Paul Smart
Transport Division 3
SEDD, area 2-F
Victoria Quay
EDINBURGH
EH6 6QQ
20 February 2001
Dear Mr Smart
STRATEGIC PRIORITIES FOR SCOTLAND'S PASSENGER RAILWAY
CONTENTS OF THIS SUBMISSION
A. Greater emphasis on rail openings and re-openings
B. A door-to-door railway, emphasising cycling and walking
Appendix 1: Spokes nomination
of ScotRail for Cycle Mark award, May 1999 [Relevant to B(1)]
Appendix 2: Pages 10-12
of the 1999 bikerail project annual report [Relevant to B(5)].
Whilst welcoming much of what is in the document, it appears to be basically a consolidation and relatively unambitious expansion of the present situation. The term 'vision' is used in chapter 1 and in the Minister's introduction, but this is too positive a description. Some elements we would suggest for a fuller vision are covered in sections A, B and C of our submission.
Specifically regarding our local area, valuable passenger-opening projects relevant to the Lothians would include the following, with early action wherever possible.
Even assuming that many potential bike/rail travellers already use rail, by driving to the station, it would be more advantageous to the rail industry if where possible they cycled instead, as in the countries above. First, the cost of providing car-parking infrastructure is high, and increasing as more people use rail in already built-up areas where land is expensive. Because of the minimal area required, provision of cycle parking is far more cost-effective - though often perversely neglected! Second, we understand [from Tony Grant, Sustrans] that there is evidence that people are least likely to make a multi-modal journey if they begin their journey by car - i.e. in that case they are likely to complete the whole journey by car. Finally, if people cycle to the station for work travel, they will think of using bike/rail for other types of long journey; whereas those who normally drive to the station for work travel (due to urban congestion), are likely to use car-alone for non-work journeys, where congestion is less.
Despite the high levels of cycling to stations in the Netherlands, Dutch Railways aim to increase this further, and are investing a further £150m on better cycle parking and extended bike-park opening hours [Platform, August 2000]. At the 46 largest stations the specifications include 18-hour-a-day staffed bike parking and hire, and convenient and well-signed walk/cycle routes to town centres.
Faced with a target to increase rail use by 50% in 10 years, Dutch Railways are working to transform rail into a 'door-to-door' system. They recognise that the train is just one part of a longer 'door to door' journey and that travellers attach considerable importance to overall journey time. Instead of focussing on big engineering projects aimed at cutting train journey times by a few minutes they believe it to be easier, more relevant and more cost-effective to focus on improving the journey times of transport to and from stations. Their Market Research and Advice Department works with 'chain managers' to manage the chain of transport options serving stations. The modal split of each station is researched and the 'chain managers' work with the bus companies, cycle-hire, taxi companies and managers of station facilities (e.g. cycle routes and cycle parking providers) to achieve optimal integration of the various links in the transport chain. They also focus on issues such as reducing journey delays at the station itself e.g. time spent queuing for tickets etc.
Further information on how rail and cycle can be integrated to form a door-to-door system are available from...
However, Spokes was proud in 1999 to nominate ScotRail for the UK CycleMark award, on the basis of its policy reversal on cycle carriage - instituting free on-train bike carriage and markedly increasing on-train bike facilities on most Class-158 and 156 stock. Our nomination was based on a survey of our membership, which showed an astounding 76% of respondents saying that ScotRail was now "much better" than previously for bike/rail, and a further 18% saying "better"! When asked what further action was needed, the top request was for yet more/better on-train bike capacity (followed by more attention to convenient and secure parking at stations). These results point to the critical importance of encouraging better on-train bike provision, and without charge (except perhaps for pre-booked long-distance holiday-type journeys). A copy of our nomination letter is attached and reveals several other relevant aspects.
We note that ScotRail's initiative was also highly commended in the 1999 annual report to the DETR by the bikerail project, who concluded that other TOCs should follow ScotRail's example [more information on the bikerail report appears in B(5) below].
