SOUTH WEST OF SCOTLAND TRANSPORT PARTNERSHIP

Transcription

1 SOUTH WEST OF SCOTLAND TRANSPORT PARTNERSHIP Meeting of Friday, 13 January 2017 at 10.30am Community Centre, Stanedyke Crescent, Lochmaben, DG11 1QY Members of the Board Tom McAughtrie (Chair) - Dumfries and Galloway Council David Bryson (Vice-Chair) - NHS Dumfries and Galloway Richard Brodie - Dumfries and Galloway Council Denis Male - Dumfries and Galloway Council John Syme - Dumfries and Galloway Council Marion McCutcheon - Dumfries and Galloway Council Alistair McKinnon - Scottish Enterprise Future Meetings 10 March Dumfries 14 July Wigtown 22 September Castle Douglas 10 November Lockerbie Douglas Kirkpatrick Lead Officer, South West of Scotland Transport Partnership

2 Agenda Agenda SOUTH WEST OF SCOTLAND TRANSPORT PARTNERSHIP Meeting of Friday, 13 January 2017 at 10.30am Community Centre, Stanedyke Crescent, Lochmaben, DG11 1QY 1. SEDERUNT AND APOLOGIES 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 3. MINUTES OF MEETING ON 11 NOVEMBER FOR APPROVAL 4. REVENUE BUDGET MONITORING REPORT 2016/17 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 DECEMBER 2016 Recommendation note the forecast outturn for the revenue budget as at 31 December CAPITAL EXPENDITURE PROGRAMME 2016/17 UPDATE Recommendations - (i) note the update on the Capital Programme for 2016/17 as outlined in the report; (ii) agree to the purchase of three 16 seat low floor accessible buses; (iii) agree that, where possible, bus shelter replacements are accelerated to ensure a greater overall spend is achieved; (iv) determine the course of action they would like officers to follow on the positioning of the Eastbound bus shelter in Springholm; and (v) agree the spend variations to the elements of the Capital Programme 2016/17 as shown in Table 1 - SWestrans Amended Capital Programme 2016/ SCOTTISH STATIONS FUND STAG APPRAISALS PROGRESS Recommendation note the progress on the STAG Part 1 work undertaken to date. 7. RAIL UPDATE Recommendations (i) note the Department of Transport s announcement of a new franchise, the West Coast Partnership; (ii) note the development of a draft ScotRail Engagement Framework, and the inclusion of the Regional Rail Forum; (iii) note the Consultation on Scotland s Rail Infrastructure Strategy and the workshop to be held in Dumfries on 24 January 2017; (iv) note SWestrans will submit a response to the Rail Infrastructure Strategy consultation, with this to be agreed after the consultation workshop on 24 January 2017; (v) agree the position paper on the Glasgow South Western Line shown as Appendix 4; and (vi) note the emergence of local rail groups in the region at Dumfries, Eastriggs, Langholm and Thornhill. 8. TRANSPORT SUMMIT Recommendation agree that the Chairman writes to the Minister for Transport and the Islands welcoming the Dumfries and Galloway Transport Summit final report, offering full assistance in the delivery of the identified actions and seeking agreement that Transport Scotland will provide updates at future Board meetings on progress made. 1

3 Agenda Agenda 9. COUNCILLORS CODE OF CONDUCT - CONSULTATION - Recommendation consider and agree the response of SWestrans to the Scottish Government s consultation on possible amendments of provisions on conflicts of interest in the Councillors Code of Conduct. 10. LOCAL BUS CONTRACTS - UPDATE Recommendation note the progress with the procurement of local bus services. 11. REGIONAL TRANSPORT PARTNERSHIPS JOINT CHAIRS MEETING 14 SEPTEMBER 2016 Recommendation note the minutes of the Regional Transport Partnerships Joint Chairs meeting of 14 September ANY OTHER BUSINESS WHICH THE CHAIRMAN MAY DECIDE IS URGENT DUE TO THE NEED FOR A DECISION It is recommended that Members of the South West of Scotland Transport Partnership Board agree to consider the following item of business in private and exclude the Press, members of the public and Observers from the meeting given the report contains confidential or exempt information as defined by the Local Government (Scotland) Act LOCAL BUS SERVICES AWARD OF CONTRACT Recommendation Members of the Board are asked to consider the recommendation as set out in the report (to be circulated separately to members of the Board only. Douglas Kirkpatrick Lead Officer South West of Scotland Transport Partnership Claire Rogerson Secretary to the Board South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 2

4 Minute Minute SOUTH WEST OF SCOTLAND TRANSPORT PARTNERSHIP Meeting of Friday 11 November 2016 at 10.30am at Council Offices, Daar Road, Kirkcudbright Present Members Tom McAughtrie (Chairman) - Dumfries and Galloway Council David Bryson (Vice-Chairman) - NHS Dumfries and Galloway Richard Brodie - Dumfries and Galloway Council Ian Carruthers (Substitute) - Dumfries and Galloway Council Denis Male - Dumfries and Galloway Council John Syme - Dumfries and Galloway Council Officials and Advisers Douglas Kirkpatrick - Lead Officer Claire Rogerson - Secretary to the Board Janet Sutton - Finance Officer Apologies Marion McCutcheon - Dumfries and Galloway Council Alistair McKinnon - Scottish Enterprise Observers June Hay - Outdoor Access Forum Sharon Ogilvie - Dumfries and Galloway Third Sector Interface Hugh McCreadie - Lochside & Woodlands Community Council Fraser Smith - Stagecoach Scotland Graham Whiteley In Attendance Craig Millar - Glenkens Community Council 1

5 Minute Minute 1. SEDERUNT AND APOLOGIES The Chairman advised that 2 minutes silence would be observed at 11am in respect of Armistice Day. 5 Members present, 2 apologies and 1 not present at the start. 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST NONE declared. 3. MINUTES OF MEETING ON 23 SEPTEMBER 2016 Decision APPROVED.. 4. REVENUE BUDGET MONITORING REPORT 2016/17 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 OCTOBER 2016 Decision The Board NOTED the forecast outturn for the revenue budget as at 31 October OBSERVERS UPDATE Decision The Board AGREED the review of Observers and associated guidance as outlined in the report, noting that a report would be brought back to the board on 10 March CLIMATE CHANGE DUTIES REPORTING 2015/16 Decision The Board AGREED the submission of the Climate Change Duties Report for SWestrans to the Sustainable Scotland Network. 2

6 Minute Minute 7. SCOTLAND S ACCESSIBLE TRAVEL FRAMEWORK Decision The Board NOTED and WELCOMED the production and publication of Scotland s Accessible Travel Framework. 8. DUMFRIES AND GALLOWAY TRANSPORT SUMMIT RESPONSE MEMBER Ian Carruthers, substitute for Marion McCutcheon, entered the meeting during this item 6 Members present. Decision The Board AGREED 9.1 the response to the Dumfries and Galloway Transport Summit Report as shown in the Appendix to the report subject to amendments regarding Langholm and Kirkconnel, being to ensure that the examination of the case to extend the Borders Railway to Carlisle includes the option of routing the extended line via Langholm and that a fully accessible southbound platform at Kirkconnel Station and the removal of fare anomalies be progressed; and 8.2 that the Chairman would write to Joan McAlpine MSP and invite her to a future meeting of the Board. 9. RAIL UPDATE Decision The Board NOTED 9.1 the recent publication of the Rail Delivery Group s Investing in the Future document; 9.2 the work being commissioned by Transport Scotland in relation to rail freight; and AGREED to receive a further report once this work is published; 9.3 the progress now being made by SAYLSA, the Community Rail Partnership (CRP) for the Stranraer to Ayr Line, and the intention to regularly update Members as the CRP develops; and 9.4 AGREED to invite First Transpennine and Abellio to a future Board meeting. 3

7 Minute Minute 10. LOCAL BUS SERVICE 350 STRANRAER TO CAIRNRYAN Decision The Board NOTED the commercial provision of the local bus service 350 Stranraer to Cairnryan from 28 November ARMISTICE The Board, officers, observers and public present observed 2 minutes silence at 11am. 11. TRAVELKNOWHOW SCOTLAND Decision The Board NOTED the availability of Travelknowhow Scotland and the intended actions to utilise this resource to encourage the development and delivery of Travel Plans across Dumfries and Galloway. 12. RESHAPING LOCAL BUS SERVICES SEMINAR / PROCUREMENT Decision The Board: NOTED the award of the Framework Contract and progress with the procurement of local bus services; 12.2 REVIEWED and AGREED the proposed route specification / timetable options to be tendered as shown in the Appendix of the report; and 12.3 AGREED to advise the Stewartry Area Committee of Dumfries and Galloway Council that whilst noting the need to keep to regulatory timescales that all Community Councils would be written to regarding proposed local bus contracts. 13. ANY OTHER BUSINESS WHICH THE CHAIRMAN MAY DECIDE IS URGENT DUE TO THE NEED FOR A DECISION Decision The Board NOTED that there was other business deemed urgent by the Chairman due to the need for a decision. PROCEDURE The Board agreed to consider the following item of business in private and exclude the press, members of the public and observers from the 4

8 Minute Minute meeting given that the report contained confidential or exempt information as defined by the Local Government (Scotland) Act BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS Summary of Report This report informed the Board of the possible pressures and associated risks regarding the development of the budget for 2017/18.Decision The Board: REMITTED the Lead Officer to write to the Director of Economy, Environment and Infrastructure of Dumfries and Galloway Council, regarding the issues outlined in the report, noting the need to maintain confidentiality requirements, in order to inform the budget setting process, NOTING that there should be a clear indication of the budget by January 2017; and 14.2 NOTED that the Chairman would support the Lead Officer in meeting with the Council s political groups as required. 5

9 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 4 13 January 2017 REVENUE BUDGET MONITORING REPORT 2016/17 FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 DECEMBER Reason for Report This report sets out the revenue monitoring position for the period ending 31 December 2016 and the projected year end position. 2. Background The Scottish Government provide revenue funding to SWestrans, with Dumfries and Galloway Council also providing funding. SWestrans also requisitions funding from Dumfries and Galloway Council in respect of payments required for public bus service contracts. 3. Key Points 3.1 The Appendix shows the revenue budget summary for SWestrans. The published expenditure budget for 2016/17 of 4,308,789 was agreed by the board on 11 March This was subsequently amended; at the Board meeting on the 1 April 2016; to maximise the amount of budget available to support the local bus network. That report identified five areas where savings or increased income could be achieved; this resulted in the revised 2016/17 budget being set at 4,353, The year to date actual figures represents the transactions for the nine months ending 31 December 2016 and are in line with management expectations. Officers are not currently aware of any anomalies that will distort the overall financial position. 3.3 Board Members will note that based on the financial performance to date, it is forecast that a balanced budget will be delivered. 4. Consultations The Proper Officer has been consulted and is in agreement with the terms of this Report. 5. Recommendation Members of the Board are asked to note the forecast outturn for the revenue budget as at 31 December Janet Sutton - Report Author Finance Officer Tel: Date of Report: 04 January 2017 File Ref: Douglas Kirkpatrick Lead Officer South West of Scotland Transport Partnership Militia House English Street Dumfries DG1 2HR APPENDIX - Monitoring Report 2016/17 for the period ending 31 December 2016.

