Memorandum from Transport for London (TfL)
1.1 Transport for London (TfL) is pleased
to respond to the Transport Select Committee's inquiry into priorities
for investment in the railways.
1.2 The Department for Transport (DfT) published
its 30 year vision for National Rail in July 2007 as
well as a High-Level Output Specification (HLOS) for the passenger
railway. Shortly after, the go-ahead for Crossrail was announced.
TfL had already started from November 2007 an upgrade of
London's orbital railways under the banner of "London Overground".
1.3 TfL and DfT have taken the first steps
towards a real improvement in London's railways. Whilst there
are plans for an unprecedented investment in the railway, some
slippage is already emerging, including the deferral of improvements
to the frequency of trains on the Finsbury Park to Moorgate route.
TfL strongly urges that HLOS1 is delivered in full and to
1.4 HLOS2 presents a series of longer
term, and additional, challenges. TfL believes that the focus
for investment and indeed management resources in the period 2014-19 should
Targeted additional capacity/capability:
Freight, including freight interchange.
Specific international links to airports
Carbon reduction, the greatest single
Improving the railway's level of customer
service, for example through simplifying the customer proposition
through for example:
consistent standards for facilities,
personal security and information at London's National Rail stations
similar to those of the London Overground, and
a less disrupted railway that operates
seven days a week.
Improving fairness, for example by continuing
to improve accessibility to the railway.
Greater coordination and integration
between transport modes, for example in the areas of fares and
ticketing and service planning.
Greater efficiency, making the most of
the resources the industry has at its disposal.
Greater responsibility and accountability
for London's suburban rail network by the Mayor of London.
1.5 Given public finances, it is more necessary
than ever for the rail industry to make the most of the investment
the industry has recently enjoyed. TfL believes this can more
readily be met by giving TfL greater powers of integration in
order to maximise revenues and reduce whole (public transport)
industry costs. Examples are:
TfL could, where appropriate, provide
rail replacement bus services using its regular service bus routes.
A stronger service planning role for
TfL would reduce the need for bus and Underground feeder services
from the main termini by making better use of interchange at stations
such as Clapham Junction and Stratford.
A simpler customer proposition in terms
of facilities, fares and ticketing which has time and again been
shown to lead to more demand and higher revenues.
A budget to operate London's rail network would
enable the Mayor to balance and prioritise London's transport
needs, priorities and service standards across the capital.
1.6 The means by which this will be implemented
in practice will affect not just Network Rail and its future enhancement
programme, but also the content of future franchises. TfL also
believes that there should be an enhanced role for a future National
Station Improvement programme and a future generation of Station
Travel Plans to drive the delivery of more consistent standards.
2.1 The Transport Select Committee has announced
a new inquiry into priorities for investment in the railways.
2.2 TfL has already welcomed the DfT's framework
for strategic planning as set out in Delivering a Sustainable
Transport System. Specifically, TfL welcomes the publication
in summer 2012 of a 30 year vision for transport, as
well as the High-Level Output Specification, not just for the
passenger railway, but also for rail freight and highways. TfL
is therefore pleased to take this opportunity to set out its objectives
for rail services in London.
3. CONTEXT FOR
3.1 London is Europe's fastest growing city
with the population expected to increase by one million over the
next 20 years.
For the capital to remain a key driver of the national economy,
the city's rail system needs substantial improvement. This was
recognised in HLOS1, and there is a substantial investment programme.
However, this will not solve the challenges the railway faces
by any means.
3.2 London's continuing economic prosperity
depends heavily on the city having a good rail system. It has
the smallest motorway system of any comparable world class city,
but one of the largest rail networks. It relies on its rail network
to bring employees from a wide area into a business centre where
high job densities and productivity result in considerable wealth
generation for the UK. One of the reasons for the high productivity
levels is that the rail network allows London's businesses to
employ skilled people in a labour market that extends far outside
the boundaries of the city. The employment density of the urban
cluster that rail serves is unique. There are only five local
authorities in the UK with employment densities of more than 5,000 jobs
per square kilometre and all are in central London. The City of
London has a density of 130,000 jobs per square kilometre.
3.3 For these reasons, TfL welcomed the
Government's decision to commit to investment in London's railways
during Control Period 4. In summary, this included a number of
vital enhancements to the existing infrastructure:
a new east-west rail linkCrossrail
1as the only realistic solution to capacity issues into
London and through central London;
an upgraded main north-south routeThameslink;
lengthening some trains and some platforms
on South West Trains, Southern South Eastern, C2C, and West Anglia,
purchase of additional rolling stock
and reconfiguration and refurbishment of existing stock to make
best use of existing infrastructure.
3.4 TfL has also committed an investment
of £1.3 billion to upgrade London's orbital rail routes.
This includes the extension of the East London line from Highbury
& Islington to Croydon; the upgrade of North London Railways;
and its complete re-equipment with new and longer trains.
4.1 Question 1: In the medium to long
term, what should be the main objectives for investment in the
railways, in order to improve both freight and passenger services?
4.1.1 In London, the process of revising
the Mayor's Transport Strategy is underway, and means that TfL
has recently identified the challenges facing London's transport
network to meet the Mayor's vision of London:
"London should excel among global citiesexpanding
opportunities for all its people and enterprises, achieving the
highest environmental standards and quality of life and leading
the world in its approach to tackling the urban challenges of
the 21st century."
4.1.2 The transport vision for London is
guided by the five broad goals below:
Support economic development and growth.
Enhance quality of life.
Improve safety and security.
Provide transport opportunities for all.
