in increased barrier down times during off-peak hours whilst also offering a limited service during the peak hours as to avoid impact on road traffic.

Currently within the Egham area there is a total of six highway crossings of the

rail line west of the River Thames. The only unrestricted grade separated crossing

is provided by the M25 motorway. A further grade separated crossing is provided

by the A320 Chertsey Lane immediately to the west of the river although this has

a low bridge with 13’3” headroom restriction. Alternative routes for higher

vehicles are signposted via level crossings. Figure 10 shows the locations of the 4

level crossings in the Egham area.

Figure 10: Egham Level Crossings

Given the currently limited number of crossing points, there would likely be

substantial severance impacts should one or all of the level crossings be closed. This would result in significant trip diversion to alternative routes that are

potentially unsuitable for the purpose.

The Network Rail report does not explore the opportunities for replacement

and/or removal of the level crossings in the Egham area, although Network

Rail’s level crossing policy is to replace or close level crossings where possible.

Option 2 and 3 proposed in the Network Rail report instead look to avoiding the

Egham area, partially in order to avoid routing additional services over the level

crossings.




Page 21


4.2 Option 1c – Western Alignment and

Staines Chord with LX Removal

Due to the significant increase in costs for Option 2 and Option 3 compared to

Option 1 (~£500m difference) Arup has developed high-level cost estimates for

removal and/or replacement of the four level crossings in order to understand the

costs in comparison to Options 2 and 3. Removal of level crossings is presented

as Option 1c, and assumes Option 1a and Option 1b are included in order to

provide the link between Heathrow T5 and Surrey. The removal/replacement of

the level crossings could allow for enhancements to the level of service offered in

Option 1b and also offer performance improvements to the existing services as

well as aligning with Network Rail’s long term aspirations to close level crossings

on a long term national basis.

In order to develop a cost estimate for Option 1c the following additional

assumptions apply for each of the four level crossings in the Egham area (detailed feasibility and traffic surveys have not been carried out as part of this assessment):

Rusham level crossing is closed and replaced with new road bridge to the south of the existing crossing - requires realignment of highway.

Egham level crossing is closed and replaced with footbridge only. Traffic

to be diverted via outer routes. Any costs associated with diversions are excluded.

Pooley Green level crossing track lowered beneath highway to make it a

grade separate junction.

Thorpe Lane level crossing is closed and traffic diverted via outer routes. Any costs associated with diversions are excluded.

Based on the assumptions above the cost estimate for the closure/replacement of

the four level crossings is approximately £42m. Although this cost estimate has

been provided for the purposes of comparison, the cost estimate does not include

any compensation costs and or costs associated with the mitigation of traffic

impacts associated with closing/replacing the crossings. The replacement or

removal of level crossings in the Egham area, in terms of SRAtH is incremental to

the cost of Option 1a and 1b, however removal of the level crossings could be

staged with the delivery of Option 1a and Option 1b initially followed later by the

removal and replacement of the crossings.

Although there are some potentially significant assumptions which could affect the

cost estimate above, there is also a significant difference between the estimate and

the cost of the alternative infrastructure alignment presented in the Network Rail

report. Including Options 1a and 1b, Option 1c with the level crossing closure

estimate is £768m, this compares to the lowest cost estimate of Option 2 of £1.45bn.

Additional costs (including mitigation) that may be identified as part of a more

detailed crossing closure assessment would have to be in the order of around £700m

in order to impact on the comparable feasibility of Option 1c.




Page 22


4.3 Option 2 – Egham Tunnel

Network Rail’s Option 2 provides additional infrastructure with the objective of

avoiding the section of line between Staines and Egham where the four level

crossings exist. Figure 11 outlines the indicative alignment for Option 2 and how it

connects with the existing rail network towards Staines and Virginia Water.

Figure 11: Option 2 Egham Tunnel

From Heathrow T5 station the tunnel alignment is the same as for Option 1

including the at-grade connection onto the existing network near the Wraysbury

River. Option 2 provides an additional alignment to the south via a second tunnel

section with a tunnel portal to the north of the Staines to Windsor line. The tunnel

proceeds under Staines, Egham and the M25, re-surfacing to the east of the

existing rail network near Stroude Road, and connecting to the existing network

north of Virginia Water station.