10 APPENDIX SOUTH WEST OF SCOTLAND TRANSPORT PARTNERSHIP REVENUE BUDGET MONITORING AS AT 31 December 2016 EXPENDITURE FINAL OUTTURN 2015/16 PUBLISHED BUDGET 2016/17 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS 2016/17 ADJUSTED BUDGET 2016/17 ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TO 31/12/16 PROJECTED OUTTURN 2016/17 Variance Staff Costs 82, ,532-5,380 98,152 26,789 98,152 0 Property Costs 609 1,700-1, Supplies & Services 34,042 34,655-34, Transport Costs 1,841 1,000 5,380 6,380 6,380 6,380 0 Administration Costs 39,697 32,940-26,440 6,500 1,963 6,500 0 Payments 4,447,117 4,086, ,440 4,192,652 3,433,282 4,192,652 0 Central Support 48,042 48,750 48, ,750 0 Capital Charges 264, , Total Expenditure 4,919,013 4,308,789 45,000 4,353,789 3,700,828 4,353,789 0 INCOME Scottish Government Funding 259, , , , ,250 0 D&G Council Funding 100, , , ,000 0 Other Contributions 4,559,763 3,949,539 45,000 3,994, ,994,539 0 Total Income 4,919,013 4,308,789 45,000 4,353, ,650 4,353,789 0 NET EXPENDITURE ,506,

11 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January 2017 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE PROGRAMME 2016/17 - UPDATE 1. Reason for Report To provide an update on the Capital Programme for 2016/17 and seek agreement to spend variations where appropriate. 2. Background At its meeting on 15 July 2016, the Board agreed its capital programme for 2016/ Key Points A brief update on each element of the programme is given below and the current spend profile up to 31 December 2016 is attached as Appendix Purchase of Accessible Buses the purchase of an appropriate 16 seat low floor bus is being progressed through a mini-competition. As discussed in paragraphs 3.2 to 3.10, there is likely to be delays on other projects in the current financial year and therefore there is potential to purchase three buses at an estimated value of 90,000 each. 3.2 Bus Infrastructure Works within the agreed bus shelter renewal/replacement programme continue with completions due at Nithbank (Dumfries), Closeburn, A75 Newfield, Parkgate, A75 Palnure, A76 Newbridge, A76 Kirkpatrick, Kirkgunzeon, Beeswing and Kirkcudbright, Merse Drive. The agreed budget of 167,400 is likely to be achieved and given discussions below on other areas of spend and the potential for delay in the current financial year, it is suggested, where possible, bus shelter replacements are accelerated to ensure a greater overall spend is achieved Ruthwell and Clarencefield Community Council accepted the offer of 3K for the provision of a bus shelter in Ruthwell village and the completed shelter is now in place. An image of the new shelter is attached as Appendix As reported to the Board at its meeting in November 2016, the turning of the shelter at Springholm had elicited requests from residents to move the shelter to another location within the village. It was agreed that officers would undertake an appraisal of possible options and report the outcome to a future Board meeting As previously advised there is limited opportunity for such a move as it is difficult to find a suitable location that does not impact on any other property without creating similar objections. However, two possible sites have been identified and these are shown in Appendix 3. The appraisal therefore suggests three possible courses of action for the Board s consideration: 1. Do nothing, retain the shelter in its current position, there is no cost associated with this option. 2. Provide appropriate natural screening (tree/bush) between the current location of the shelter and Cameronian Place that would restrict any privacy 1 5

12 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January 2017 impingement. Costs to determine land ownership/permission and for the purchase and planting would be incurred and are initially estimated at 2, Move the shelter to one of the two identified alternate locations. Costs for the removal and reinstatement of the existing location including associated infrastructure (high kerbs etc) plus the creation of the new site would be incurred and are likely to be in the region of 10, Bus Infrastructure As reported to the Board meeting in November 2016, officers are in discussions with bus operators and Transport Scotland to develop an appropriate framework for the replacement of Electronic Ticket Machines (ETMs) across the subsidised bus fleet. These discussions continue There are currently a number of unknowns that do not allow the replacement of ETMs to proceed at this time, particularly in relation to the outcome of the local bus tender exercise for the replacement of some 65% of the network. Therefore, no expenditure is likely in this current financial year. However, it is intended to reach a conclusion and seek approval to an appropriate course of action at the March 2017 Board meeting to enable spend early in the new financial year. 3.5 Cyclepath Development (Lochmaben Lockerbie/Portpatrick Stranraer) - Discussions on possible options have been undertaken with the Council s Engineering Design team and a possible solution on the Portpatrick to Stranraer route had been agreed for development. Lochmaben to Lockerbie continues to be an issue due to land issues and it is considered that it cannot be progressed in its current form On 22 December 2016, the Council informed the Lead Officer that due to a requirement to focus their limited engineering/design staff resources on an on-going large project, progress on certain other projects would need to be limited in the meantime The SWestrans projects affected by this decision are the Portpatrick to Stranraer cycleway and the Rail Station Improvements relating to Lockerbie car parks. Therefore, it is likely that a maximum spend of some 5,000 on cyclepath development will be achieved this year A fresh look will be taken at a possible link from Lochmaben to Lockerbie over the coming months and any solutions will be brought to a future Board meeting for decision on progression or otherwise. 3.6 Rail Station Improvements Lockerbie Phase 2, as indicated above, progress on this element of the programme is now limited and will not achieve full spend this financial year. Work, where possible, will continue on the phases: Detailed design. Final land acquisition Concluding the planning process. Obtaining listed building consent. Promoting Traffic Regulation Orders. Procurement to appoint a contractor. 2

13 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January 2017 As the majority of the 153,000 budget for this element relates to the on-site works and with the anticipated start now likely to be towards the end of calendar year 2017 spend this year is estimated at some 5, Rail Station Improvements Lockerbie Phase 3, the valuation of the three areas of land available to create potential parking availability in the vicinity of the railway station has concluded. Each of the landowners are being informed of the outcome of this independent land valuation and their views on progression sought. Further information will be brought to the Board in March Scottish Stations Fund Progress on the agreed STAG Part 1 appraisals is subject of a parallel report to this meeting. Final spend on this element of the programme will be in the region of 56,000 (budget 50,000). 3.9 Garroch Loaning - this element of the programme should be completed by March 2017 and is currently estimated to outturn on budget at 100, Active Travel Projects A number of locally identified projects ranging from the provision of dropped-kerbs to the provision of lengths of footway to provide greater access for both walking and cycling are being implemented through Dumfries and Galloway Council. It is forecast that this will outturn on budget. 4. Summary 4.1 Table 1 below summarises the agreed Capital Programme for 2016/17 and reflects the updates in section 3 of this report to suggest amendments to the programme to utilise the funding available and minimise slippage. SWestrans Capital Programme 2016/17 Total Budget Allocated 2016/17 Amended Budget Allocation 2016/17 Purchase of Accessible Buses 68, ,000 Bus Infrastructure 167, ,400 Cyclepath Development 50,000 5,000 Rail Station Improvements (Lockerbie phase 2) 153,000 5,000 Rail Station Improvements (Lockerbie phase 3) 100,000 7,000 Studies re. potential rail station openings 50,000 56,000 Garroch Loaning 100, ,000 Active Travel Projects 100, ,000 TOTAL 788, ,400 Table 1 SWestrans Amended Capital Programme 2016/ The Board are asked to agree the spend variations to the elements of the Capital Programme 2016/17as shown in Table 1 - SWestrans Amended Capital Programme 2016/17. 3

14 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January Recommendations Members of the Board are asked to: 5.1 note the update on the Capital Programme for 2016/17 as outlined in the report; 5.2 agree to the purchase of three 16 seat low floor accessible buses; 5.3 agree that, where possible, bus shelter replacements are accelerated to ensure a greater overall spend is achieved; 5.4 determine the course of action they would like officers to follow on the positioning of the Eastbound bus shelter in Springholm; and 5.5 agree the spend variations to the elements of the Capital Programme 2016/17 as shown in Table 1 - SWestrans Amended Capital Programme 2016/17. Douglas Kirkpatrick - Report Author Tel: Date of Report: 2 January 2017 File Ref: SW2/meetings/2017 Douglas Kirkpatrick Lead Officer South West of Scotland Transport Partnership Militia House English Street Dumfries DG1 2HR Appendix 1 Capital Programme for 2016/17 spend to 31 December Appendix 2 Images of Ruthwell village bus shelter. Appendix 3 Images of possible Eastbound bus shelter sites, Springholm. 4

15 Appendix 1 SWestrans Monitoring Capital Programme 2016/17 Total Budget Allocated 2016/17 Actual Net Spend 31/12/16 Forecast Net Spend 31/03/17 Variance 2016/17 Slippage to / (Acceleration) from 2017/18 Purchase of Accessible Buses 68, , , ,000 Bus Infrastructure (including shelters, PUDOs and RTI) 167, , ,400 78,000-78,000 Cyclepath Development (Lochmaben - Lockerbie / Portpatrick - Stranraer) 50, ,000-45,000 45,000 Rail Station Improvements (Lockerbie phase 2) 153,000 2,718 5, , ,000 Rail Station Improvements (Lockerbie phase 3) 100, ,000-93,000 93,000 Studies re. potential rail station openings 50,000 20,219 56,000 6,000-6,000 Garroch Loaning 100,000 3, , Active Travel Projects 100, , TOTAL 788, , , /17 Funding Summary Swestrans Allocation as per Full Council 29 February ,000 Less Acceleration 2015/16-34,600 Total Allocation 2016/17 788,400

16 Image of the completed bus shelter at Ruthwell village Appendix 2

17 Appendix 3 The two possible alternate sites for the Eastbound bus shelter in Springholm have been identified as either side of the path accessing Cameronian Place from Main Street shown in Figs 1 to 4. Fig 1. View looking East Fig 2. View looking West