Since the CycleMark award, ScotRail has maintained the general philosophy of free bike carriage and some on-train provision; but there have been slippages suggesting that bike/rail as a concept is not yet thoroughly enough integrated into general ScotRail thinking. The new Class-170 Turbostars still have no door-signs telling cyclists where to load their bikes(despite promises from ScotRail that this would be looked into); and bike capacity between Edinburgh and Glasgow was reduced from 2 bikes per 2 coaches to 2 per 3 coaches when the Turbostars were introduced (i.e. passenger capacity was increased but cycle capacity was not corresondingly increased). Class-158's were moved to the Far North line with grossly inadequate bike (and luggage) capacity, to the extent that ScotRail had to introduce a parallel on-road bike-bus (although ScotRail says it is investigating on-train improvements); and we understand that cascaded rolling stock proposed for the North Berwick line will have much-reduced bike capacity, despite this being a very popular bike/rail route (particularly but not exclusively for recreational cyclists). Spokes still receives complaints from cyclists about inadequate on-train bike capacity. Recently [4.9.2000] one of our members wrote "I had a bike reservation on the 2012 from Pitlochry to Edinburgh. Receiving news that I was required back urgently, I had to catch the 1120. I was told there was no room for any bike so, given the urgency of my return, I had to abandon the bike."
We also note that, in terms of the technicalities
of bike carriage, a German report is available comparing different methods
of on-train cycle storage, and coming up with recommendations, both for
long-distance services and for commuter trains. The 4-page report 'AFDC
Bikes on Trains Paper' is available free from the UK Cyclists Touring
Club.
We note with interest that Scottish Borders Council has suggested that stations on the Borders Railway be linked to towns and villages by cycleways "to promote sustainable travel patterns" [council leaflet]. Also recent S.E. Public Transport Fund allocations to Argyll & Bute and Inverclyde councils include cycleroute linkages to stations. We also welcome the recent ScotRail/Sustrans project to sign 60 stations in Scotland as being adjacent to the National Cycle Network [Sustrans Network News, Dec 2000] - this forms a useful first stage to our suggested future programme linking the stations with the network.
The Strategic Rail Authority is also contributing to Safe Routes to Stations, for example in a recent award to Anglia Rail from the Rail Passenger Partnership Fund, aimed at innovative projects to achieve modal shift to rail.
Despite such welcome initiatives by various stakeholders, we hope to see franchise bidders committing to a proactive role, including targets as above, to ensure the development of safe, convenient, and well-known walking and cycling routes to stations from town centres, from national cycle routes, from major housing areas etc. This would often be done in partnership with councils, Sustrans, and other relevant bodies. However it should not be left to local authorities to take the initiative, as some will be interested and others not, and thus Safe Routes to Stations might be implemented in an arbitary fashion. Given the figures (above) for rail access by bike in countries such as Germany and Denmark, and the costs of providing car-parking spaces, this is surely also in the economic interests of rail operators.
As well as taking the initiative in setting
up partnerships to promote Safe Routes to Stations, rail operators should
also be contributing financially. This could be funded in various ways
- for example, as part of the track access charges levied by Railtrack.
There should be a range of incentives to encourage door-to-door cycle/rail travel. These could include...
Based on the above, the terms for the new franchise should include the guarantees on the following...
Quite apart from any desire to be 'green', living car-free allows the individual to forget worries about repairs, theft, insurance, parking, etc; and for many it also means a healthier, friendlier and a less-costly lifestyle.
Similarly, by wholeheartedly espousing the concept of door-to-door railways (B above) the government, and the new franchisee, could give this genuine choice to many more of the people of Scotland. Whilst a City Car Club allows some city residents to mix and match transport modes to provide their accessibility needs, so door-to-door rail can do the same particularly for people living in towns and more rural areas - and indeed it could work with City, Town and Rural car clubs to allow yet more people the choice of not owning a car.
1&2 Operational priorities The dilemmas listed are not realistic when posed in such general terms. Services/corridors need to be assessed on an individual basis to determine the most appropriate actions in each case. Also, other priorities should be built into the equation - notably priority (B) above.
As regards question 2, our comments are as in (A) above.
3 Overcrowding One possible response, which should be prohibited in the terms of the franchise, would be to ban or deter cycle carriage. Such action would have a very negative effect both on bike/rail commuters specifically, and on the general understanding of bike/rail. This is particularly so given the positive and successful momentum to bike/rail integration which has been given by ScotRail's moves in B(1) above. Any response to deter cycles by the new operator would be indicative of unpreparedness to deal properly with known and everyday peak-hour problems.
4 Security and safety See B(2) - safe routes to stations and B(3) - cycle parking at stations.
Additionally, having staffed stations wherever possible, preferably with regular member(s) of staff, would add greatly to security and could be linked to community involvement.
We are slightly sceptical as to the desire of railway companies for community involvement, however, based on our experience of commenting of planning applications at station buildings.