4.1.3 A sixth goal to deliver the London
2012 Olympics and Paralympic Games will also influence the
future of transport in London.
4.1.4 The DfT has consulted on an updated
set of national transport objectives, as set out in Delivering
a Sustainable Transport System. As shown in Figure 1 below,
the objectives of the Mayor and TfL are closely aligned.
4.1.5 This close alignment leads to TfL
agreeing that these objectives are the right ones against which
to prioritise investment in the railways to improve freight and
4.2 Question 2: How should these objectives
4.2.1 The rail industry's objectives should
be consistent not just with transport policy as a whole but also
wider government policy, both at national level and at regional
4.2.2 TfL believes that the process set
out in the DfT's strategy document Delivering a Sustainable
Transport System is a good means by which objectives for transport
as a whole should be set, by taking into account the Eddington
Study and the Stern Review.
4.2.3 The Eddington Transport Study,
published in December 2006, recognizes transport's role as a key
enabler of productivity and competitiveness; stressing the need
for Government action to avoid transport constraints hampering
the economic growth of the UK. Prioritising improvements in growing
and congested areas, particularly London and the south-east region,
will allow the railways to make a substantial contribution to
economic expansion. London is heavily dependent on the success
of the transport system for its economic health. Rail is a critical
component of this system, accounting for 76% of all commuter journeys
into central London.
In fact, 36% of all rail journeys in the UK are made wholly within
the Greater London boundary.
4.2.4 According to the Eddington Study,
reductions in travel time for both passengers and freight can
have a significant impact on improving both labour productivity
and cost savings. It is estimated that a 5% reduction in travel
time for all businesses and freight travel on roads can generate
£2.5 billion of cost savings, or 0.2% of GDP.
Given London's unique circumstances, it is estimated that an additional
30% in time-savings benefits will accrue for some transport schemes
in the Capital. Rail in London is uniquely positioned to have
a substantial impact on the reduction of travel times and delays
associated with congestion.
4.2.5 The Stern Review on the Economics
of Climate Change, published November 2006, signalled a widespread
recognition of the importance of sustainability and the measures
necessary to avert large-scale climate change. As the UK's primary
urban conglomeration, London is a substantial contributor to greenhouse
gas emissions. Some 22% of these emissions are transport related
and, more specifically, road vehicle related.
The Mayor's ambitious plans to reduce carbon emission focus largely
on promoting a modal shift away from private road transport to
public transport. Rail can move both passengers and freight efficiently
and at significantly lower levels of carbon emissions.
4.2.6 There are other factors that should
affect transport objectives identified by TfL and incorporated
in the Mayor's Transport Strategy and by the rail industry as
well for example in "The Rail Industry Sustainable Development
Extensive research has shown the value of improving the journey
experience itself. This covers factors such as speed, reliability,
comfort and the quality of the travel environment in terms of
its cleanliness, customer friendliness, and indeed the built environment
or "urban realm".
4.2.7 Other objectives should support Government
environmental policy more widely. For this reason, the Mayor's
Transport Strategy contains an objective to reduce air pollutant
emissions from ground-based transport, contributing to EU air
quality targets, reducing impacts of noise, and helping to improve
health impacts. Transport can also contribute to the safety and
security goals, with the objective of reducing crime, fear of
crime and anti-social behaviour as well as reducing casualties
on public transport networks. Finally, rail transport has a long
way to go to meet government policy in the area of physical accessibility
of the transport system, and this should therefore remain an important
4.2.8 Successful investment will lead to
progress against all the goals, though there can be tension between
them when considering decisions about the different options for
future investment and the level of resource given to each. In
particular supporting economic growth while reducing greenhouse
gas emissions are likely to be the most challenging to deliver
in parallel, at least in the short term. Again, however, there
will be examples of synergy between different goals.
4.2.9 The expected state of the public finances
means that transport will be expected to demonstrate how it will
be making the most of the resources we have got, for example through
efficiencies and maximising return on the investment from HLOS1.
Integration between the modes here can enable this.
4.3 Question 3: What is the impact of
rail enhancements on the economy?
4.3.1 London and the South East are critical
to the success of the UK economy. London is a world-leading financial
centre, it has more corporate headquarters than any other European
city, it provides many major tourist attractions and it acts as
a global centre for cultural and creative industries. As such
it competes with other global centres such as New York, Paris
and Frankfurt. London's success in the global market place brings
substantial benefits to the nation with the wider South East region
making up a third of the UK's total GDP and Greater London itself
nearly 20% of GDP.
London is 30% more productive than the rest of the UK and makes
a net contribution of £9-15 billion to the national
In short, investments that make a demonstrable improvement to
London's economy will have a significant impact on the UK as a
4.3.2 Rail is vital to London, as it provides
the only effective solution to transporting large numbers of people,
relatively quickly, from the suburbs and the South East of England
into Central London. As mentioned earlier, 76% of journeys to
central London are by rail including London Underground, 43% by
National Rail, and Londoners travel 2½ times as far by rail
as the average UK resident.
Improvements to London's rail system will affect more people and
have greater economic impact than elsewhere.
4.3.3 However, rail's strong position in
the market is not because of its current high quality. London's
railways are under great stress, with passenger satisfaction lower
and crowding substantially worse than other UK regions. The current
committed investment will improve this in the period to 2017 when
Crossrail is delivered. Notwithstanding the recession, long-term
growth in jobs and population is anticipated to resume with population
expected to grow by over one million by 2025.