18 Fig 3. Location West of path Appendix 3 Fig 4. Location East of path

19 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January 2017 SCOTTISH STATIONS FUND STAG APPRAISALS PROGRESS 1. Reason for Report To advise on progress towards developing potential rail station re-opening bids to the Scottish Stations Fund and the outcomes of related Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (STAG) Part 1 work undertaken to date. 2. Background 2.1 The Scottish Station Fund (SSF) is a 30million Transport Scotland resource to encourage investments in Scotland s rail network and facilities, aiming to facilitate improvements to existing stations, re-open disused stations and open new stations. There are two stages in applying for funding: Stage 1: Undertaking a study in line with STAG. Stage 2: Preparing an investment case for submission to Network Rail. 2.2 Peter Brett Associates LLP (PBA) was commissioned in January 2016 to undertake a STAG pre-appraisal of sustainable transport options for three areas and their surrounding communities in Dumfries & Galloway: Thornhill; Eastriggs; and Dunragit/Glenluce. 2.3 PBA had also been commissioned in November 2015, by Beattock Station Action Group (with modest funding support from SWestrans), to undertake a similar pre-appraisal for the Beattock/Moffat area. 2.4 As required by the guidance, the STAG pre-appraisals undertaken were fully multi-modal. They sought to identify and evidence the transport problems and opportunities within the four study areas, and the most appropriate opportunities for addressing these problems and opportunities. 2.5 Undertaking all four studies concurrently and in a similar manner has enabled consistent: evidence to be gathered across each location. identification of problems and opportunities. development of transport objectives and options that can stand up to scrutiny through the required STAG process. 2.6 This has also enabled the decision making process to be fully informed and allows a channelling of resources into the most appropriate study(s) to progress further, if desired, to STAG Parts 1 & 2 option appraisal stages and ultimately the development of a Business Case to the SSF. 2.7 The outcomes and recommendations from the STAG Pre-Appraisal work were presented to the Board at its meeting on 15 July They identified a range of problems and opportunities for each area, and developed transport options to address these. 6 1

20 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January The Board agreed that STAG Part 1 Appraisal studies would be progressed for Thornhill, Eastriggs and Beattock as each had the potential for a station project to emerge that could support a bid to the Scottish Stations Fund. 2.9 STAG guidance sets out a range of criteria against which options should be appraised at Part 1. These include appraisal against the study Transport Planning Objectives, STAG criteria (Environment, Economy, Safety, Integration and Accessibility and Social Inclusion), and against affordability, public acceptability and feasibility criteria The commission was extended to appraise these options in a proportionate manner, with a suitable methodology to ensure a robust and effective analysis. This approach undertook a focused hierarchical appraisal that appraised the options using the key criteria most likely to quickly eliminate options. 3. STAG Part 1 Appraisal Progress 3.1 The two key criteria against which options were initially appraised are: Feasibility for the rail station options where it will be of particular importance to understand the impacts of the proposed new rail stations on the existing and future rail network in terms of timetabling, impacts to existing services and users, and freight movements. Affordability with a focus on commercial viability for the public transport options, and with capital construction cost the key element for the active travel options and rail station options. 3.2 The outcomes from the above work are now complete and a summary Technical Note for each study area is included as Appendix 1 Beattock; Appendix 2 Eastriggs and Appendix 3 Thornhill. 3.3 The focus on these two key criteria has reduced or ruled out a number of the possible sustainable transport options identified at the pre-appraisal stage for all three areas. The opportunity of rail station re-openings remains a potential solution. 3.4 A summary of the current progress of the rail station re-opening solution is provided below, it should be noted that this may change as the STAG Part 1 process is finalised. Beattock Railway Station 3.5 If re-opened, long distance trains are unlikely to form the base load train service at Beattock Railway Station. However, there is an opportunity to further explore the potential for a new station at Beattock through consideration of the Scotland Route Study defined Stirling Carlisle via Coatbridge Opportunity to Travel, with a new train service to serve Lockerbie and Motherwell, which could also call at a very limited number of stations (existing or new) between Motherwell and Carlisle. 3.6 Taking into account the need to make an allowance for overhead line equipment alterations the cost of the station build is estimated in the 14million - 15million range. 2

21 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January 2017 Eastriggs Railway Station 3.7 Re-timing trains at the northern or southern end of the Glasgow South Western Line (GSWL) route to accommodate a new stop at Eastriggs is complex when the wider network is considered, with a comprehensive re-planning of all the services on this route, including the Barrhead and East Kilbride suburban services required. However, a potential reduction in unnecessary pathing time, increases in the generic line speed, the potential for new trains or improvements made as part of the Abellio ScotRail franchise agreement offer alternative opportunities for the introduction of a stop at Eastriggs Railway Station. 3.8 From an engineering perspective the build of the railway station presents no major engineering feasibility issues. Comparisons with other stations currently being constructed or recently reopened stations suggest an estimated station construction cost of 8million - 11million. Thornhill Railway Station 3.9 Re-timing trains at the northern or southern end of the GSWL route to accommodate a new stop at Thornhill is complex when the wider network is considered, with a comprehensive re-planning of all the services on this route, including the Barrhead and East Kilbride suburban services required. However, a potential reduction in unnecessary pathing time, increases in the generic line speed, the potential for new trains or improvements made as part of the Abellio ScotRail franchise agreement offer alternative opportunities for the introduction of a stop at Thornhill Railway Station From an engineering perspective the build of the railway station presents no major engineering feasibility issues. Comparisons with other stations currently being constructed or recently reopened stations suggest an estimated station construction cost of 8million - 11million. 4. Next Steps 4.1 The STAG Part 1 process for each area will be completed by March If the rail station re-opening option remains at the conclusion of the Part 1 process, a decision will be required as to which, if any, of these areas are progressed through STAG Part 2 Detailed appraisal/investment case for submission to Network Rail. 4.3 It should be noted that the Scottish Stations Fund is not intended to fund these developments in their entirety but act as a top up or supplementary resource and it is likely that 50% of the build costs of any new rail station will need to be found from local sources. As indicated from the initial costs shown for each of the possible station re-openings this would require local funding in the region of 4million to 7million. 4.4 Two of the possible re-openings Eastriggs and Thornhill are on the same line, the GSWL route, and as indicated there would be significant timetabling challenges to be overcome to deliver one additional station stop on this route. Currently these stations are prioritised as 1 st equal by both SWestrans and Dumfries and Galloway Council. 3

22 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January It may be necessary for both organisations to prioritise one station over the other to provide any chance of achieving success through the Scottish Stations Fund. 4.6 There is a clear need to consider the strategic role of the GSWL route in this part of Scotland and the potential implications of all potential additional stations and train services. To this end, a short paper has been prepared, as an addendum to the STAG work, which is not intended to develop a strategy for the route but to draw together the policy strands emerging from the railway industry and also the issues surrounding the potential new stations at Eastriggs and Thornhill. This paper is discussed further in a parallel report to this meeting. 5. Financial Implications 5.1 Future financial implications are dependent on progression through the STAG and business case process. The conclusion of the STAG Part 1 process for each area is included within the Capital Programme for 2016/17, a parallel report to this meeting provides a full update. 5.2 The Board should note that Dumfries and Galloway Council s Capital Investment Strategy has committed its capital expenditure up to 2023/24 and any funding sought from the Council in relation to these projects would require to compete with other Council capital development projects. 6. Consultation The Proper Officer (Finance) has been consulted and is in agreement with the terms of this report. 7. Recommendation Members of the Board are asked to note the progress on the STAG Part 1 work undertaken to date. Josef Coombey/Douglas Kirkpatrick - Report Author Tel: Date of Report: 2 January 2017 File Ref: SW2/Meetings/2017 Douglas Kirkpatrick Lead Officer South West of Scotland Transport Partnership Militia House English Street Dumfries DG1 2HR 4

23 TECHNICAL NOTE Job Name: Dumfries & Galloway Sustainable Transport Options STAG studies Job No: Date: 20 December 2016 Prepared By: Emily Seaman Subject: STAG Part 1 Progress Note - Beattock Introduction Seven options were progressed from the Pre-Appraisal stage to be appraised at STAG Part 1. These options have been further developed during STAG Part 1 and have been initially appraised against the STAG feasibility and affordability criteria as shown in Table 1. Work is on-going to appraise the options against the remaining STAG criteria, with a focus on the accessibility and integration benefits Dumfries and Galloway Sustainable Transport Studies - Beattock Page 1 of 3

24 TECHNICAL NOTE Table 1: Initial Appraisal Outcomes Option Description Feasibility Affordability 1a 1b Dedicated direct bus service operating between Moffatt, Beattock and Lockerbie Railway Station, integrated to reduce interchange times between bus and rail Adjustment of Service 380 bus times to reduce interchange time at Lockerbie Railway Station and extended service operating hours later into the evening. From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. Initial analysis shows that the service is unlikely to generate sufficient demand to cover operating costs and as such is not considered to be commercially viable unless the service is subsidised. Initial analysis shows potential for the service to be commercially viable if rail and bus times were better integrated to generate sufficient demand. 2 Bus priority measures including: On-going investment in, and recalibration of, the SCOOT system with investment in a wireless detection system; The overall scope of the option is still being developed. However, In terms of the feasibility of the listed elements: A SCOOT system is already operational in Dumfries town centre. The recalibration of the existing system is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. Costs still being finalised subject to option scope. Bus lane development on Glasgow Street (extended operational hours, north/south bus lane extensions/inclusions) Investment in a wireless detection system would require some works to implement but such software is widely utilised and its installation and use is unlikely to provide any significant feasibility challenges. Potential for northbound bus lane on approach to A75/A76 junction and extension of the southbound bus lane Dumfries and Galloway Sustainable Transport Studies - Beattock Page 2 of 3