The Network Rail cost estimate for Option 2 is between £1.4bn and £1.8bn, Arup’s cost estimate is £1.45bn, towards the lower end of the range presented in the Network Rail report.




Page 23


4.4 Option 3 – Chertsey Link

Option 3 provides additional infrastructure to that provided in Option 1 and 2 with

the objective of avoiding the section of line between Staines and Egham and improving journey times to services from the south. Figure 12 outlines the

indicative alignment for Option 3 and how it connects with the existing rail network towards Staines and Chertsey.

Figure 12: Option 3 Chertsey Link

From Heathrow T5 station the tunnel alignment is the same as for Option 1

including the at-grade connection onto the existing network near the Wraysbury

River. Option 3 provides an additional alignment towards the south on a viaduct

starting to the north of the Staines to Windsor Line for approximately 6.7km. The

viaduct crosses the Wraysbury River, existing rail network and the A30 then

proceeds alongside the M25 south of Wraysbury Road. Where the viaduct

approaches the M25 Junction 12 with the M3, realignment of the B388 Thorpe

bypass is required and the viaduct is designed to be around 20m above the

ground level over the road junction to clear existing structures. Where the

existing Chertsey line crosses over the M25 the new viaduct joins with an at-

grade junction.

There are a number of additional assumptions that apply to the cost estimates for

Option 3. The estimate costs for the viaduct infrastructure are based on historical

cost data taking into consideration the complexity of the chosen location and the

solution required. The estimates also assume that no work or improvements to the

M25 motorway will be made during the same period and that the requirement for

the demolition of buildings will extend 20m to the east of the viaduct. The cost

estimates also exclude work that may be required to any existing structures.




The Network Rail cost estimate for Option 3 is between £1.4bn and £1.8bn, Arup’s cost estimate is £1.6bn, within the range of the Network Rail estimate.

4.5 Option 4 – Eastern Alignment

Option 4 provides a rail link from Heathrow Central (T1, 2, 3) station to the

existing Staines to Windsor line joining to the West of Feltham station via an easterly tunnelled approach. Figure 13 shows the indicative alignment for Option

4 and how it connects with the existing rail network towards Feltham.

Figure 13: Option 4 Eastern Alignment

The option proposed would not provide services from Surrey to Heathrow, only from London Waterloo, and the Network Rail report has only considered this option in relation to services to London Waterloo.

As this option does not offer service opportunities towards Surrey, we have not

developed a cost estimate, however the Network Rail estimate is £1.0 to £1.4bn.

4.6 Other SRAtH Studies

The following section reviews the infrastructure options of other proposals for SRAtH:

Airtrack and Airtrack-Lite; Heathrow Southern Rail; and London Borough of Hounslow.




4.6.1 Airtrack & Airtrack-Lite

Airtrack was a proposal to provide direct rail services from Heathrow airport to

London Waterloo, Reading and Guildford. The proposal involved reinstating a 4km stretch of the former Staines and West Drayton railway between the

airport and the existing Staines – Windsor line, running parallel with the M25 across Staines Moor.

The Airtrack proposals included infrastructure options similar to Options 1a and

1b presented in the Network Rail study and included tunnelling from Heathrow to

Stanwell Moor, a new rail link across the moor as well as the construction of

additional track in Staines town centre as well as the remodelling of Staines

station. The Staines Chord to the west of the existing station would also have been

reinstated.

The economic case for the scheme was established upon these minimal

requirements for infrastructure, which totalled approximately £680 million. The

proposal would have facilitated a 2tph London Waterloo – Heathrow service, a

2tph peak and 1tph off-peak Guildford – Heathrow service and a 2tph Reading –

Heathrow service. There was also discussion of extending the existing Heathrow

Express services to terminate at Staines-upon-Thames, providing an additional

2tph on the new link section.