The recession has not affected this underlying trend: the Greater
London Authority's most recent population projections, published
in April 2009, show an increase in London's 2026 compared
with 2006 projections. The south eastern region also shows
a substantial increase of 13%.
4.3.4 If nothing is done, then some routes
where demand is expected to grow particularly rapidly will become
very stressed in the absence of additional investment. TfL believes
railways should not become once again the poor relation of transport
in London, given the scale of the rail transport task they face
and given that London's rail system is more necessary than anywhere
4.3.5 The Eddington Review, commissioned
by DfT and the Treasury in 2007, established the case for investing
in transport infrastructure, particularly where existing infrastructure
demonstrably faces capacity constraints (as is already the case
in London). It is simply not credible for London to remain a driver
of the UK economy and competitive with other world cities without
a rail system that meets not just its current needs but also its
4.3.6 This sets London's key transport challenge
as one of delivering people swiftly from their homes in the London
suburbs or the wider South East, to a geographically concentrated
central business district. The effectiveness of the Capital's
transport infrastructure will be critical to cater for this growth.
Rail will be the dominant mode in this.
4.3.7 If the Government does not continue
to facilitate transport improvements from 2014 onwards, then
this will have a long-term adverse impact on companies deciding
to locate in London. These companies are unlikely to move to other
areas of London or the UK, as they tend to cluster around Central
London to gain efficiencies arising from the co-location of other
similar businesses (ie in the financial services sectors) thereby
losing the UK economy billions of pounds of investment and much
needed tax revenue. Businesses are more likely to relocate to
other international centres such as Paris or Frankfurt. The UK
will also face reduced employment, accessibility and urban regeneration
4.3.8 Projections show that rail passenger
demand will increase over the next 20 years by some 30 to
40%. Currently funded rail projects add 25% to rail capacity.
The committed investment will ease crowding significantly in the
next five years, but will worsen once again as employment and
population continue to rise without further any investment after
STRESS ON THE LONDON RAIL NETWORK
Key to corridors:
|A: South Eastern TrainsNorth Kent lines (Woolwich, Bexleyheath and Sidcup)
||I: Chiltern RailwayAylesbury Line, London OvergroundDC Lines (Watford-Euston)
|B: South Eastern TrainsOrpington, Hayes and Bromley lines (to London Bridge and Victoria via Herne Hill and Catford Loop)
||J: First Capital ConnectMidland Main Line
|C: Southern RailwayCroydon lines and First Capital ConnectBrighton Main Line
||K: First Capital ConnectGreat Northern
|D: Southern RailwaySutton lines, First Capital ConnectWimbledon loop
||L: West Anglia Main Line (via Seven Sisters and Tottenham Hale)
|E: South West TrainsSouth West Main Line to Woking via Surbiton and Worcester Park
||M: Chingford branch|
|F: South West TrainsWindsor lines (including Richmond Loop)
||N: Great Eastern Main Line|
|G: Heathrow Express, Heathrow Connect, First Great WesternGreat Western Main Line and South West TrainsHounslow loop
||O: c2c lines (mainline to Upminster and Rainham loop)
|H: Chiltern RailwayBirmingham Main Line
4.3.9 TfL does not believe that demand management techniques
alone can solve crowding problems. There is already a degree of
peak pricing built into the fares structure, for example with
the off-peak Travelcard, cheap day returns and Oyster pay as you
go, and its extension to other ticket types can make a further
contribution to meeting the challenge of growth by encouraging
people to travel at quieter times of day. Technology such as teleworking
also offers opportunities to reduce the need to travel, while
TfL's programme of smarter travel measures should reduce pressures
on public transport to some degree. However, these do not provide
a panacea, and TfL estimate that growth in the peaks will still
4.3.10 The immediate impact on passengers is obvious,
but there are a number of other consequences, such as delays and
longer journey times, as the efficiency of the railways buckles
at peak times under the weight of numbers. This ultimately will
affect the business efficiency of Central London.
4.4 Question 4: How should long-term development of
major new infrastructure, such as high speed lines, be balanced
against short and medium term investment to improve capacity and
4.4.1 The long-term development of major new infrastructure,
such as high speed lines, is not necessarily in conflict with
investment to improve capacity for freight and passenger on the
main lines into London. A new line to the Midlands and the north
west of England for example would release capacity on the West
Coast mainline; TfL would wish to see this capacity reused by
suburban services as well as providing capacity for the expected
increase in cross-London container freight flows from the Thameside
ports to the Midlands.
4.4.2 Employment growth in London over the past decade
has led to significant levels of crowding on both National Rail
and Underground routes in the Capital. Both rail and Underground
generally operate at capacity, resulting in heavy crowding on
most lines but particularly the Victoria, Jubilee, Central and
Northern lines on the Underground and routes into London Bridge,
Waterloo, Victoria, Moorgate and the Thameslink core on National
4.4.3 Employment and population in London are projected
to rise notwithstanding the recession, and so a major investment
programme is underway by both TfL and Network Rail to introduce
new capacity. The industry as a whole needs to anticipate this
through the development of schemes not just in the short-run,
but also the medium and long-run too.
4.4.4 The case for new lines is unlikely to be compelling
unless there is no longer capacity on the classic routes. TfL
wholly supports the development of new lines where there is a
case in the next control period for delivery in the 2020s.
4.5 Question 5: Is enough consideration given to the
integration of rail with other transport modes, and with demographic
developments, such as new housing developments, when rail investment
decisions are made?