25 TECHNICAL NOTE Option Description Feasibility Affordability 3 Increased direct bus services to Edinburgh with increased the frequency of service 101/102 with a service every 2 hours during the day and evenings Monday Sunday. From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any physical feasibility challenges. Initial analysis shows that the service is unlikely to generate sufficient demand to cover operating costs and as such is not considered to be commercially viable unless the service is subsidised. 4 Park & Ride site at Beattock After more detailed consideration, the option was not progressed further. The X74 (Dumfries to Glasgow) service runs between Dumfries and Glasgow stopping at Beattock and Moffat every hour during the day on Monday Saturday and every three hours during the day on a Sunday. Extending this service/providing a new service from an easily accessible Park & Ride site to provide accessibility to Motherwell (and hence onwards via rail to Edinburgh/Glasgow) is unlikely to be able to compete with direct journey times by bus from Beattock/Moffatt to Edinburgh, or with bus to Lockerbie to then access to the faster trains to Edinburgh/Glasgow on the West Coast Mainline. 5 Increased promotion and further development and support for local community transport 6 Re-open Beattock Railway Station 7 Improved cycling infrastructure between Beattock and Moffat including No longer being progressed due to Council s work on the development of a Public Social Partnership (PSP), the aims of which are, in general terms, to improve the design of transport services delivered on behalf of the Commissioner(s) and to develop the capacity of the social and community transport sector. This is to be achieved by working in partnership to maximise the benefits to the community. If re-opened, long distance trains unlikely to form the base load train service at Beattock Railway Station. However, there is an opportunity to further explore the potential for a new station at Beattock through consideration of the Scotland Route Study defined Stirling Carlisle via Coatbridge Opportunity to Travel, with a new train service to serve Lockerbie and Motherwell, which could also call at a very limited number of stations (existing or new) between Motherwell and Carlisle. Existing narrow footway and side entrances between National Cycle Route 10 and Beattock village, and insufficient space to provide a shared use facility on the A701 means only very limited improvements could be made (i.e. additional signage). Taking into account the need to make an allowance for overhead line equipment alterations the cost of the station build is estimated in the 14m - 15m range. Not considered due to feasibility issues Dumfries and Galloway Sustainable Transport Studies - Beattock Page 3 of 3

26 TECHNICAL NOTE Job Name: Dumfries & Galloway Sustainable Transport Options STAG studies Job No: Date: 20 December 2016 Prepared By: Emily Seaman Subject: STAG Part 1 Progress Note - Eastriggs Introduction Seven options were progressed from the Pre-Appraisal stage to be appraised at STAG Part 1. These options have been further developed during STAG Part 1 and have been initially appraised against the STAG feasibility and affordability criteria as shown in Table 1. Work is on-going to appraise the options against the remaining STAG criteria, with a focus on the accessibility and integration benefits Dumfries and Galloway Sustainable Transport Studies - Eastriggs Page 1 of 4

27 TECHNICAL NOTE Table 1: Initial Appraisal Outcomes Option Description Feasibility Affordability 1a 1b Dedicated bus service operating between Eastriggs, Annan and Lockerbie Railway Station, integrated to reduce interchange times between bus and rail Extending Service 79/179 to includes stops at/close to Dumfries, Annan, Gretna Green and Carlisle railway stations and timing the services to better integrate with rail times From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. Initial analysis shows that the service is unlikely to generate sufficient demand to cover operating costs and as such is not considered to be commercially viable unless the service is subsidised. Initial analysis shows that the service is unlikely to generate sufficient demand to cover operating costs and as such is not considered to be commercially viable unless the service is subsidised. 1c Extending the existing Service 383 to connect Eastriggs to Lockerbie Railway Station 2 Bus priority measures including: On-going investment in, and recalibration of, the SCOOT system with investment in a wireless detection system; From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. The overall scope of the option is still being developed. However, In terms of the feasibility of the listed elements: A SCOOT system is already operational in Dumfries town centre. The recalibration of the existing system is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. Initial analysis shows that the service is unlikely to generate sufficient demand to cover operating costs and as such is not considered to be commercially viable unless the service is subsidised. Costs still being finalised subject to option scope Bus lane development on Glasgow Street (extended operational hours, north/south bus lane extensions/inclusions) Investment in a wireless detection system would require some works to implement but such software is widely utilised and its installation and use is unlikely to provide any significant feasibility challenges. Potential for northbound bus lane on approach to A75/A76 junction and extension of the southbound bus lane Dumfries and Galloway Sustainable Transport Studies - Eastriggs Page 2 of 4

28 TECHNICAL NOTE Option Description Feasibility Affordability 3 Later running, increased Sunday services and express services between Eastriggs, Carlisle & Dumfries including Increased frequency of Service 79 and 179 to hourly in the (weekday) evenings and every 90 minutes throughout the day on Sundays; and some express instances of Service 79 between Dumfries and Carlisle calling only at Dumfries, Annan, Eastriggs, Gretna and Carlisle 4 Direct buses to Edinburgh and Glasgow 5 Increased promotion and further development and support for local community transport 6 Re-open Eastriggs Railway Station From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any physical feasibility challenges. Initial analysis shows that the service is unlikely to generate sufficient demand to cover operating costs and as such is not considered to be commercially viable unless the service is subsidised. No longer being progressed as improved access to the rail network (Options 1, 2 and 3) is felt to provide far greater benefits in accessing Edinburgh and Glasgow given the much quicker journey time achievable to the cities from either Lockerbie or Carlisle railway stations. No longer being progressed due to Council s work on the development of a Public Social Partnership (PSP), the aims of which are, in general terms, to improve the design of transport services delivered on behalf of the Commissioner(s) and to develop the capacity of the social and community transport sector. This is to be achieved by working in partnership to maximise the benefits to the community. Re-timing trains at the northern or southern end of the GSWL route to accommodate a new stop at Eastriggs is complex when the wider network is considered, with a comprehensive re-planning of all the services on this route, including the Barrhead and East Kilbride suburban services required. However, a potential reduction in unnecessary pathing time, increases in the generic line speed, the potential for new trains or improvements made as part of the Abellio ScotRail franchise agreement offer alternative opportunities for the introduction of a stop at Eastriggs Railway Station. Comparisons with other stations currently being constructed, or recently reopened stations suggest an estimated station construction cost of 8million - 11million. Calculations considering potential patronage are still being undertaken. From an engineering perspective the build of the railway station presents no major engineering feasibility issues Dumfries and Galloway Sustainable Transport Studies - Eastriggs Page 3 of 4

29 TECHNICAL NOTE Option Description Feasibility Affordability 7 Improved off-road cycling Infrastructure between Eastriggs and Annan and Gretna along the NCR7 route, focused on lighting and signage improvements with consideration given to the required directional, waymarking and on-road signage. No major engineering feasibility issues are envisaged. (It is noted that Dumfries and Galloway Council has examined options with regard to providing a link from the NCR7 to Annan Railway Station. It is assumed that Dumfries and Galloway Council are taken this forward and as such this has not been considered further as part of this appraisal.) The total cost for the full route improvements is estimated at around 20, Dumfries and Galloway Sustainable Transport Studies - Eastriggs Page 4 of 4

30 TECHNICAL NOTE Job Name: Dumfries & Galloway Sustainable Transport Options STAG studies Job No: Date: 20 December 2016 Prepared By: Emily Seaman Subject: STAG Part 1 Progress Note - Thornhill Introduction Six options were progressed from the Pre-Appraisal stage to be appraised at STAG Part 1. These options have been further developed during STAG Part 1 and have been initially appraised against the STAG feasibility and affordability criteria as shown in Table 1. Work is on-going to appraise the options against the remaining STAG criteria, with a focus on the accessibility and integration benefits Dumfries and Galloway Sustainable Transport Studies - Thornhill Page 1 of 4

31 TECHNICAL NOTE Table 1: Initial Appraisal Outcomes Option Description Feasibility Affordability 1a 1b Dedicated direct bus service operating between Thornhill, Dumfries Railway Station and Lockerbie Railway Station, integrated to reduce interchange times between bus and rail Extension of the existing Service 246 to include a stop at Dumfries Railway Station with adjustment of the bus timetable to reduce interchange time between bus and rail arrival/departure times. From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. Initial analysis shows that the service is unlikely to generate sufficient demand to cover operating costs and as such is not considered to be commercially viable unless the service is subsidised. Initial analysis shows potential for the service to be commercially viable if rail and bus times were better integrated to generate sufficient demand. 1c New bus service providing direct connection to Lockerbie Railway Station provided through an extension of the existing Service 81/381 operating between Dumfries and Lockerbie 2 Bus priority measures including: On-going investment in, and recalibration of, the SCOOT system with investment in a wireless detection system; From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. The overall scope of the option is still being developed. However, In terms of the feasibility of the listed elements: A SCOOT system is already operational in Dumfries town centre. The recalibration of the existing system is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. Initial analysis shows that the service is unlikely to generate sufficient demand to cover operating costs and as such is not considered to be commercially viable unless the service is subsidised. Costs still being finalised subject to option scope. Bus lane development on Glasgow Street (extended Investment in a wireless detection system would require some works to implement but such software is widely utilised and its Dumfries and Galloway Sustainable Transport Studies - Thornhill Page 2 of 4

32 TECHNICAL NOTE Option Description Feasibility Affordability operational hours, north/south bus lane extensions/inclusions) 3 Earlier and later (and Sunday) services between Thornhill, Moniaive and Dumfries, including Extension of the current Service 202 timetable to operate later into the evening; extension of the current Service 202 timetable to operate on Sundays with 2 hourly frequency; and Increased frequency of Service 236 on Sundays. 4 Direct bus services to: Glasgow through additional X74 Dumfries service via Thornhill (in addition to existing route via Amisfield/Parkgate) installation and use is unlikely to provide any significant feasibility challenges. Potential for northbound bus lane on approach to A75/A76 junction and extension of the southbound bus lane From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any physical feasibility challenges. From an engineering perspective, the option does not require the build of any infrastructure or any land purchase and as such is unlikely to present any feasibility challenges. Initial analysis shows that the service is unlikely to generate sufficient demand to cover operating costs and as such is not considered to be commercially viable unless the service is subsidised. Initial analysis shows that the services are unlikely to generate sufficient demand to cover operating costs and as such are not considered to be commercially viable unless they are subsidised. Dumfries Royal Infirmary 5 Increased promotion and further development and support for local community transport No longer being progressed due to Council s work on the development of a Public Social Partnership (PSP), the aims of which are, in general terms, to improve the design of transport services delivered on behalf of the Commissioner(s) and to develop the capacity of the social and community transport sector. This is to be achieved by working in partnership to maximise the benefits to the community Dumfries and Galloway Sustainable Transport Studies - Thornhill Page 3 of 4

33 TECHNICAL NOTE Option Description Feasibility Affordability 6 Re-open Thornhill Railway Station Re-timing trains at the northern or southern end of the GSWL route to accommodate a new stop at Thornhill is complex when the wider network is considered, with a comprehensive re-planning of all the services on this route, including the Barrhead and East Kilbride suburban services required. However, a potential reduction in unnecessary pathing time, increases in the generic line speed, the potential for new trains or improvements made as part of the Abellio ScotRail franchise agreement offer alternative opportunities for the introduction of a stop at Thornhill Railway Station. From an engineering perspective the build of the railway station presents no major engineering feasibility issues. Comparisons with other stations currently being constructed, or recently reopened stations suggest an estimated station construction cost of 8million - 11million. Calculations considering potential patronage are still being undertaken Dumfries and Galloway Sustainable Transport Studies - Thornhill Page 4 of 4