As noted in the Network Rail report, one significant issue raised against the

Airtrack scheme was the impact of additional services on level crossing barrier

down times, particularly between Staines and Virginia Water where an additional

four trains per hour (4tph) were proposed in each direction. Longer barrier down

times would negatively impact on traffic congestion, particularly in Egham and

Wokingham.

Airtrack-Lite proposals looked to resolve some of the issues surrounding level crossings by making use of splitting and joining of trains at Staines, the infrastructure proposals remained the same as that proposed for Airtrack.

4.6.2 Heathrow Southern Rail

Heathrow Hub Ltd proposes a scheme called Heathrow Southern Rail (HSR) for

providing rail access to Heathrow from the south. The infrastructure proposals

developed for this scheme are very similar to Option 3 proposed in the Network

Rail report, whereby the Waterloo to Reading Line is entirely avoided for services

towards the south joining the existing rail network between Virginia Water and

Chertsey. The infrastructure costs developed by Heathrow Southern Rail are

estimated at £1.1bn.

4.6.3 London Borough of Hounslow

The London Borough of Hounslow submitted a pre-feasibility study for southern rail

access to Heathrow T5 in August 2015. The infrastructure proposal includes a new

grade separated junction to the south-west of Feltham station providing a link

towards Feltham and a second grade separated junction proving a link towards

Staines (forming a triangle junction). The alignment towards Heathrow continues




on a viaduct from the grade separated junctions and includes a proposed new

station at Bedfont to serve the Bedfont Lakes Office Park and current/future

proposed residential and commercial developments. From Bedfont, the alignment

continues to the south of the airport and to the north of the Staines Reservoirs

onto Stanwell Moor where it turns back towards the airport and joins into the

station box at Heathrow T5 station. The alignment is similar to that found in a

report for Wandsworth Borough Council published September 2013.

Figure 14 below illustrates a high-level interpretation of the alignment. The indicative costs were valued in the range of £900m - £1bn.

Figure 14: Indicative London Borough of Hounslow alignment




Page 27


4.6.4 Summary of Other SRAtH Studies

Table 1 provides an overview of the other proposals considered above.

Table 1: Other SRAtH Studies Summary Table

Airtrack Airtrack-Lite Heathrow London

Southern Rail Borough of

Hounslow

Scheme BAA Wandsworth Heathrow Hub Hounslow

Promoter Council Ltd Council

Infrastructure Tunnel Tunnel Chertsey Link Tunnel

required alignment alignment Tunnel alignment Re-modelling of Re-modelling of alignment New Bedfont Staines station Staines station Station

Staines Chord Staines Chord Elevated Track

Ashford Chord

Approximate £679m Not available £1.1bn £900m

Costs

The infrastructure scheme developed previously for Airtrack and Airtrack-Lite, is

similar to that for Option 1a and 1b in the Network Rail report. Both

infrastructure schemes will impact on level crossing barrier down time

subsequently affecting road traffic. Given the objections to the previous Airtrack

scheme in regards to the impact on level crossings it is also foreseeable that

Option 1b would succumb to similar scrutiny. The addition of a platform at

Staines could provide additional connectivity options potentially, for example,

allowing services from the Great Western Route to terminate at Staines, although

it is likely a third independent line to the additional platform at Staines would be

required to mitigate any performance risks.

The infrastructure proposals outlined in the Heathrow Hub HSR are similar to that

set out in the Network Rail report for Option 3, however with the objective of

providing faster journey times between Surrey/Hampshire and Heathrow. The cost

estimate for HSR infrastructure is £1.1bn compared to Network Rail’s estimate of

£1.4bn to £1.8bn, and Arup’s cost estimate of £1.6bn. It is understood the

difference in costs in the HSR scheme are around reducing the requirement of

viaduct sections compared to the Network Rail scheme. The impact on costs

associated with compensation are not included in the Arup cost estimate, however

with a viaduct alignment option these costs could be significantly greater than that

of Option 2 via a tunnel alignment.