4.5.1 With 44% of rail journeys in London involving transfers
to LU or Docklands Light Railway (DLR), TfL believes that integrated
solutions across all modes in London offer the most advantages
to customers. There
is a pressing need to integrate better National Rail services
with Overground, Tube, DLR and Tram as well as TfL's extensive
bus network to deliver seamless journeys and fares for passengers
as well as better value for the taxpayer. South London, for example,
suffers from a much poorer perception of connectivity because
of the way in which the National Rail network is presented and
operates. Public transport usage is only four-fifths of that in
North London, while car use per capita is 10% highercongestion
and journey speeds are thus commensurately worse than North London.
4.5.2 TfL has a clear role to ensure the interchange
between modes is as seamless as possiblefor example ensuring
that the ticketing system covers all modes and is as simple as
possible. Many of the changes and innovations described above
match TfL's strategic aspirations, and therefore our role in pricing
and planning needs to be comprehensive in order to ensure that
the transport system as a whole can make best use of these developments.
As a multi-modal service provider, TfL would be able to ensure
that improved interchanges benefit from technological advances
and improved services. This could be as simple as providing adequate
signage or physical access that ensures modal transfers are quick
and seamless. It may also involve additional technological innovation
that provides passengers with greater knowledge of transfer options
and more effective trip planning.
4.5.3 The introduction of Overground with standards consistent
with other TfL modes has been highly welcomed by passengers. Unlike
elsewhere, patronage is increasing despite the economic downturn
and ticketless travel (fares evasion) is down by over 10%. Overground
stations are now clean and well maintained. The Overground model
of rail services under the Mayor's direction should be now extended
across the rest of London. The inner suburban element of each
London rail franchise should be specified and managed by TfL.
London-wide rail services should be operated to the same byelaws
and travel conditions as the rest of TfL (for example the Penalty
Fare and alcohol rules are different) and branded accordingly.
4.5.4 Under the current arrangements, convincing Train
Operating Companies (TOCs) to introduce new technology is both
difficult and time consuming. The up-coming introduction of Oyster
ticketing has proved exceptionally inefficient and slow, despite
TfL's offer to fund capital works.
4.5.5 In summary, service integration is a theme of previous
White papers, and can be better delivered by:
The Mayor being allocated a rail budget for London
for all suburban passenger services.
Common rail, Overground and LU fare levels.
Inner suburban services to be to franchised to Overground
standard with same performance indictors to allow a comparison
Gross cost contract operated by private sector specified
Mayor to be cosignatory to franchise contract where
franchise covers both suburban and long distance services.
Inner Suburban services should be branded Overground.
All London fares to be set by the Mayor.
Conditions of Travel in London should be same for
Overground and National Rail services.
Inner suburban stations to be transferred on long
lease to TfL.
4.5.6 In terms of integration with land-use planning
more broadly, both the Eddington Study and Barker Review of Land
Use Planning, published in 2006, highlight the need for strong
linkage between transport and local planning. Given the economic
importance of the UK's cities and regions, there is a strong case
for local decision making to deal with local issues. This is particularly
the case with regard to local transport provision and the Eddington
Study strongly endorses the idea of enhanced sub-national decision-making
as a means to a more efficient and responsive transport policy.
4.5.7 In London the form that this has taken has been
the development together of the London Plan (spatial land-use
strategy) and Mayor's Transport Strategy. This ensures that planning
is joined up; the impact of one upon the other is explicitly taken
into account. TfL also ensures that the impact of developments
upon transport is recognises and where appropriate mitigated,
for example through "section 106" contributions. Crossrail
will also be partially funded from a supplementary business rate.
4.6 Question 6: Is enough consideration being given
to the views of passengers in making investment decisions on the
4.6.1 The simple answer is no. Neither local residents
nor rail passengers in London would say they have a significant
say in the planning or operation of their local rail service.
Many of them would assert that rail services in London appear
predominantly planned and funded by the largely remote and completely
centralised DfT and Network Rail. In contrast bus, Tube, and tram
services in London are planned and operated by TfL which is directly
accountable to London's elected Mayor. Stakeholder engagement
is central to decision-making by the Mayor. He is elected on a
mandate which includes manifesto promises in respect of public
transport and he has personal ownership and accountability for
his Mayor's Transport Strategy.
4.6.2 There are six main requirements that customers
consistently say they want from their rail journey:
Speedcustomers want to reach their destinations
quickly, with minimal delays.
Safetycustomers want to feel confident and
Environmentcustomers want clean and pleasant
trains, stations and facilities.
Simplicitycustomers want a rail system that
is easy to use and understand, integrated with other transport
services and accessible to all.
Reliabilitycustomers need confidence in the
level of service provided, with problems quickly rectified, and
good passenger information.
Comfortcustomers want to travel in relative
comfort in carriages that are not filled to over capacity. Transport
for London has undertaken research to define a consistent and
customer-friendly level of service quality on trains and stations
cost effectively. These quality standards cover cleanliness, information,
personal security, facilities and staffing. They enable the organisation
to focus its activity to best effect on meeting these standards
while giving customers confidence in using the system and thereby
improving their perceptions.
4.6.3 TfL would like to see such standards applied across
National Rail as well as TfL services. This reflects the fact
that research shows that rail passengers have similar needs to
TfL passengers more widely. There is no particular reason for
rail to be treated as an exception. Rather, it should be integrated
as closely as possible, so the better it can play the maximum
role possible in meeting London's transport challenges.
4.6.4 This is reflected not just within TfL policy but
increasingly at a national level too. The Secretary of State has
announced a proposal to improve the consistency of standards at
National Rail stations, and the DfT is preparing terms of reference
on developing these standards according to the level of footfall
at a station.
