Thameslink Franchise Consultation - Have your say on this

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Stephen Middleton on July 16, 2012 at 17:34

Thanks Arkady, that helps and explainsa lot. Selfishly this could be good for me as I live near Ally Pally Station and may get trains direct to Gatwick Airport.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Karen Alexander on July 16, 2012 at 17:33

Here is the foreword from the consultation document - explains in great detail (sorry its lengthy) but gives you all the details: Its the First Capital Connection franchises that are important here

1.1 The combined Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise (referred to in this document as ‘the combined franchise’) will bring together all of the services currently operated by two franchisees: First Capital Connect (FCC), in 2013 and from July 2015 Southern (including Gatwick Express). In addition, some services will transfer from Southeastern in 2014 and 2018 . The franchise will be responsible for delivering rail services across Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Greater London, Hampshire, Hertfordshire, Kent, Norfolk, Surrey and Sussex. There will be a wide and diverse range of destinations served such as Ashford, Bedford, Brighton, Cambridge, Chichester, Eastbourne, East Croydon, Gatwick Airport, Hastings, Horsham, King’s Lynn, Lewes, Littlehampton, Luton, Luton Airport, Peterborough, Portsmouth, St Albans, Stevenage and Welwyn Garden City.
1.2 There is significant change associated with the Government’s £6 billion investment in the Thameslink Programme, such as rebuilding London Bridge station and introducing new trains. As a result, the Government needs to ensure that programme and passenger benefits are fully realised. The Government believes that the most cost-effective way of managing the transition and its associated costs is to merge the existing FCC and Southern franchises. This approach was recommended by Sir Roy McNulty in his report Realising the Potential of GB Rail – Report of the Rail Value for Money Study, published in May 2011, as a way of making the industry more efficient.
1.3 The combined franchise will be the biggest franchise that has ever been let. When all the services have been incorporated, it will have the largest income, the most trains and the most staff of any franchise in the UK rail market and present some significant challenges. These are:
• to deliver services which effectively manage passenger demand throughout the period of reconstruction of London Bridge station;
• to bring into service a new fleet of trains, which are equipped with new technology, to deliver additional capacity for passengers;
• to manage the integration of other franchises’ services (that is, FCC, Southern and some Southeastern) into this combined franchise;
• to manage the transition in a way that enables the benefits of the Government’s investment in the Thameslink Programme to be fully realised;
• to ensure focus across the whole franchise area whilst supporting delivery of the Thameslink Programme;
• to ensure that performance and customer satisfaction is maintained; and
• to create the biggest franchise that has ever been let in order to realise benefits for passengers and taxpayers.
1.4 We are now consulting on what we should include in the specification for the combined franchise, which is due to start in September 2013 and run for a minimum of seven years. The consultation commences on 31 May 2012 and closes on 23 August 2012.
1.5 The consultation exercise will help inform what we include in the Invitation to Tender (ITT) which is scheduled to be released in October 2012. The ITT will:
• require bidders to set out how they will successfully deliver the challenges in this franchise and integrate services to improve the overall service offered to passengers; and
• set out a framework of incentives to allow bidders to develop and enhance services, where appropriate but also strikes the right balance between commercial freedom for the franchise and ensuring that interests of passengers, taxpayers and the economy are suitably protected.
1.6 We expect bidders will develop a suitable vision for this franchise. Developing a meaningful vision means that bidders will need to take into account value for money, affordability and the deliverability of their plans to address future challenges, whilst maintaining and potentially increasing passenger satisfaction.
1.7 The new franchise will need to respond to current and future growth. The Government is committed to the Thameslink Programme which will deliver a step change in capacity and service on the franchise in addition to the investment that has already taken place on the FCC and Southern franchises in more vehicles and longer platforms. Bidders will be expected to build on this by responding to increased demand and exploiting the opportunity this investment provides.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gerry N on July 17, 2012 at 11:21

Intersting stuff,a megafranchise   a quote from above:

1.3 The combined franchise will be the biggest franchise that has ever been let. When all the services have been incorporated, it will have the largest income, the most trains and the most staff of any franchise in the UK rail market and present some significant challenges. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by William Booth on July 18, 2012 at 9:19

Sorry to bang the drum for new/improved TfL services, but I feel this would be a good opportunity to look at two problems - first, the underuse of the Finsbury Park to Moorgate section, and second, the existence of the Parkland Walk line. I've put my ideas (which of course have been had by many people previously!) in sketch form and with annotation here.