The scheme proposed by the London Borough of Hounslow, offers limited

advantages to services towards Surrey and the south compared to the Network

Rail options. As with Option 1b, these proposals would not avoid impacting on

level crossings through the Egham area, limiting service levels especially during

peak hours. This option would also mean Staines is served via services from the

south rather than from London Waterloo. There is also an impact to journey times;

whilst this scheme could improve journey times for services from London

Waterloo, it will increase journey times for services from Surrey and the south.

The inclusion of a new station at Bedfont potentially adds to the increased journey



times, however the development at Bedfont may support funding a SRAtH scheme.

4.7 Summary of Rail Infrastructure Options

The following table (Table 2) summarises the proposed infrastructure options identified above.

Table 2: Infrastructure Options Summary

Core Variants

Option 1 Option 1a – Option 1b – Option 1c – Staines Chord

Western Alignment Staines Chord (with level crossings removal)

Option 2 Option 2 – Egham

Tunnel

Option 3 –

Option 3

Chertsey Link

Option 4 – Eastern

Option 4

Alignment

Airtrack

Airtrack (Lite)

Airtrack

HSR

Heathrow

Southern Rail

Hounslow Eastern

Hounslow

Alignment

Option 1a is the core minimum infrastructure required to provide a southern rail link

to Heathrow, and offer only opportunities for services between London Waterloo

and Heathrow. Option 1a presents the minimum cost estimate which is required for

all options in the Network Rail study with the exception of Option 4.

Option 1b provides a new chord providing rail access from Egham direction,

however it could potentially result in significant local disruption requiring significant alterations to the access of the local car park and bus station as well as

highway realignments.

Option 2 provides opportunities for additional services above that in Option 1b

between Heathrow and Surrey/Hampshire as it bypasses the four level crossings

in the Egham area. It is also potentially a less intrusive option to the local area,

depending on how the tunnel design is completed. Option 2 re-joins the Waterloo

to Reading line allowing for interchange at Virginia Water station with Airport

services, whilst this would not be possible with Option 3, interchange could only

happen at Staines with Heathrow – London Waterloo services (of which only

2tph could stop at Staines).

Option 3 however provides the potential opportunity for additional services

between Heathrow and Surrey/Hampshire. Option 3 is potentially the most

intrusive option on the local area. Arup’s cost estimate has excluded any

compensation costs, as it is believed this is also excluded in the Network Rail

study estimates. The impact of implementing a viaduct structure through the




Egham area, alongside the M25 could have significant ramifications in respect of

compensation costs which will increase the cost difference between Option 2

and Option 3. To potentially minimise these impacts, an alternative option to the

development of a viaduct structure for Option 3 has been considered. This option

proposes tunnelling along the alignment for Option 3. For the purposes of

comparison Arup has produced cost estimates for a tunnel option which would

increase the costs of Option 3 by circa £120m.

Figure 15: All NR Options

Arup has developed its own costs estimates for each of the options outlined in the

Network Rail report which could offer SRAtH to Surrey rail stations. The cost

estimates for the options outlined in the Network Rail report range between

£0.68bn and £1.61bn, these point estimates are broadly aligned with the estimate

range quoted in the Network Rail report, although slightly lower. Options 1a and

1b lowest cost option allowing for services towards London Waterloo and

Surrey/Hampshire. Option 2 and 3 are significantly more expensive however both

are similar in cost. However the cost estimates amongst other assumptions do not

include costs associated with compensation which has the potential to

significantly increase the estimate cost for Option 3 due to the impact of the

viaduct structure. The same alignment for Option 3 developed as a tunnel rather

than a viaduct would increase the cost by approximately £120m, but could reduce

the risks regarding compensations costs and visual impact. Table 3 summarises

the cost estimates for each option.