4.6.5 Such standards could then be measured regularly
by both Mystery Shopper Survey
and specific performance measures to ensure a consistently welcoming
passenger experience, on a comparable basis across all franchises
and all modes. TfL's analysis concluded that there were significant
revenue benefits from applying consistent station standards as
well as increased customer satisfaction.
4.6.6 Naturally, over time there will be changes in the
passenger market that will affect the type of services demanded
by customers. Demographic shifts in age and income composition
coupled with potential changes in work patterns will require transport
operators to adjust the type of service they provide. Increasingly,
new technology will push the expectations and demands of passengers
4.6.7 Given these changes, the industry must focus on
improving services and using technological innovations to push
service enhancement further and bring down costs.
4.6.8 Given the expected changes in the customer market,
TfL believes that the long-term strategy must provide for a higher
quality of service, including:
more off-peak services for the growing leisure market;
meeting the need of workers with increasingly flexible
working hours, and
better step-free physical access, given an ageing
4.6.9 TfL welcomes the role of Passenger Focus in the
development of Network Rail's route utilisation strategies and
DfT's franchises because of the expertise it brings in ensuring
passenger interests are fully reflected. TfL also believes that
benchmarking customer service performance through the National
Passenger Survey across franchises is a very important means of
driving up standards. This common approach should be extended
to other measures in the service quality management system found
within franchises. At the moment, both the measures themselves
and the targets are set on a case by case basis in such a way
that no comparison is possible across train operators.
4.7 Question 7: What should be the key priorities
for the next High Level Output Statement?
4.7.1 TfL believes the following should form the key
priorities for the next High Level Output Statement:
targeted additional capacity/capability:
Freight, including freight interchange;
Specific international links to airports and ports;
carbon reduction the greatest single challenge;
improving the railway's level of customer service,
for example through simplifying the customer proposition through
consistent standards for facilities, personal security
and information at London's National Rail stations similar to
those of the London Overground;
a less disrupted railway that operates seven days
improving fairness, for example by continuing to improve
accessibility to the railway;
greater coordination and integration between transport
modes, for example in the areas of fares and ticketing and service
4.7.2 To meet this challenge TfL is developing proposals
as part of the new Mayor's Transport Strategy to define solutions
for London's travel needs. This projects passenger rail demand
growth of 40%, estimated the extent to which demand management
can play a role, and identified where additional capacity is required.
4.7.3 TfL has also started to identify specific schemes
that will ensure London's rail network can cater to future passenger
and freight growth beyond 2014:
West Anglia: more capacity through a greater number
of 12-car trains and a turn-up-and-go service between Cheshunt
and Stratford in the fast growing Lea Valley where there are significant
South-western: more capacity through running more
10-car trains along the route between Staines, Feltham, Putney,
Clapham Junction and Waterloo.
Overground: more capacity through longer trains on
these fast growing routes, with some opportunities to expand its
Some additional capacity on some specific stressed
routes, for example between Finsbury Park and Moorgate and Bromley
South and central London.
Improved interchange at a dozen locations by a combination
of calling more services and changes to the stations themselves
to effect better links between orbital and radial routes and reduce
Freight capacity around London north of the Thames
from the fast growing container ports to the Midlands and north
of the country, and provision of interchange terminal capacity
4.7.4 TfL is starting to assess the value for money of
these improvements. For example, TfL's proposed improvements to
the West Anglia services have a benefit cost ratio of 1.9:1,
more once the wider economic benefits as recommended in the Eddington
report are included. The proposals also enhance accessibility,
bringing another more people within reach of jobs, goods, and
services. The scheme will also aid regeneration of the Lea Valley,
and affect directly some of London's most deprived wards. TfL
is working closely with DfT and Network Rail to ensure that the
strategy and solutions are consistent with wider National Rail
4.7.5 Additional capacity for the routes into Waterloo
is also value for money (a benefit cost ratio of more than 3:1),
as are a package of other capacity enhancements. The total value
across London as a whole is £2 billion over the five
4.7.6 These proposals complement current investment programme
not just on National Rail but also on other parts of London's
passenger transport system, such as Underground and DLR enhancements,
interchange development, improvements to London bus services,
multi-modal ticketing systems, cycling and pedestrian initiatives.
4.7.7 Increasing the amount of passenger capacity will
require additional rolling stock. Given limited resources, a cheaper
and quick way to do this is to extend the life of existing rolling
stock. The ability to do this however, is constrained by 2020 deadline
associated with the implementation of the People of Reduced Mobility
Technical Standard for Interoperability and/or Rail Vehicle Accessibility
Regulations. This implies some quite costly changes to rolling
stock, which is not always worthwhile where trains are already
25 or more years old. Consideration should therefore be given
to some flexibility in their interpretation to ensure that basically
sound assets are not scrapped unnecessarily, at the cost of enhancements
elsewhere on the system.
4.7.8 Just as with the train service, many National Rail
stations are congested at peak times and enhancements to station
capacity are required in order to improve customer service and
to enable London's growth in rail demand to be accommodated. This
is an area where HLOS1 gave less priority, but where spare
capacity is now running out at many locations. HLOS2 should
therefore set aside monies for a programme of cost effective station
capacity enhancements. Particular priorities are:
some central London termini such as Charing Cross
and Fenchurch Street;
Clapham Junction station where the subway, stairways
and entrances are regularly overwhelmed by passengers, and
a package of other medium sized stations with severe
congestion either already or emerging, including East Croydon,
Finsbury Park, Bromley South, Wimbledon, Vauxhall, and Barking.