34 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January 2017 RAIL UPDATE 1. Reason for Report To update Members of the Board on developments in relation to various rail issues, including: West Coast Partnership Franchise. Regional Rail Forum. Rail Infrastructure Strategy Consultation. Glasgow South Western Line. Local Rail Groups. 2. Background 2.1 Rail policy for the South West of Scotland has been developed in a number of key documents, including The Regional Transport Strategy (RTS) and RTS Delivery Plan. Members of the Board have, at various times, agreed responses to a number of consultations and addressed emerging issues concerned with rail issues. 2.2 The region is served by three railway lines: The Stranraer Line which connects the far west of the region into the Central Belt network at Ayr, and with services on to Kilmarnock. The Glasgow and Southwestern Line (GSWL) which runs down the Nith Valley. Stations in Dumfries and Galloway include Kirkconnel, Sanquhar, Dumfries, Annan, and Gretna. The West Coast Main Line (WCML) passing through the east of the region, with a station at Lockerbie. 3. West Coast Partnership Franchise 3.1 On 4 November 2016 the UK Government announced a new rail franchise which will combine the current InterCity West Coast (ICWC) services with the development and introduction of High Speed 2 (HS2) services. 3.2 The new franchise, the West Coast Partnership, will be responsible for services on both the WCML from 2019 and designing and running the initial high speed services from The franchise will run for the first 3 to 5 years of operation of HS2. It is intended to be the first step in attracting a world-class bidding group to develop and enhance the service for West Coast passengers, paving the way for future HS2 services. 3.4 Phase one of HS2 is due to open in 2026 and will see high speed between London and Birmingham. The completion of this phase will nearly triple the number of seats at rush hour from 11,000 to around 30,000. The majority of intercity trains will run on the high speed network, allowing more commuter services to run on the WCML. 7 1

35 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January The new operator will work closely with, amongst others, local transport authorities and Transport Scotland to give passengers an improved experience on the WCML. 3.6 Benefits of the partnership proposition set out by Paul Maynard MP, Minister for Rail, include: ICWC passengers befitting from new technology before the introduction of high speed services. An experienced operator coming on board at an early stage to shape service design based on knowledge of the markets and passenger needs. A strong partner acting collaboratively with HS2 Ltd to design, launch and operate the passenger services on HS2 and manage the timetable recast of the WCML. 3.7 The formal expression of interest for the West Coast Partnership was due to be published in December 2016, followed by the invitation to tender in October or November The new franchise is scheduled to start 1 April The Department for Transport has confirmed that a new short-term contract of around 12 months would be required to cover the operation of ICWC services when the current franchise held by Virgin Trains expires in The existing franchise currently includes services at Lockerbie station. 3.9 This new franchise, and comments from HS2 Ltd Chairman Sir David Higgins, further confirm that HS2 will not be a standalone railway, but fully integrated with the wider network. It would also suggest a High Speed western alignment, which SWestrans favours, north of Birmingham Further information on the West Coast Partnership and the franchise competition from the Department of Transport can be found in Appendix 1 of this report. 4. Regional Rail Forum 4.1 At its meeting on 13 May 2016, the Board agreed to assist the ScotRail Alliance (Abellio ScotRail and Network Rail) with the establishment of a Regional Rail Forum with the intention to hold the first Forum meeting in Dumfries in August The Forum is primarily an opportunity for the Alliance to hear local concerns, but would also provide them with a local communication channel for their vision for Scotland s railways. 4.3 The Alliance was notified of SWestrans agreement to assist and responded that they needed to discuss further with Transport Scotland on the programme for their Regional Rail Forums and their overall framework for engaging with the RTPs. 4.4 The Alliance has now produced a draft ScotRail Engagement Framework. This includes a proposed Regional Transport Partnerships Engagement Framework which is set out in Appendix 2 of this report. 2

36 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January The Framework consists of four levels, with each representing separate platforms for engagement. Regional Rail Forums represent the third level of engagement which aims to provide specific Alliance input into performance, project updates and wider development projects/actions. 4.6 Level 2 of the framework sets out RTP Board Meetings as being a level of engagement, with the Alliance identifying principle RTP Liaison(s) who will attend all RTP Boards to provide updates (as invited), identify further specific issues/projects (when required) as well as providing a general point of contact for general RTP enquiries. 4.7 Officers will inform Board Members of further developments concerning the Regional Transport Partnerships Engagement Framework and the future date of the Regional Rail Forum once known. 5. Consultation on Scotland s Rail Infrastructure Strategy from On 17 November 2016 Transport Scotland launched an online public consultation on the future rail infrastructure strategy. 5.2 This consultation document reaffirms the Scottish Government s vision for rail, considers the challenges and opportunities faced and makes a number of proposals which the Government believe can help maximise investment to support predicted demand in growth, while delivering services that customers can depend on. The document does not represent a formal statement of policy at this stage. 5.3 This consultation aims to gather evidence that can help inform the general approach taken to specifying and funding our priorities for the railway infrastructure. The consultation does not seek views on the day-to-day operation of services, through rail freight operations or the ScotRail or Caledonian Sleeper franchise contracts. Transport Scotland are also not seeking views from stakeholders on what they believe to be priority investment schemes, whether proposed upgrades to the existing infrastructure, or new routes or stations. 5.4 The results from this consultation will help to inform the Scottish Ministers High Level Output Specification (HLOS) for Control Period 6 (April 2019 to March 2024), which is due to be submitted to the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) by June The consultation can be found on Scottish Government s Citizen Space website at: The closing date for responses is Friday 24 February As part of the engagement on this strategy, Transport Scotland are holding a number of workshops around the country in the coming months to engage in discussion with other interested parties and Transport Scotland officials. A workshop in Dumfries will be held at the Best Western Station Hotel on 24 January 2017 from Stakeholders, passengers and members of the public with an interest in Scotland s railways are all welcome to attend. Officers have been involved in assisting Transport Scotland with the arrangements for this event and the Lead Officer will be one of the presenters. For further details, or to confirm attendance, contact Rail.Infrastructure.Strategy@transport.gov.scot. 3

37 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January As the submission deadline falls before the next Board meeting, 10 March 2017, a copy of the consultation questions is included as Appendix 3 to this report. 5.8 Following the workshop to be held in Dumfries on 24 January 2017, a draft consultation response will be sent by to Board Members for their input. Prior to submission, it is intended to seek agreement of the Chair and Vice-Chair with a full report presented to the Board for homologation at its March 2017 meeting. 5.9 Transport Scotland has stated that in addition to this consultation, the forthcoming reviews of the National Transport Strategy and the Strategic Transport Projects review will allow further opportunities for stakeholders to help shape objectives and approaches to achieving those objectives through project and service delivery. Officers are lobbying on our agreed rail positions through representation on national working groups and SWestrans own rail related work streams. 6. Glasgow South Western Line 6.1 It is considered critical that at this vital time in the rail planning process that SWestrans be pro-active at lobbying and highlighting issues for the south west of Scotland, and rural areas generally, to decision-makers at a national level. 6.2 The current work in relation to station re-openings has presented an opportunity to look at the GSWL route as a whole and set out what SWestrans considers as essential for the line going forward. The ongoing development of strategic rail documents towards CP6 ( ) High Level Output Specification (HLOS), as well as actions emerging from the Dumfries and Galloway Transport Summit, present imminent opportunities to further SWestrans case for rail improvements. 6.3 As discussed briefly in a parallel report on STAG progress, the opportunity to provide a short paper on the potential wider GSWL route strategic issues as an addendum to the STAG work has been progressed. This paper, included as Appendix 4 to this report, has been prepared to start a conversation with national decision makers and feed into the HLOS in the short timeframe available. It draws together the various policy strands emerging from the railway industry and suggests how these might enable train service developments which will provide benefits to Dumfries and Galloway. A similar paper on the opportunities for the Stranraer Line is being developed and will be presented to the Board at the meeting. 6.4 A meeting with the Head of Rail Policy at Transport Scotland has been requested to discuss/present these papers in detail. It is hoped that such a meeting would take place before this Board meeting and if so an update will be provided verbally. 6.5 Members of the Board are asked to review and agree the position papers on the GSWL Route. This will allow the position paper to be presented on the 24 January 2017 at the rail workshop held by Transport Scotland. 6.6 Officers will then undertake to form a GSWL Steering Group as indicated to inform the HLOS development through the Rural Economy and Connectivity Technical Sub Group and other channels. 4

38 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January Local Rail Groups 7.1 A number of rail groups have formed in region in the last couple of months. These are largely as a result of increased awareness of the joint aspiration of Swestrans and Dumfries and Galloway Council for rail station re-openings. 7.2 Members have been made aware, through reports and verbal updates at previous Board meetings, of rail groups for new stations/lines at Langholm (Getting Langholm Back On Track), Eastriggs (Eastriggs Rail Station Action Group) and Dumfries (Dumfries Rail Group). These are in addition to an existing rail group at Beattock (Beattock Station Action Group). Officers are committed to work with each of these groups and will provide appropriate updates on progress to the Board 7.3 In late December 2016, SWestrans officers were contacted by Thornhill Rail Action Group. An introductory meeting is due to take place on 11 January 2017 and a verbal update will be given to the Board. 8. Recommendations Members of the Board are asked to: 8.1 note the Department of Transport s announcement of a new franchise, the West Coast Partnership; 8.2 note the development of a draft ScotRail Engagement Framework, and the inclusion of the Regional Rail Forum; 8.3 note the Consultation on Scotland s Rail Infrastructure Strategy and the workshop to be held in Dumfries on 24 January 2017; 8.4 note SWestrans will submit a response to the Rail Infrastructure Strategy consultation, with this to be agreed after the consultation workshop on 24 January 2017; 8.5 agree the position paper on the Glasgow South Western Line shown as Appendix 4; and 8.6 note the emergence of local rail groups in the region at Dumfries, Eastriggs, Langholm and Thornhill. Josef Coombey - Report Author Tel: Date of Report: 4 January 2017 File Ref: SW2/Meetings/2017 Douglas Kirkpatrick Lead Officer South West of Scotland Transport Partnership Militia House English Street Dumfries DG1 2HR Appendix 1 West Coast Partnership. Appendix 2 ScotRail Alliance, RTPs Proposed Engagement Framework. Appendix 3 Draft Consultation response on Scotland s Rail Infrastructure Strategy. Appendix 4 Position Paper - Potential Wider GSW Route Strategic Issues. 5