\\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\227000\227787 SURREY RAIL STRATEGY\227787-60 HEATHROW SOUTHERN RAIL ACCESS\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-05 ARUP REPORTS\REPORT\SURREY SRATH - FINAL REPORT - DEC 2016.DOCX

Page 30


Table 3: Arup Cost Estimates

Option 1a Option 1b Option 1c Option 2 Option 3 Option 3

(Western (Staines (+ LX (Egham (Chertsey (Tunnel

Alignment) Chord) removal) Tunnel) Link) alternative)

Arup £679.9m £725.5m £725.5m £1,448.9m £1,605.8m +£120m

Estimate

(+£42m)

Table 4 compares Arup’s estimates with the Network Rail estimates. Comparison of Arup’s point estimates with the range estimate outlined in the Network Rail

study suggests the cost estimates outlined in the Network Rail report are representative of the infrastructure requirements, although detailed information

regarding the Network Rail estimates were not made available upon request.

The Network Rail Study has assumed capacity enhancements on the South West

Main Line are delivered as a requirement to increase capacity to London Waterloo

from Surrey and Hampshire. As noted previously it is not made clear the extent to

which the capacity available will be prioritised for trains to Heathrow, and

whether any capital costs would be associated with delivery of SRAtH, the costs

of these required schemes could have a significant impact.

Table 4: Comparison of Cost Estimates between Arup's cost point estimate and the Network Rail study range estimate.

Option 1a Option 1b Option 2 (Egham Option 3

(Western (Staines Chord) Tunnel) (Chertsey Link)

Alignment)

Arup £679,860,000 £725,530,000 £1,448,910,000 £1,605,830,000

Estimate

Network £700,000,000- £800,000,000- £1,400,000,000- £1,400,000,000-

Rail £900,000,000 £950,000,000 £1,800,000,000 £1,800,000,000

Estimate

The cost estimates developed by Arup are indicative and include a number of

assumptions and clarifications that are outlined in Appendix A1. The cost

estimates do not consider the feasibility of construction for each alignment and

should be considered relative to each other to provide an indicative cost for each

scheme. Details of Network Rail’s cost assumptions and exclusions were not

made available, however their study does report that “cost does not include future

inflation, asset resilience, power supply upgrades or potential depot and stabling

requirements”.

4.8 Additional Infrastructure Option

Arup has developed an additional infrastructure option to improve Surrey service connectivity with SRAtH from that proposed within the Network Rail report. The

Arup option is complementary to the Network Rail options and involves improving connectivity at Weybridge, where services are proposed to be removed

in the Network Rail report.

| Final | 21 December 2016 \\GLOBAL.ARUP.COM\LONDON\PTG\ICL-JOBS\227000\227787 SURREY RAIL STRATEGY\227787-60 HEATHROW SOUTHERN RAIL ACCESS\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-


Page 31


4.8.1 Weybridge Chord Option

The Network Rail options (1b, 2, 3) provide capacity for up to 4tph between Heathrow and any pair of the following destinations; Basingstoke, Guildford and Weybridge.

We have developed an additional enhancement to the Network Rail options which

predominantly seeks to improve connectivity. In addition to the options proposed

in the Network Rail report a chord between Weybridge Platform 1 and Byfleet

Junction could potentially provide half hourly (2tph) connectivity to all three

destinations. The proposed chord allows trains from the bay platform to access the

Down Slow Line without conflicting with services on the other lines. Figure 16

shows the proposed alignment for the junction and how this would connect to the

existing infrastructure, whilst Figure 17 on the following page, provides a

schematic track layout of how the new chord (dashed red line) would make use of

the existing grade separated Byfleet Junction.

Figure 16: Option 2b/3b Weybridge Chord

It is proposed that 1-2tph from Heathrow to Surrey/Hampshire could be routed via

a reversing move to serve Weybridge station. Stopping airport services at

Weybridge provides additional connectivity options, and could off-set some loss

in connectivity on the Chertsey Line by proving a station interchange at

Weybridge. An increase in though journey time of approximately 10 minutes

would be incurred to services which call at Weybridge as part of a reversal move.

The cost estimate for the Weybridge chord is between £23m and £49m depending on alignment. Details regarding the cost estimate are included in Appendix A.

This option could be developed alongside Option 1b, Option 2 and Option 3,



although with a reduced level of service during peak hours to 2tph with Option 1b.