4.7.9 TfL's analysis shows that these need not always
be expensive, and that small scale improvements to remove pinch-points
can offer good value to money. An example package would cost £100 million
over five years and have a benefit cost ratio greater than 2:1.
4.7.10 In addition to the increased capacity of passenger
services, the long-term strategy should also look to improve freight
systems and capacity in London and the surrounding regions. It
is anticipated that as early as 2014, the number of trains along
certain routes will increase by 60%. Given the projected increase
in London's population and the proposed expansion of rail services,
any additional freight traffic will place substantial pressure
on existing network capacity. The need to improve freight capacity
is supported by the Mayor's Transport Strategy (MTS), in which
the importance of encouraging the transfer of goods to more sustainable
modes of transport is considered an important goal in so far as
it helps reduce congestion and carbon emissions.
4.7.11 Currently, there are large volumes of through
freight in London, the most important category of which is deep
sea containers from the East Coast ports to destinations on the
West Coast Main Line. Maritime container traffic is also expected
to be the fastest growing category over the next 10 years
with an expected increase of over 64%.
It is also anticipated that freight traffic through the Channel
Tunnel could grow to six million tonnes of freight by 2014-15,
compared with two million tonnes today. In order to meet this
growth challenge effectively, the planning of passenger and freight
capacity and capability needs to be integrated. The current system
presents a number of challenges to the development of the full
range of modern facilities which are needed to encourage rail
freight serving London's needs.
4.7.12 In order to meet these challenges TfL's proposes
a number of solutions, including:
further capacity and capability schemes inside London
such as the Barking to Gospel Oak route;
further capacity and capability schemes outside London,
including the full upgrade of the Felixstowe to Nuneaton cross
Schemes which encourage better use of the network,
such as freight train lengthening and trains that can keep pace
with passenger traffic, and
Terminal developmentstrategic facilities for
developing large scale value adding activities on rail connected
sites (eg for primary retail distribution customers).
4.7.13 TfL is also supportive of both improvements to
passenger and freight's international links. Notably, this includes
the main Lea Valley line to Stansted, and also the freight routes
to Thameside and Haven ports on the East coast.
4.7.14 The Mayor is supportive in principle of the development
of a new high-speed rail line to the North and locating the London
terminus in the central area would maximise access to jobs and
London's population, and enable efficient onwards dispersal of
high-speed line passengers.
4.7.15 The greatest environmental challenge we face today
is climate change. While other environmental challenges such as
air quality and noise pollution are important, the impact of climate
change carries a far greater risk. The reduction in greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions is now a major part of Government policywitness
the Stern Report and the profile its launch enjoyed. It is also
an objective of the Eddington Study, despite its explicit focus
on the economy.
4.7.16 Climate change is a priority for the Mayor. London
is already the UK's most carbon efficient region per pound of
economic activity, but the Mayor has pledged to reduce the volume
of emissions by 60% by 2025 (compared with 1990 levels).
Reduction in GHG is an explicit transport objective for the Mayor.
The 4% modal shift from cars to public transport in Londonan
unprecedented success anywhere in the worldhas made a big
contribution to helping keep London's transport emissions down
despite economic and population growth in the period from 1999.
TfL wishes to see National Rail in London play its part in this.
4.7.17 Whilst private cars and road freight are comfortably
the largest contributors, only 4% of GHG emissions are due to
TfL is encouraging this through a range of means:
improved energy efficiency and reducing consumption
through for example, efficient use of resources (reduce empty
running or remove or shorten trains with low load factors), enabling
regenerative braking or "intelligent" trains that reduce
power consumption, reducing transmission losses through the use
of low-loss conductor rail, lighter weight trains, installing
low power lighting and energy efficient equipment where possible,
and building design and improvement, for example building insulation
and the installation of low power lighting and energy efficient
equipment at stations;
supporting land-use changes in the London Plan that
encouraging the switch from high emission modes, such
as the car, and
producing a switch to low-carbon technologies, such
as development of hybrid engines and procuring more energy from
green sources, and installing photo-voltaic cells, windmills,
This extends to encouraging correct behaviours such as:
Driver behaviourincrease coasting, smoother
and gentler acceleration and deceleration, only turn lights on
when necessary, have optimum heating and air conditioning levels,
turn off heating and lighting over night, turn off rectifiers
and transformers when not in use.
Station staff behaviourefficient use of energy
by, for example, turning on appliances and lights only when necessary.
4.7.18 TfL's research has defined a value for money set
of customer service standards covering cleanliness, information,
personal security, facilities and staffing which it applies consistently
across its modes. There is no reason why these could not be extended
to National Rail as well, given research shows that rail passengers
have similar needs to TfL passengers more widely.
4.7.19 In London, TfL believes that Overground service
standards provides an evidenced template that HLOS2 and the
franchising process could readily follow. Indeed, it has already
been adopted for the new South Central franchise, which started
on 20 September 2009, with more than 40 stations and
extensive route patterns.
4.7.20 The minimum standards include:
staffing over the traffic day with improved customer
and technology skills;
Oyster acceptance and retailing through ticket machines
within Travelcard Zones 1 to 6;
station facilities such as seating and shelters and
better integration with other, sustainable modescycle storage,
safer pedestrian access routes, bus stop facilities;
multi-modal customer information at stations, through
posters and electronic means, on-system and off, scheduled and
security features such as lighting, CCTV and help
graffiti removal, litter removal and cleaning;
train frequency of at least four trains per hour on
each route where the infrastructure allows this up to 23:00, and
first and last trains broadly aligned with the Underground's
4.7.21 The means of delivery could be not just through
HLOS2 directly, in the form of a fund analogous to the current
National Station Improvement programme, but also through franchises
as they come up for renewal. Such ideas would also influence the
content and funding of a future generation of Station Travel Plans,
again a valuable idea from HLOS1.