Finally, as regards overall public safety, see (C) above, which in combination with B(2) would allow safer lifestyles in terms of transport/accessibility than where lifestyles are largely car-dependent.
5 Service Quality As with questions 1-2 above, a generalised ranking of the points you list is not realistic; on top of which other points are omitted from the list - for example, station staffing.
As regards ticketing issues, see B(4) above.
6 Reducing road-traffic congestion/pollution See (B) and (C) above.
Also, it is vital that the scarce funds for capital investment are always used in the most effective way. At present, expensive trunk road schemes (such as the A1 Haddington/Dunbar or the Ayrshire 3-towns bypass) are still approved without proper comparison with other alternatives, such as investment in other transport modes, use of planning/location policies, and fiscal measures like charging for road-use and for workplace/supermarket car-space provision.
7 Encouraging more people to use rail as their preferred transport mode See (B) and especially (C).
However, for a really effective policy, there must be stick as well as carrot. At present motorists do not pay the full costs they impose on society; on top of which, in the last 10-20 years, motoring costs incurred by the individual motorist have fallen drastically in comparison to the costs of using public transport. A really significant modal shift may be impossible to achieve until these factors are corrected - which can only be done when the government has the strength of purpose to fully engage the public on the environmental and public health issues, along with hypothecation of the revenue to sustainable development purposes.
8 Reducing peripherality See (A) and (B).
Please note, in connection with combining bike/rail for the 'door-to-door' journey, there is a common misconception that cycling in rural areas is primarily for leisure, and that there is little scope for promoting utility cycling except in urban areas. This is absolutely false. In the 1991 census the 3 Scottish local authorities with highest levels of cycle commuting were all rural authorities, and Spokes can provide further evidence from other sources to confirm the importance of rural utility cycling. Most recently, the Scottish Household Survey also suggest cycle commuting to be at least as common in rural as in urban areas. Therefore bike/rail door-to-door journeying should be seen as an important and realistic means of reducing peripherality in many cases.
9 Expansion of the rural rail network Again the question posed is too general; and answers depend on assessing each specific case. The points in (B) and especially (A) above are again relevant.
10 Affordability of rail to people on low incomes See (B) above. Combining rail and bike into door-to-door journeying means that the non-rail part of the journey is extremely cheap, thereby reducing the overall journey cost to the individual. Further ideas are in B(4), although most of those points are not of great relevance to those on the very lowest incomes.
11 Improving accessibility This section of the document does not include as a separate category the question of cycle carriage (and more generally people with luggage), although this is a clear area of accessibility problems. For our comments about on-train bike carriage see B(1).
12 Integration of rail with other modes Given the evidence from Europe we are absolutely bedazzled that this section does not include a full paragraph on integration of bike/rail (and of walk/rail), as well as a much fuller consideration of the concept of promoting the door-to-door journey - including assessment of its cost effectiveness in comparison to other forms of transport investment. See our comments in (B) above.
This omission is even more disturbing given that you attach such weight to park-and-ride and to airport access; both of which are likely to encourage unsustainable means of transport for significant sections of each multi-modal journey. Each park-and-ride proposal, for example, must be very carefully assessed and modelled to try and ensure that it will significantly reduce, and certainly not increase, motorised travel - a clear danger in many park-and-ride projects.
13 Working with other bodies on rail projects The new franchisee should have sustainability as a clear priority objective, and this should be a guiding light in developing new projects, choosing partners, and defining objectives. For example, we would hope to see active work with local authorities and bodies such as Sustrans and the tourist industry to promote concepts such as those in (C) and (B) above.
14 Relationship/conflict with cross-Border rail services The greatest conflict/competition faced by rail is with motorised transport rather than with other rail services. Yet the consultation paper takes a very complacent if not defeatist line on such issues. We would like to see the franchisee highlighting and indeed campaigning on points such as our comments under D(6), D(7), and (C) above.
On the specific point of on-train bike carriage, and more generally bike/rail integration, the new franchisee should move forward rapidly from ScotRail's welcome early initiatives mentioned above in B(1) and B(2), to achieve early substantial progress on all areas of (B). Through its CycleMark success ScotRail has already given something of a lead to other rail operators, and Scotland should now advance this lead.
We trust our comments will be of use, and thank you for this opportunity to comment.
Yours Sincerely
Dave du Feu
Enclosures...
Appendix 1: Spokes nomination of ScotRail
for Cycle Mark award, May 1999 [See B(1) above]
Appendix 2: Pages 10-12 of the 1999 bikerail
project annual report [See B(5) above].
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|