39 Appendix 1 West Coast Partnership This franchise brings together the operation of the InterCity West Coast (ICWC) franchise services and the design, mobilisation and initial operation of High Speed 2 (HS2) passenger services. ICWC services The ICWC franchise provides passenger services between London (Euston), the West Midlands, north-west England, North Wales and Scotland. Its services call at major towns and cities including London, Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester, Edinburgh and Glasgow. HS2 shadow operations The specification for the shadow operator element of the franchise will be developed more fully in the expression of interest (EoI), prospectus and invitation to tender (ITT), but is currently expected to include activities such as: identifying the markets across the West Coast corridor (both high speed and conventional passenger services) and developing the products and the passenger proposition for those markets engaging with the HS2 design and build programme to ensure the franchise operator s and passengers requirements are fully considered innovating and exploiting emerging technologies to deliver a step change in passenger experience and the delivery of services on WCP leading industry consultations on services and developing service patterns (both high speed and conventional services) for the period after high speed services commence developing implementation plans for HS2 rolling stock and infrastructure and recruitment and training in respect of the period after high speed services commence collaborating with Network Rail and HS2 Ltd to develop an organisational model for the delivery of services on HS2 o this will more closely align the incentives between the management of infrastructure and the operation of train services enabling them to jointly focus on delivering a service in the best interests of passengers and taxpayers o this could pave the way for the future establishment of an integrated railway developing transitional plans for the conventional network having responsibility for HS2 mobilisation activities such as o testing and acceptance of rolling stock o staff recruitment o obtaining regulatory approvals and contracts for operations o testing infrastructure to support HS2 o the phased introduction and testing of HS2 services

40 Appendix 1 HS2 operations It is envisaged the franchise operator will then operate both the West Coast and high speed services as an integrated operation in order to provide operational stability and a trading history in advance of the department retendering the services. The franchise operator will therefore need to be capable of operating high speed rail services to deliver the full benefits of the HS2 scheme. Structure and duration of franchise It is currently anticipated that the ICWC services will be operated until the commencement of HS2 on a partial revenue risk basis. On commencement of HS2 services it is anticipated that the franchise operator would provide integrated ICWC and HS2 services for a further period of approximately 4 years on an incentivised management contract basis. It is recognised that the role of the shadow operator will evolve over time and, as such, flexibility will be built in to the contract to manage this. This is likely to involve some form of review mechanism to enable refinement of the role over time. Additional information about the WCP competition The franchise EoI for the WCP competition will contain a number of mandatory further technical questions. The questions will include a test of participants ability and competence to: 1. exploit new technology and drive innovation to develop new products and services for customers 2. deliver the shadow operator role 3. plan, design, develop, operate and mobilise high speed rail services, ie speeds in excess of 250 kmh Applicants should note that due to the unique nature of the WCP proposition, the department is considering the potential for a franchise specific approach to the operation of the temporary visa mechanism as currently set out in the Passport process document. In the event that a franchise specific approach is adopted, details will be set out in the WCP franchise EoI process document. Due to the unique nature of the WCP proposition the department anticipates that bid vehicles will need to draw upon a wider range of participants and skills than would usually be the case in a rail franchise competition. Participants are encouraged to form bid vehicles in a manner which will enable them to deliver as strongly as possible all the constituent elements of the WCP franchise as described above. The department reserves the right to refine further its requirements in relation to the nature of the contributions to be made by the participants in a bidding vehicle.

41 Appendix 2 ScotRail Alliance Regional Transport Partnerships (RTPs) - Proposed Engagement Framework Level 1 National RTP/ScotRail Review Group Regional Transport Partnerships (Board/Senior Directors) ScotRail (Management Directors/Senior Directors) Transport Scotland Led by ScotRail, this group meet annually to review: Key Performance ScotRail Alliance Investment Programme General ScotRail Community Programme (e.g. CRPs) Level 2 RTP Board Meetings ScotRail to identify principle RTP Liaison(s) who will: Attend all RTP Boards to provide updates (as invited) Identify further specific projects/issue input (as required) Provide general point of contact for general RTP enquiries Level 3 RTP Rail Forums/Advisory/Rail User Groups ScotRail propose to expand existing TS/RTP meeting procedures to provide specific Alliance input on: Performance Project updates Wider development projects/actions Level 4 Project Programme Review Groups/Teams Specific project/programme/issue teams: Project 1, Project 2 etc.

42 Appendix 3 Rail Infrastructure Strategy - Consultation 2016 Transport Scotland CONSULTATION QUESTIONS 1. Do you agree with our vision and approach? Will they help us to achieve the Scottish Government s purpose of increasing sustainable and inclusive economic growth? Yes/No Please explain your answer and provide any relevant evidence. 2. How might we make trade-offs and prioritise between different types of investments, while ensuring that our actions are aligned with our vision? Note that this question refers to the types of trade-offs that may be required (e.g. where improvements to journey times may impact on levels of connectivity, or vice versa) rather than actual names/locations of schemes promoted or supported by stakeholders. Comments: 3. Do you support the move to a more flexible pipeline approach to scheme delivery, that does not force us to make early decisions on a detailed specification prior to the commencement of the five-year regulatory control period, without receipt of a robust business case? Yes/No Please explain your answer and provide any relevant evidence. 4. What are your views on the retention or removal of individual ring-fenced funds? Comments: 5. What alternative sources of funding could be used to help deliver the rail investment programme? Comments: Page 31 of 34

43 Rail Infrastructure Strategy - Consultation 2016 Transport Scotland 6. Do you agree with our approach to emissions reductions and climate change adaptation? What else should be considered? Comments: 7. Do you agree with the proposed approach to specifying performance outputs? Yes/No Please explain your answer and provide any relevant evidence. 8. How should performance be balanced against the wider priorities for reduced journey times and the full utilisation of existing and new capacity? Comments: 9. Do you have a view on our approach to safety? How can the closure of level crossings be better supported? Comments: 10. Do you support our approach to innovation and new technologies? Yes/No Please explain your answer and provide any relevant evidence. 11. Do you have any other views on how innovation could be better supported through the HLOS process and Network Rail s broader management of the rail infrastructure? Comments: Page 32 of 34

44 Potential Wider GSW Route Strategic Issues (Role of the Glasgow and South Western (GSW) Route) Appendix 4 1. Overview This short paper has been prepared to try to start a process to develop a strategy for the Glasgow and South Western (GSW) Route. It draws together the various policy strands emerging from the railway industry and suggesting how these might enable train service developments which will provide benefits to Dumfries and Galloway. 2. Background 2.1 Passenger Operation The GSW main line has always been the secondary Glasgow - Carlisle route, with the Caledonian Line via Beattock being the main West Coast route. The GSW line had through trains from London up until the 1970s and was used as a diversionary route in the early 1970s during the upgrade of the Caledonian line (track renewal, re-signalling and electrification). When this work was finished the GSW route was downgraded with considerable track singling; Annan Gretna and Kilmarnock Barrhead. (A section was also singled in the Thornhill area, but this was reversed due to the resulting poor performance.) The Kilmarnock Dalry route was completely closed in 1973 removing a through link to Paisley, one of the last through route closures in Britain. Only Kirkconnel remained open on the 58 miles between Kilmarnock and Dumfries. South of Kilmarnock a residual locomotive hauled service operated between Glasgow and Carlisle until the introduction of the new class 156 units in 1988/89, with a resulting upgrade of the service. The service has hardly changed over the nearly thirty years since then, except for the diversion of (Newcastle) Carlisle Kilmarnock Girvan/Stranraer trains to/from Glasgow in December At that time the Lugton loop was also extended permitting the introduction of a regular half hourly frequency service between Glasgow and Kilmarnock. With this service expansion the bulk of the GSW long distance services omitted calls at Barrhead, Dunlop, Stewarton and Kilmaurs, although these calls have now been reintroduced (except Barrhead). Sanquhar station re-opened in 1994, Gretna in 1995 and in South Ayrshire, Auchinleck in 1984 and New Cumnock in Freight Operations Freight operations in the post West Coast electrification era were predominantly from Carlisle to link into the industrial areas of Ayrshire, (particularly chemicals and steel) with local Ayrshire coal traffic at the north end. There were very few long distance coal flows. This traffic all dwindled away, but in the early 2000 s coal traffic from Hunterston port and Ayrshire opencast sites became vital for maintaining the supply of coal to English Power Stations and long distance coal trains rapidly increased in number. In August 2008 the Annan - Gretna section was redoubled. In response the closures of these same English Power stations coal flows have now dwindled to a few sporadic movements. They will cease completely by 2025 as a result of UK government decisions to cease electricity generation using coal.

45 2.3 Comparisons with other similar towns Appendix 4 Appendix A shows the rail provision for Dumfries compared with a number of other comparable towns around Scotland. Comparisons can be made on size, with Dumfries clearly much more poorly served by rail than Stirling, Perth and Inverness which are all of a similar size and status. For similar journey times much smaller places, such as Arbroath, Montrose and Dunbar, whose function could best be described as local centres, are generally further away from Glasgow than Dumfries. Dundee is virtually the same distance from Glasgow and it benefits from two trains an hour for much of the day and journey times in the 1 hour 20 to 30 minute range. The comparison of rail access to Edinburgh from Dumfries is meaningless as the current rail journey times are generally in the 2½ to 3+ hour range. Effective connections at Carlisle would reduce this journey time much closer to two hours. 2.4 Summary Scottish railway services have changed considerably over the 30 years since the wholesale replacement of the old rolling stock with the second generation Sprinter fleet (156s & 158s). North of the Central Belt the core long distance routes have seen an upgrade from the class 158 units (themselves an significant upgrade from the class 156s) to class 170 units offering more capacity and 100 mph running. Service patterns have changed with frequency increases across the core long distance routes. By 2018 the class 170 units are to be replaced by new Hitachi electric units on Edinburgh Glasgow and refurbished HSTs on the long distance routes with associated service, capacity and frequency upgrades. Cascaded rolling stock will improve services in Fife, the Borders and on the West Highland routes. By this time the GSW mainline will have seen an improvement in service frequency, but with the same class 156 rolling stock that has been in use for thirty years and with the same journey times. Appendix C reports the Minister s views the all of Scotland will benefit from the current rail investment. However there appears to be little on offer for southwest Scotland in this latest package Scotland Route Study and Investing in the Future - Choices for Scotland s Railways 2019 and beyond These two Network Rail publications, produced in mid-2016, make broadly the same points in respect to the GSW route. The following points, taken from the RDG s Investing in the Future publication are indicators to railway industry thinking. There refer to two separate sections; A Connected Scotland (which covers cross border routes) and Greater Glasgow Improvements. 3.1 Freight diversionary capability The GSW route features in A Connected Scotland specifically in the following context: The proposing gauge clearance of the GSW to W10, possibly W12, is required to ensure that the route is fully capable of handling the types of freight traffic handled by the WCML (and ECML). This is to provide a resilient freight capability by enabling trains to be diverted during disruption. The nature of the disruption is not specified, but the collapse, in early 2016, of Lamington viaduct over the Clyde on the WCML at has given more urgency to the issue.