4.7.22 Another important part of this is the on-going
measurement of quality against these standards on a comparable
basis across all operators and all parts of the network. At the
moment an individual TOC can measure performance in different
ways which means there is no reputational pressure from the use
of a consistent benchmark with which to help drive up customer
satisfaction. Future franchises should have a series of specified
measures as part of their service quality management system.
4.7.23 The other part of the reason for this is to make
public transport in general and railways within this as simple
as possible for customers to understand the network, plan their
journey and buy their tickets. If customers know more of what
they can expect, infrequent or under-confident users will be more
likely to become regular users. TfL is convinced that such outcomes
are more likely if it has a strong role in planning, fares and
ticketing (see section on coordination below).
4.7.24 Improving customer service goes even further than
identifying and delivering travel standards. The handling and
response of passenger comments and travel enquiries requires the
provision of accurate and impartial travel information across
all modes and single point responsibility for service delivery.
This currently exists only for TfL services. National rail service
information provided by the rail industry fails to provide multi-modal
door to door travel information for Londoners.
4.7.25 Programmes to improve accessibility at National
Rail stations, such as the DfT's "Access for All", must
continue as part of HLOS2 and be accompanied by further accessibility
improvements around stations to enhance integration for everyone,
including works to surrounding streets and more accessible bus
stops adjacent to stations.
4.7.26 It is abundantly clear that the railway industry
has a great opportunity to improve the customer experience, increase
its sustainability, and upgrade its capacity. TfL believes these
changes can be brought about concurrently. However, through closer
partnership with TfL, the industry can achieve much more. TfL
would encourage a further devolution of rail powers as part of
HLOS2. Specifically, TfL believes it should be given greater powersin
particular pricing, planning and potentially fundingwith
regard to franchise specification over certain inner suburban
routes into central London.
4.7.27 Such changes in governance would allow TfL to
deliver a system that is more responsive to changing customer
needs. TfL's ideas allow integration and simplicity for customers,
yet overcome the significant drawbacks of the existing increment
and decrement regime, where it is very difficult for example to
obtain value for money changes between re-franchising. Fundamentally,
TfL's ability to drive improved take-up of rail in the capital
is constrained by a lack of influence over the following areas.
4.7.28 Research consistently shows that passengers perceive
rail fares and ticketing to be complex and poor value for money.
They often perceive fares to be higher than in fact they are.
4.7.29 The extension of Oyster pay as you go to National
Rail in January 2010 is long overdue. However, while very
welcome, more can be done to make it easier to use by customers.
Rail fares integration would allow a reduction from the three
separate Oyster pay as you go and ordinary fare tariffs (one each
for National Rail, London Underground, and through fares between
the two networks) to just one tariff for each ticket type.
4.7.30 Further steps could include standardising concessions
across TfL rail and National Rail and simplifying the ticket product
range once integration is complete within the Oyster area. TfL
is also developing automatic ticketing using contactless bank
cards. This would obviously be more effective if introduced London-wide.
4.7.31 An enhanced role in planning could tackle barriers
to usage and make the most of the networks we have by increasing
simplicity through application of consistent standards.
4.7.32 An example is the role of interchange. TfL's could
utilise capacity better if it had a stronger service planning
role on routes such as those through Clapham Junction. Making
the most of the interchange opportunities here both reduces passenger
journey time and cuts costs through reducing the need for onward
bus and Underground journeys from terminals. This could help both
TfL and rail industry to make the most of its resources.
4.7.33 TfL believes that a strong case exists to expand
the current Overground concession, that is the orbital rail lines
in London, and the radial Watford-London Euston route. TfL believes
that other similar routes serving London should progressively
be transferred to the Overground as re-franchising and other opportunities
arise. There are opportunities to reduce the unit costs of both
DfT franchises as well as the TfL concession to mutual advantage.
4.7.34 The amount of HLOS-related renewals and enhancement
investment during the next few years on the railway will be significant.
The downside is the short-term disruption, but there are many
ways in which TfL and National Rail could work more closely together
to reduce the cost to the tax-payer and improve service to the
4.7.35 For example, it would be possible to make as the
default position that National Rail tickets would be valid on
regular relevant TfL bus services at weekends, rather than hiring
rail replacement bus services. Where London Underground has done
this, there are potential savings of 30% over current costs for
replacement buses. It is also more convenient for passengers who
can catch the bus to/from the most convenient places along the
4.7.36 The means to achieve the objectives above should
themselves help to improve efficiency with which resources are
used by the rail industry. For example, there is scope for greater
carbonelectrification and reduction in fuel
planningintegration not competition between
other modes especially in London;
outputscommon standards, and
franchisinggreater use of gross cost contracts
for urban railways, which allocate risks (such as changes to levels
of employment, population and income) to those bodies that can
most cheaply mitigate them.
4.7.37 HLOS2 should also consider other means of
obtaining operational efficiency such as reducing the costs of
ticket retailing through simpler fare structures and a move towards
the use of contactless credit and debit cards directly as ticket
medium, rather than having a bespoke Smartcard. Greater use of
driver-only operation, tram-train and automatic train operation
could also reduce operating costs.