This was an old LU scheme at one point, as shown here, but I think a DLR-type service would be easier now as the platforms could be pretty short on the northern section. StephenBln knows why the line can't go further than Moorgate but a thirteen station line from Alexandra Palace (which remains a complete pain to get to) to the City intersecting with Northern, Overground, Victoria and Mainline services would be incredibly useful.

As I say in my blogpost about it, a major concern would be the loss of the Parkland Walk (which I use several times a week and am very fond of) but a light rail system would be much more useful to be honest. And a contingency of the scheme could be the replacement of that green space with (say) twice as much elsewhere, and perhaps pointing in more useful directions for cycle/foot traffic.

The rail situation would be a lot more simple if it were all running out of Kings Cross. I agree that putting in the extra platforms at Harringay and Hornsey is absolutely critical and the council should be working towards making this happen in any way they can. But the weedy little branch line from FP to Moorgate could become a fantastic link which really benefits many underconnected bits of Haringey if it was a) integrated into the underground network and b) extended north.

How I imagine it:

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Arkady on July 18, 2012 at 9:27

King’s Cross doesn’t have anything like the necessary capacity to handle all the current local services, even post-Thameslink.  They need to go to Moorgate.

I agree that restoring the Northern Heights line would be a good idea, but it would need to either terminate at Finsbury Park or head down the Canonbury Curve onto the East London Line via flyover over the North London Line.  The ELL connection to FP was originally proposed as part of the recent ELL extension.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by William Booth on July 18, 2012 at 9:35

True, as it stands. You could close the bottom 200m ish of York Way (i.e. south of Wharfedale Road) and make the equivalent stretch of Caledonian Road two way again. Then where platform 0 is there would be room for another three platforms probably... 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Arkady on July 18, 2012 at 9:40

Sorry William, but that’s never going to happen!  Not after the recent redevelopment of King’s Place!

One of my few regrets about the current KX masterplan is that they didn’t safeguard the lower levels of zone A (between KX and StP) for additional platforms.  KX is now at maximum capacity indefinitely.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by William Booth on July 18, 2012 at 9:52

Ah, I know really, we'll all be underwater or huddled in the dark eating mouldy uncooked rice before we get any sensible large-scale infrastructure planning!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by William Booth on July 18, 2012 at 9:37

Alternatively, Finsbury Park could become a semi-terminus, given that you could then go from there to the West End (Picc. and Vic.) or the City (light rail) if you were coming in from the commuter belt.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Arkady on July 18, 2012 at 9:29

Also, given that old Stroud Green Station is on Stapleton Hall Road, where would your separate SHR station go?  And any DLR-like service would have much lower passenger capacity - better to restore the service as standard rail.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by William Booth on July 18, 2012 at 9:40

Would there be room for long trains though? If there were, that would be great. Yeah, sorry, that's unclear. SHR would be where that very tall drop down to the Gospel Oak-Barking line is (interchange by lifts) - i.e. at SHR itself. Stroud Green further south on Tollington Park. Though if it was going to be long trains I think this extra stop would be difficult to fit in.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Arkady on July 18, 2012 at 9:58

Are you are aware of the (largely defunct) Muswell Hill Metro group?  They had a similar plan to restore the line, but terminating at FP.  I had a long discussion once with the former chair (who had received death threats from Muswell Hill residents terrified at the threat to their hilltop idyll).  His take on it (which I broadly agree with) was that the capacity benefits of a DLR-like service probably wouldn’t be worth digging up the Parkland Walk for. 

 

A standard-gauge railway would have additional benefits on top of much larger capacity – e.g. the link-up with the ELL and the possibility of restoring the link to Barnet).  On the other hand, the length of trains might rule out some stations (e.g. Cranley Gardens) and make others superfluous to requirements.  For instance, a restored Stroud Green Station really ought to have an interchange with the GOBLIN, but it might be hard to justify Crouch Hill’s existence in those circumstances).  Regardless, even with light rail it would be hard to justify an additional station between old Stroud Green and Finsbury Park.  It’s a five minute walk.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• …
• 10
• Next ›
• Page