Figure 17: Schematic Weybridge station track layout diagram. Adapted from source www.networkrail.co.uk

4.9 Supporting Infrastructure Scheme Requirements

In addition to the specific SRAtH proposals, the Network Rail report also outlines several significant schemes required to be in place in order to accommodate SRAtH services. These enhancements are outlined in the Network Rail Wessex

Route Study report2, as key infrastructure schemes to support future demand on

the South West Main Line. The schemes relevant to SRAtH are:

Woking Junction grade separation;

Woking station additional Down through platform;

Freight regulation point/solution (potentially requiring a new loop);

Basingstoke (down) direction grade separation (if SRAtH is planned to Basingstoke); and

2 Wessex Route Study (Network Rail, August 2015).



Guildford station capacity enhancements (if SRAtH is planned to Guildford).

The enhancement schemes outlined in the Wessex Route Study are unfunded

proposed schemes for CP63 and beyond, which would be required regardless of

SRAtH, in order to improve capacity on the South West Main Line. As such the Network Rail study has excluded the scheme costs from their appraisal, although there is a possibility that funding may be required for these schemes as part of any SRAtH scheme, depending on timescales.

3 Control Period 6 – the Network Rail 5-year financial planning period running from April 2019

to March 2024.




5 Capacity and Service Options

The following section presents the current train service provision and that planned as part of the next South Western Franchise, and capacity constraints in relation to SRAtH.

5.1 Current Situation

The existing rail network connecting London Waterloo and Surrey / Hampshire is

already very busy and adding trains to/from Heathrow is complicated. The

Heathrow trains will introduce new conflicting moves which will constrain the

timetable and potentially have a significant impact on performance. This

performance risk is mentioned in Network Rail’s report and this chapter

summarises the constraints and reviews the Network Rail proposals on future

capacity.

5.1.1 Current Capacity

Currently services typically operating from London Waterloo towards Reading, Weybridge, Windsor & Eton Riverside, Shepperton (via Twickenham),

Farnham (via Ascot) and on the Hounslow loop are considered as the Windsor Line services.

Today in the high peak hour (arrivals at London Waterloo between 0800h and 0859h) there are 15tph from the Windsor Line. This is expected to increase to

18tph by the end of CP54 with an additional Reading service and additional

Windsor & Eton Riverside services. Excluding the inner Windsor services, Figure 18 below outlines the current train service provision. Each line in the figure represents one train per hour, whilst the white dots indicate stops at stations.

4 Control Period 5 – the current Network Rail 5-year financial planning period running from

April 2014 to March 2019.



Figure 18: Current Outer Windsor Lines Train Service Map for high peak hour arrivals to London Waterloo, excluding inner Windsor Line services.

5.1.2 South Western Franchise

The current South Western franchise is due for renewal in 2017. The next South

Western franchise Invitation to Tender (ITT) documentation is planned around

making use of the infrastructure enhancements delivered during CP5 and into CP6.

The infrastructure enhancements are due to be delivered with the end goal of

providing capacity for up to 20tph into London Waterloo from the Windsor Lines.

The main enhancement scheme required for this is the re-opening of Platforms 20-

24 and associated signalling and station track layout changes at London Waterloo.

It is envisaged that up to 18 trains per hour will operate from the Windsor Lines

during the start of CP6 (2019) as outlined in the ITT for the next franchise. The

following Table 5 compares current service provision to that in the ITT for the

next South Western franchise.




Page 36


Table 5: Comparison of current outer Windsor Line services to that in the ITT for the next South Western franchise.

Current Peak

New SW Franchise ITT

Service Peak Service (indicative)

Reading – Waterloo 3tph 4tph

Windsor – Waterloo 2tph 4tph

Weybridge/Farnham – Waterloo 2tph 2tph*

Kingston Loop 2tph 2tph

Shepperton (via Twickenham) 2tph 2tph *Service provision to Weybridge/Farnham is dependent on franchise bidder choices, remaining services

are required to be delivered.

20tph is considered the maximum capacity of the Windsor Lines due to several

significant constraints on the route. In regards to SRAtH services to London Waterloo a key constraint for services between Heathrow and London Waterloo is

the section of track between Staines and Feltham which is limited to a maximum of 14tph with 12tph stopping.