46 Appendix 4 However two other projects could also impact or influence the decisions on the GSW Main Line: There are pressures to upgrade the WCML, in some form, either to provide extra capacity or to provide for HS2. There is a proposal to carry out development work (but not construction) in CP6. The first major blockade is likely to happen in CP6 with the complete remodelling of Carstairs Junctions. This will be highly disruptive for freight (and also passenger) trains, especially if it is carried out before the Edinburgh area freight upgrades are completed. 3.2 Greater Glasgow Improvements There are three separate, but related, proposals: Glasgow Central High Level station enhancement is still to be defined, but appears to be a relatively low cost concept referring to making best use of available capacity, rolling stock utilisation, timetable and infrastructure solutions Additional Capacity to East Kilbride/Barrhead potentially additional infrastructure - including electrification to deliver additional services with more seats as well as optimising operations at Glasgow Central. Electrification and enhancement to Kilmarnock/Barassie Making best use of the available capacity and providing a more resilient network delivering greater connectivity 3.3 Issues for the GSW - Freight Diversionary Capability It is clear that the rail industry considers that the GSW has a role as a diversionary route for freight that uses the West Coast Main Line (WCML), but nothing has been said about passenger diversionary use. The need is driven by the requirement that rail freight can continue to offer a reliable service and remain a viable transport option. Potential disruption arising from the proposed work at Carstairs lends some urgency to this. The creation of a diversionary route could be viewed as timeous advance works for longer term HS2 or capacity works on the WCML. What is of concern is that there is no reference to how these additional trains will impact on the current train service on the GSW. The Lamington passenger diversions resulted is a curtailment of service on the Barrhead Kilmarnock section of line, to the detriment of the smaller communities on that section. This cannot be an acceptable long term outcome. Some freight went via Mauchline Ayr Paisley, a long, time consuming and high resource route. The documents are silent on any intention to provide sufficient route capacity for these diverted trains. 3.4 Issues for the GSW Passenger Capability The passenger capability proposals are all in the Glasgow suburban area. They fall into two broad groups: relatively minor infrastructure alterations to enable more trains to run and also potentially to release capacity at Glasgow Central and electrification of parts or all of the East Kilbride and Barrhead/Kilmarnock/Barassie routes. The implication is that there is not going to be any major work to reduce the impact of the single line sections between Barrhead and Kilmarnock. If redoubling is to happen, it needs to happen prior to any electrification, because the cost would rise considerably if it was to be carried out later on an already electrified route.

47 3.5 Implications for Dumfries and Galloway Appendix 4 The proposals, as presented, suggest considerable work and disruption along the railway to deliver the upgrades and potentially also on the road network if bridges are to be demolished and rebuilt. However there will be no benefit accruing to rail users in the D&G area. 4 The Abellio Franchise Agreement The Abellio ScotRail includes some service upgrades on the GSW route. There are plans for the December 2017 timetable to significantly increase the number of services. Full details of the changes contained in the Franchise Agreement are in Appendix B. This service improvement, the first major upgrade since the introduction of the class 156s in the late 1980s, will significantly reduce the generalised journey times as a result of the increased numbers of train run, which reduces the service interval. This could permit the introduction of new calls at Eastriggs and/or Thornhill with a much reduced adverse impact on other journeys currently being made. However the journey time argument is not one that is always considered so critically by Transport Scotland. On the introduction of the half hourly Glasgow Kilmarnock services in December 2008 the extra trains allowed the Glasgow Dumfries Carlisle services to run as expresses between Glasgow and Kilmarnock. However all trains now call at three of the intermediate stations, but still omit Barrhead. Given the major service retiming and resource plan that is currently being developed for December 2017 this creates the opportunity to future-proof the timetable by adding in the time required for calls at Eastriggs and/or Thornhill, as happened prior to building Conon Bridge on the Inverness Wick/Thurso line. With such a major service change, this is an opportunity for SWestrans to contribute to the definition of the service restructuring at an early stage and not when it is too late to have any influence on the outcomes. 5 The role of the GSW route? The rail industry now appears to see the GSW route as an important diversionary route for the WCML in Scotland, with a change in the freight use from coal, with its heavy axle loads to multimodal which required an improved structure gauge. The route section north of Kilmarnock is seen as an important Glasgow commuter route. The improved service to Kilmarnock, which was enabled by the extension of the Lugton loop, has led to considerable growth in passengers. There are seems to be a rail industry view emerging that diversions for the core Ayrshire to Glasgow services should be available via an electrified route between Barassie, Kilmarnock and Barrhead. The status of the rest of the GSW route is seen as part of the Rural Railway (as opposed to the railways serving the other regions north of the Central Belt branded Seven Cities Connectivity in the RDG s Investing in the Future ).

48 Appendix 4 The implication of the Rural Railway designation is that Dumfries is the only significant regional centre that has not had its rail service improved to date. It is no longer clear that the original Rural Railway designation, made at least 30 years ago, is appropriate, classifying Dumfries with much smaller places such as Stranraer, Oban, Fort William, Dingwall, Wick and Thurso. Moreover the cost driven train service resourcing plan which takes rolling stock from the rural part of the route to provide Glasgow peak services is now restricting both the type of rolling stock being used, as well as its availability. Clearly this will change if the Glasgow suburban routes are electrified, as the rolling stock will no longer be inter-changeable. Electrification will present the opportunity to provide rolling stock tailored to the needs of longer distance users in the more sparsely populated areas of southwest Scotland. In summary the GSW s role appears to be: WCML freight diversionary route Glasgow area suburban route to Kilmarnock (possibly electric) Rural route Ayrshire diversionary route WCML passenger diversionary (this needs confirmation) 6 An opportunity Does this move to becoming the WCML freight (and possibly passenger) diversionary route present an opportunity to secure upgrades and improved services for the D&G area? The current rail industry approach to the GSW can be summarised as: It is only looking at how best to manage the current network, not at new stations It is silent on the role of the GSW as a passenger diversionary route It is only considering the current Glasgow suburban services in its thinking north of Kilmarnock. The freight route upgrade is only considering freight gauge with no view expressed on the capacity required on operate diverted freight trains The long term (2043) rural passenger service proposals contained in the Scotland Route Study are attractive, but they are a long term aspiration. The current class 156 fleet are approaching 30 years old. Their replacement will probably be an issue for the next franchise (post 2025) The issues for Dumfries & Galloway are intimately bound up with the issues for East Ayrshire, south of Kilmarnock and also East Kilbride/Barrhead/Kilmarnock electrification (because of the common rolling stock and the capacity constraint of Lugton loop). This is the biggest focus on the GSW route since the coal route upgrade ten years ago. However that was a focused panic measure whereas the current focus is part of a wider strategic view of the whole of the railway in Scotland. Raising the GSW route to the status of a main line, albeit for diversionary purposes, will require significant investment. But it could deliver infrastructure offering higher standards and performance than is currently the case and this provide a base on which to build improved local services. If the benefits of a co-ordinated investment to deliver faster and more frequent long distance local regional services are linked with these upgrade works, there should be considerable benefits in terms of improved connectivity and improved value for money.

49 7 The Vision Appendix 4 The SWestrans vision for the GSW route is: A route that better connects the South West of Scotland to both Glasgow and Edinburgh with rolling stock that looks and feels modern. Specific interventions that could deliver this might include: 100 mph running and W12 gauge to provide an effective diversionary route to the WCML which provides a base from which to upgrade the local services (Raising most of the approximately 80 miles between Gretna and Kilmarnock from the current 70 mph to 100 mph would take about 20 minutes off the end to end running time.) To provide an hourly, fast (100mph), high quality, inter-regional train service linking the Dumfries- Gretna area to Glasgow, with limited stops north of Dumfries. (This implies separation from the Glasgow Kilmarnock suburban services.) To provide a more frequent (1/2 hourly) local service linking Dumfries and the intermediate communities and through to Carlisle offering wider connections, including to Edinburgh To improve access to rail services to significant and growing communities along the route, with the provision of stations at appropriate locations: Eastriggs and Thornhill, and potentially at places in East Ayrshire, served by additional local services. 8 Possible Actions For real changes to take place there needs to be a common purpose throughout the railway industry, including local and national government. This will require leadership. SWestrans is willing to provide that leadership at Board and officer levels. The formation a GSW Route Steering Group will be a critical step to co-ordinate the wide range of differing proposals and interests that are emerging. The concept of this Steering Group would be launched at the Transport Scotland Consultation Day on 24 th January 2017, with the first meeting shortly afterwards. The initial objective of this Steering Group would be to: define a strategy for the whole of the GSW Main Line to which all parties can subscribe and support. Identify areas where a consensus is not reached and seek routes to achieving better understanding and ideally resolve these issues. Publish a GSW Main Line Strategy in time to inform the HLOS announcement. Potential members would be: SWestrans, D&G Council, SPT, East Ayrshire Council, Transport Scotland, Network Rail, Abellio ScotRail/Alliance Other possible members could be, depending on their interest: East Renfrewshire Council, Glasgow City Council, Carlisle City Council, Cumbria County Council

50 Appendix A Appendix 4 Population Distance from Representative Number of trains per hour Glasgow (miles) rail journey times Dumfries 50, hr 50 mins Less than 1 Stirling 46, fast, 40 3 or 4 stopping Perth 47, mins/ 1 hour 1 or 2 Inverness 47, hrs 15/30 mins Less than 1 per hour (direct or connections) Will be faster and hourly in Dec 2018 Dundee 148, hr 20/30 mins 2 in most hours Arbroath 24, hr 40/50 mins 1 Montrose 12, hr 55 mins. 2 1 hrs 05 mins Dunbar 8, hr 20/40 mins 1 (connect in Edinburgh) Girvan 7, hr 20/30 mins 1 (connect at Ayr) Stranraer 11, hr 20/30 8 a day (approx. 2 hourly)

51 Appendix B Abellio Franchise Agreement Train Service Changes Appendix 4 The franchise Agreement includes the following Section, which sets out the agreed changes: Section 15.11: 3 additional through Passenger services, two of which are new and one an extension of an existing passenger service, 2 further extensions of Passenger Services to provide better through connectivity and consistency of service pattern, 1 additional Dumfries and Carlisle shuttle, A reduction in the longest and average interval between Passenger Services. The longest interval to reduce from 3 hours to 2 hours and the average time between Passenger Services on this route will be reduced by a little over about half an hour. A greater number of daytime connections All this is required to happen by 1 st December (But probably at the December timetable date which is likely to be 10 th December possibly a typo with the 0 missing). A trolley- based catering service is to be provided on all Passenger Services on the Kilmarnock-Carlisle Route by no later than 1 st April 2017.