4.8 Question 8: Is the current investment programme
sufficient for the needs of the UK economy and for passengers
4.8.1 TfL believes that the current investment programme
is a good start in making the railway in London and the South
East fit for purpose for the 21st century. The various elements
address the Mayor's transport objectives as shown below:
|Supporting economic development and population growth
||The Crossrail, Thameslink and other National Rail upgrade schemes will provide additional capacity to Central London and significantly improve connectivity in London through, for example, linking Heathrow, central London and Docklands and enhancing links from the City to Gatwick and Luton airports. These investments will improve businesses access to labour and commercial markets and enhance the attractiveness of London as a place to do business.
|Providing a better quality of life for all Londoners
||Enhanced public transport information provision together with reduced public transport crowding will improve the journey experience for those travelling in London. Some rail projects will also enhance the built environment and improve perceptions of the urban realm. There are also significant resources for cycle parking at stations.
|Ensuring the safety and security of all Londoners
||Safety for public transport passengers will continue to be the number one operational priority. HLOS1 targets continued improvement. Implementation of best practice design guidance and improved surveillance (through police officer patrols, staff visibility and CCTV) will reduce crime rates and improve perceptions of personal safety and security.
|Improving transport opportunities for all Londoners
||Physical accessibility of the public transport system will be improved. A "whole journey" approach will deliver increased step free access and other accessibility improvements to the Tube and rail networks to complement accessibility improvements already made to the bus service. Furthermore, improvements to the streetscape will improve physical accessibility and integration of land-use and transport planning will deliver improved walk, cycle and public transport accessibility to jobs and essential services.
|Tackling climate change||The committed and future planned investment programmes in London's transport system will increase the attractiveness of low carbon modes of public transport, walking and cycling and lead to further mode shift away from the car. Decarbonised electricity supply will make electric powered transport, such as the majority of London's railways and electric cars, more environmentally advantageous. The strategic freight network will reduce the costs associated with use of rail for freight movement.
4.8.2 The investment, therefore, supports the Mayor's
vision to develop London as a sustainable World City based on
strong economic growth and social inclusion, alongside improvements
to its environment and use of resources. TfL believe the programme
offers good value for money against the standard cost-benefit
methodology, as well as recognition of the region's rail needs.
It believes it will also pay off in terms of superior economic
performance at both national and regional level.
4.8.3 The timely delivery of the entire capacity enhancement
programme is essential and the Mayor has welcomed the Secretary
of State's reassurance that it will be delivered in full without
slippage. DfT's Rail team and TfL London Rail worked together
in preparing for Control Period 4 and there is every reason
to believe they will achieve similar results in the upcoming planning
work required for Control Period 5.
4.9 Question 9: In light of the current economic crisis
is it still important that projects designed to increase capacity
continue on the present timescale?
4.9.1 TfL believes that it is indeed it still important
that projects designed to increase capacity continue on the present
4.9.2 Demand in the period between 2004 and 2008 was
growing very fast, at around 5% per annum, and even though demand
is now static, there is little sign of any dramatic drop off in
demand as measured by the number of journeys in London. This means
that trains are still heavily overcrowded on many routes. The
recession does mean though that it will not worsen in the near
term; it has in effect bought perhaps two years for investment
to catch up with a pre-existing problem of overcrowding.
PERCENTAGE OF PEAK HOUR TRAINS ARRIVING OVER CAPACITY
4.9.3 The current recession and its impact on public
finances means that it is more important than ever that the strategy
should also identify ways of making the most of the investment
delivered and reducing costs in order to maintain the competitive
advantage of rail. This note has described above a number of ways
by which the industry can make the most of existing resources.
5.1 The choices made in the next high level output statement
will affect uniquely affect London given its high dependence on
rail. TfL will continue to develop more detail proposals for change
in the period through to its expected publication in July 2012.
Transport Committee: Press Notice, 27 July 2009. Back
Mayor's Transport Strategy-statement of intent, figure 5, page
29, May 2009. Back
City of London, City Research Focus, 2007, p 7. Back
TfL analysis from DfT's Delivering a Sustainable Transport System
and Mayor's Transport Strategy, statement of Intent. Back
TfL central area peak count. Back
National Rail Trends, 2007-08. Back
The Eddington Transport Study, 2006, p 15. Back
TfL, Environment Report 2008, 2008, p 16. Back
RSSB Sustainable Rail Programme, February 2009. Back
Oxford Economic Forecasting, London's Place in the UK Economy
2006-07, 2006, p 20. Back
As measured by GVA per capita. Source: Regional Trends 2008. Back
Source: National Travel Survey as reported in Regional Trends. Back
London Plan, statement of intent, July 2009. Back
TEMPRO dataset v5.4. Back
TfL estimate. Back
TfL analysis, Mayor's Transport Strategy public consultation draft
TfL origin and destination data. Back
A tool used by market researchers to measure quality of service.
Mystery shoppers posing as normal passengers perform tasks such
as purchasing tickets, asking questions of staff, establishing
the presence of accurate information, degree of cleanliness, etc.
They provide detailed quantitative feedback about their experiences. Back
Source: TfL analysis of costs and benefits. Back
List of medium sized National Rail stations includes Balham, Putney,
Orpington, Peckham Rye, Putney, Surbiton, Sutton. There are also
some London termini where there is congestion of course, as well
as stations on the route of Crossrail where there are proposed
funded works. Back
TfL estimate of costs and benefits. Back
Network Rail Freight route utilisation strategy. Back
TfL, Transport 2025, 2006, p 34. Back
Mayor's Climate Change Action Plan, figure x, page xxiv. Back
DfT passenger in excess of capacity data 2007-08. Back