For SRAtH services between Heathrow and Surrey/Hampshire, the key constraints are the level crossings in the Egham area, and capacity on the South

West Main Line. Table 6 compares the plain line planning capacity utilisation5

for today compared to the expected 2019 service levels (Department for Transport, South Western franchise ITT, 2016).

Table 6: Plain Line Planning Capacity Utilisation of Existing Infrastructure5

Line link Timetable Stopping Stopping Non- Total

Year trains dwell

trains

stopping

Utilisation

time

headway

trains

headway

Feltham – 2016 15% 53% 0% 68%

Staines

2019

20%

70%

0%

90%

Staines – 2016 12% 41% 0% 53%

Virginia Water

2019

13%

47%

0%

60%

Weybridge - 2016 3% 15% 0% 18%

Chertsey

2019

3%

15%

0%

18%

This indicates that there is potential spare capacity to introduce new services between Heathrow and Surrey via the Weybridge to Chertsey and Virginia Water

5 Plain line planning capacity is a measure of utilisation using the planning headways, which is

calculated as a function of the number of trains, stopping patterns and journey time though the section of line. It does not include the utilisation of planning margins at junctions, however provides an indication of the capacity available/utilised in the route section. Planning headways are the stated minimum margin between trains, and are usually in excess of the minimum technical signalling headway.




to Staines links. However, as reported in the Network Rail study the level

crossings in the Egham area act as a significant constraint on increasing the

number of services. The Network Rail report states that “The Office of the Rail

and Road (ORR) has advised that no additional services can be pathed via Egham

in the peak whilst these level crossings are in operation.” Therefore options

developed will need to avoid increasing the number of services on this section of

line in order not impact on level crossing barrier down time.

5.1.3 Heathrow – London Waterloo Constraints

All infrastructure options proposed in the Network Rail study seek to

accommodate four trains per hour all day, including the peak hours between

Heathrow and London Waterloo. Due to the maximum capacity of the route

between Staines and Feltham being 14 trains per hour (with 12tph stopping), this

therefore means there is not sufficient capacity to support an additional 4tph

Heathrow – London Waterloo services on top of the 12tph planned for CP6. Table

6 illustrates that between Feltham and Staines the assumed service increase in

CP6 of 3tph in the peak hours brings the planning capacity utilisation to 90%. The

high utilisation of this section of line presents a performance risk to services.

Our analysis indicates that even if capacity is increased between Staines and Feltham there are further capacity issues towards London Waterloo including

Barnes Junction and capacity approaching and at London Waterloo that would preclude any additional increase in capacity.

To accommodate the services from Heathrow to London Waterloo the Network

Rail study proposes to curtail the 2tph Weybridge – London Waterloo services at Virginia Water. This has the following implications;

1. The 4tph between Heathrow and London Waterloo will increase the line utilisation to 100% between Staines and Feltham during peak hours, presenting a significant performance risk to Windsor Line services.

2. Due to the capacity constraints it also suggests that 2tph of the Heathrow –

London Waterloo services will need to be timed as “semi-fast” or non-stop

services between Staines and Feltham (potentially resulting in only 2tph of the airport services calling at Staines and Feltham).

3. Although the Network Rail report has suggest curtailing the 2tph Weybridge –

London Waterloo services, it is feasible that other services operating through Staines and the Hounslow loop could be curtailed or removed instead. For

example 2tph services from Reading or Farnham (via Ascot).

5.1.4 Heathrow – Surrey/Hampshire Constraints

Not all the infrastructure options in the Network Rail report provide connectivity

between Surrey/Hampshire and Heathrow Airport (Option 1a and Option 4). Of the

options that do, Option 1b can only support 2tph in the peak without increasing level

crossing barrier closure times beyond that planned in 2019. This therefore requires

that any services routed though Egham from Heathrow will have to replace existing

services; the Network Rail report suggests it should be the



final report - surrey...surrey county council southern rail access to heathrow final report final |...

Documents