Purpose of the report: Policy Development and Review
To receive a presentation on the key areas of consideration with regards to Surrey’s proposed Rail Strategy.
Minutes:
Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses:
Paul Millin, Travel and Transport Group Manager
Stephen Bennett, Arup
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee was given a presentation on the work being undertaken to develop a rail strategy for Surrey County Council. A copy of this presentation is included as an additional supplement to these minutes. Officers informed the Committee that an opportunity to take a more proactive approach to developing a rail strategy than in previous years. It was recognised that Surrey had a comparatively small amount of influence, but that there would be long-term benefits for Surrey’s economy and residents. These considerations would inform a key part of the work related to Surrey Future.
2. The Committee was informed that Network Rail’s control periods worked in five year cycles. The current period 2014-2019 was largely committed and agreed in the main part, but there was an opportunity to have strategic input in the 2019-2024 control period. It was highlighted that the franchise renewal of South West Trains was due in 2017.
3. The Committee was told that four objectives had been idenifited in developing the rail strategy – these were global competiveness, economic growth, the environment and population growth. Officers informed the Committee that the first part of the study had investigated key issues and presented its findings in December 2012. Amongst these was overcrowding on the South West mainline into Waterloo, and access to stations within local employment area.
4. An options paper was presented in February 2013, outlining 30-40 options. Each was provided with a rationale, the changes that would be required, the costs, benefits and timescale in which this option would take place.
5. The view was expressed by officers that rail was not always the best option for resolving transport and infrastructure pressures, and that any strategy would need to take a number of other solutions into consideration.
6. The Committee was then given a detailed overview of a number of the possible options Surrey could choose to explore as part of its rail strategy. Included in these were an orbital service link between Gatwick and Guildford, an increase in services to and from Waterloo, improved access to airports and station improvements. The Committee was informed that there were ongoing discussions with Network Rail about an increase in services going into Waterloo, and there had been the suggestion that there was the possibility of this as a medium term upgrade. The draft Rail Strategy would be finalised upon clarification of this point in the following weeks.
7. Officers outlined to the Committee that the public consultation period would take place following Surrey County Council guidance, with a 3 month public consultation period on the draft Rail Strategy. The Council would also seek to work closely with partners such as the District & Borough Councils, Transport for London and other rail providers.
8. Members raised a question regarding cross-border working and development. Officers confirmed that there had been efforts made to engage other local authorities in order to improve cross border working. They commented that representatives from Hampshire County Council had attended the latest Rail Strategy Workshop. Members suggested drop-in sessions within key areas would be an important means of engaging the public.
9. The Committee also heard that officers were mindful of the terminus points in the rail network, such as Portsmouth and Brighton, and discussions were taking place with the relevant local authorities. However, it was also highlighted that the Rail Strategy was considered a Surrey focussed piece of work.
10. One Member questioned the absence of work identified in Oxshott, Claygate and Esher. Officers recognised these areas were important, but confirmed that there were already a number of committed schemes in the area. As consequence, Surrey County Council would have less of an opportunity to input into strategic development.
11. The Committee discussed the potential benefits of the Crossrail 2 development. Some Members expressed concerns that the scheme had not been designed with the intention of benefiting Surrey residents, and that the County Council should be cautious in supporting it. Officers commented that there were a number of variants on the proposed scheme, and that Surrey could benefit from the “regional scheme.” This would have the advantage of improving capacity at Waterloo. It was confirmed that conversations were ongoing with Transport for London, and that Surrey would be seeking to have an active presence on the development board for Crossrail 2.
12. The Committee discussed the improvement of station access and parking. Members commented that, in order to see the full benefits, any improvements would need to be in coordination with rail infrastructure developments. Concern was also expressed that an increase in station parking, could lead to larger catchments areas for commuters at certain stations, which could lead to further strain of the road infrastructure and hence needed careful consideration.
13. Officers outlined the next steps for developing the Rail Strategy. It was confirmed that the final document would be presented to Cabinet in July 2013 for approval. The Committee queried when Members would be provided an opportunity to provide input into the strategy, and whether the consultation would be directed through Local Committees. Officers expressed the view that the Rail Strategy was not orientated towards individual, local schemes but intended to take a Surrey-wide view. However, it was confirmed that the Rail Strategy would be brought to the Committee in June 2013 for further comments, following the consultation period. Officers also agreed that the Rail Strategy would be shared through the Local Committees once agreed.
14. Members expressed concerns regarding the communication and engagement of Members and residents in advance of the Rail Strategy being agreed. It was highlighted that the Strategy could benefit from being shared with the Chairman’s Group. It was also commented that officers needed to take into consideration how the proposals would impact on the public’s levels of expectation, and how the consultation period could be used to manage these expectations. The Committee highlighted that Member involvement should be considered integral, and that any proposals should be shared in advance of the Rail Strategy being agreed.
Recommendations:
None.
Actions/further information to be provided:
None.
Committee Next Steps:
The Committee will review the draft Railway Strategy prior to its final approval at Cabinet in July 2013.