52 Appendix C Extract from The Herald Monday 12 December 2016 Appendix 4 New ScotRail fleet will benefit all of Scotland, Humza Yousaf says New ScotRail fleet will benefit all of Scotland, Humza Yousaf says SCOTRAIL S new fleet of trains will benefit the whole of Scotland, and not just the busier Central Belt routes, transport minister Humza Yousaf has promised. The Class 385 trains, unveiled by transport bosses yesterday in Glasgow, will begin testing later this week, with a view to beginning operations in September next year. They will first serve the Glasgow to Edinburgh line, via Falkirk High, before being rolled out on a number of Glasgow Central routes by May 2018, and then on the Glasgow to Stirling, Dunblane and Alloa lines from December It has been hailed as a milestone in the ongoing efforts to improve the country s railways, which have endured heavy scrutiny recently. Increasing fares, reliability problems and overcrowding are regular concerns among commuters, but it is hoped the new Hitachi trains will be an important step in restoring public confidence in Scotland s railway network. Speaking at the ScotRail depot in Pollokshields yesterday, Mr Yousaf insisted the 385s will not only ease the pressure on Scotland s peak routes, but will improve links to more remote areas of the country.

53 Appendix 4 He said: I have no doubt that, once these carriages go into service, the extra space and seats will transform the experience of users and help to continue to build upon the success of ScotRail services across the country. People won t be surprised that Edinburgh to Glasgow is our busiest commuter route, so they will be serviced by these trains before everybody else. But, certainly, once they come on, we can cascade carriages across the network, including the far north of Scotland and down to the Borders. What we don t want people to think is that we are only concentrating on the Central Belt, as important as the Central Belt is to us in Scotland. We re going to be ambitious for the next control period, , to make improvements right across Scotland and I don t want any part of Scotland to feel like it s been forgotten when it comes to our railways. Although it will be a while before commuters will reap the benefits of the new 385s, the head of ScotRail operating firm Abellio insists all efforts are being made to bring in new trains from across the UK network to fill the gaps. Dominic Booth, managing director of Abellio UK, said: It s very difficult to find trains anywhere in the United Kingdom. We are constantly on the lookout and, if anything becomes available, then obviously we ll work up a proposal and see if we can get it to Scotland. But trains are in relatively short supply at the moment. If we get the chance to bring any trains to Scotland in the intermediate period, then we ll try to do that.

54 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January 2017 TRANSPORT SUMMIT 1. Reason for Report To update Members of the Board on the Dumfries and Galloway Transport Summit 2. Background 2.1 On 2 May 2016, the Deputy First Minister, Mr John Swinney MSP, committed to holding a Transport Summit in the South West within the first 100 days of a new Scottish Government. 2.2 The summit was held on 22 August 2016 at Easterbrook Hall, Crichton Campus, Dumfries. The summit was opened by Mr John Swinney MSP and chaired by Mr Humza Yousaf MSP, the Minister for Transport and the Islands. The summit was aimed at providing a forum for a focussed discussion on identifying the key transport challenges and opportunities for the region s future. 2.3 A Draft Dumfries and Galloway Transport Summit Report was published by Transport Scotland on 19 September At its meeting on 23 September 2016, the Board agreed a detailed submission in response to the public engagement exercise held between the publication of the Draft Report and 31 October Key Points Final Report 3.1 The Dumfries and Galloway Transport Summit Final Report which incorporates the results of the public engagement exercise, was published on 28 December 2016 and is available on the following link %E2%80%93-final-report-%E2%80%93-december The report concludes with 13 actions and next steps which are provided below for the Board s information: A summit report will be issued in draft in four weeks for public comment. -This action has been completed. Final summit report to be published by the end of This action has been completed. The summit recognised that organised pressure groups exist to further the cause of particular transport upgrades and engagement by the relevant organisations will continue to address their concerns. Transport Scotland will prepare a Springholm and Crocketford village traffic management study. Key partners will need to focus on what improvement can be made to improve the situation at Stranraer, looking closely at connectivity and access to road, rail and the ports at Cairnryan. Transport Scotland will work with stakeholders to discuss capacity and thecondition of rail rolling stock on the Nith Valley line. 8 1

55 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January 2017 Transport Scotland will continue to monitor progress on the rail station appraisal work which is underway, offering advice where appropriate. Transport Scotland will work with local authorities to consider ways in which congestion can be reduced to ease travel for bus services. Transport Scotland will bring forward proposals for a Transport Bill, including measures to improve bus services, and consult widely on those. Transport and travel aspects related to health and social care to be considered in the National Transport Strategy review. All partners should consider current legislation that limits council s to operate commercial bus services. SWestrans will refresh their Regional Transport Strategy. Progress on key road improvements, including improvements to the A77south of Girvan, linking to Cairnryan Ferry hub and the A75 and improvements to connect Dumfries and the A74(M), will be considered in the forthcoming reviews of the National Transport Strategy and the Strategic Transport Projects Review. New Action: The final transport summit report will form part of the initial evidence base that will support the reviews of the National Transport Strategy and Strategic Transport Projects Review. 3.3 It is clear that to maintain momentum the majority of these actions will only be achieved through close partnership working between SWestrans and Transport Scotland and that progress on their delivery should be reported regularly to the Board. 3.4 Therefore, the Board are asked to agree that the Chairman writes to the Minister for Transport and the Islands welcoming the report, offering full assistance in the delivery of the identified actions and seeking agreement that Transport Scotland will provide updates at future Board meetings on progress made. 4. Financial Implications There are no financial implications associated with this report at this time. 5. Recommendation Members of the Board are asked to agree that the Chairman writes to the Minister for Transport and the Islands welcoming the Dumfries and Galloway Transport Summit final report, offering full assistance in the delivery of the identified actions and seeking agreement that Transport Scotland will provide updates at future Board meetings on progress made. Douglas Kirkpatrick - Report Author Tel: Date of Report: 2 January 2017 File Ref: SW2/Meetings/2017 Douglas Kirkpatrick Lead Officer South West of Scotland Transport Partnership Militia House English Street Dumfries DG1 2HR 2

56 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January 2017 COUNCILLORS CODE OF CONDUCT - CONSULTATION 1. Reason for Report To agree a response to the Scottish Government s consultation on the Councillors Code of Conduct. 2. Background 2.1 Each councillor has a personal responsibility to comply with the Councillors Code of Conduct (the Code). This sets out the standards of behaviour expected of those in public office, provides guidance relating to registration and declaration of interests, and possible conflicts of interest for councillors in undertaking roles on outside bodies. 2.2 On 12 December 2016, the Scottish Government launched a consultation on the Code with a closing date of 20 March 2017 as shown at the Appendix. All the Regional Transport Partnerships (RTPs) were approached to respond to the consultation. 3. Key Points - Consultation 3.1 The purpose of the consultation is to consider making changes to the Code to address a specific issue relating to Sections 5 and 7 of the Code on declarations of interest in connection with quasi-judicial or regulatory matters. 3.2 The consultation seeks views on possible changes to the Code s provisions on conflicts of interest as regards councillors who are also members of other public bodies such as RTPs and whether such changes should be made, and if so what form those changes should take. 3.3 The proposal is to amend the Code so that councillors who are appointed or nominated by their councils to be members of an outside body would not be prevented from taking part in their council s discussion of a matter of a quasi-judicial or regulatory nature in which that other body had an interest solely because of their membership of that body. 3.4 It is suggested that this could be done by extending the current specific exclusion in the Code for councillor members of a public body, so that it would include quasi-judicial or regulatory matters in which that body had an interest. This would enable councillor members of a public body to take part in their council s consideration of and decision-taking on such matters, although they would still need to declare their interest as a member of that public body. There would be a need to make consequential changes to para. 7.5 of the Code, which reiterates the principle that the specific exclusion does not apply to quasi-judicial or regulatory matters. However, the Scottish Government would be open to considering other options. 9 1

57 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January Key Points Consultation Response 4.1 Currently the Code does not make it explicitly clear to which outside bodies exclusions apply when declaring interests. The Code refers to those public bodies as defined by a list of legislation, which would need further investigation for the reader to easily understand. Therefore, it is proposed in the consultation response below, that if there is to be an amendment to the Code, then for the avoidance of doubt particular reference should be made to RTPs. 4.2 The consultation questions and proposed responses for the consideration of the Board are outlined below. 1. Do you agree or disagree that the Councillors Code of Conduct be amended so that councillors who have been nominated or appointed by their councils to membership of a Regional Transport Partnership can take part in discussion of decision-taking on matters of a quasi-judicial or regulatory nature in which that body has an interest? Agree Disagree 2. If you agree How should the amendment be worded? For the avoidance of doubt, the wording should make it explicit that the specific exclusion relates to those who are members of RTPs (as it currently does in the Code with the Cairngorms National Park Authority) and that members of the RTP would not be prevented from taking part in their council s discussion of a matter of a quasi-judicial or regulatory nature in which that other body had an interest solely because of their membership of that body. 3. If you disagree please explain why you do so. Not applicable 4. If you agree - should that amendment apply to all public bodies, not just RTPs? Yes No 5. If you have answered no please explain why. Not applicable no response to question 4 provided. We would also ask if respondents have any other comments or suggestions about the provisions of the Code on declarations of interest as regards councillors who are also members of other bodies. An answer has not been provided to question 4 as SWestrans can only respond for matters that affect RTPs and not on behalf of other outside bodies that are affected by the Councillors Code of Conduct. There may be benefit in approaching councils for a more general response regarding other outside bodies and conflicts of interest in planning matters. 2

58 Report South West of Scotland Transport Partnership 13 January 2017 SWestrans is concerned with matters of a strategic level and members of the Board who are councillors would not have been presented with the same level of information or detail that a councillor would consider as part of a council s planning committee. Therefore, it is entirely reasonable that there should be an exclusion for RTPS on these matters as the decisions being asked are not the same. Councillors who are on the planning committee are fully trained and experienced in how to consider planning applications. It is always a matter for an individual councillor in applying the objective test, and having regard to the Code, to determine whether an interest should be declared. 5. Financial Implications There are no financial implications associated with this report. 6. Recommendation Members of the Board are asked to consider and agree the response of SWestrans to the Scottish Government s consultation on possible amendments of provisions on conflicts of interest in the Councillors Code of Conduct. Claire Rogerson - Report Author Tel: Date of Report: 4 January 2017 File Ref: SW2/meetings/2017 Douglas Kirkpatrick Lead Officer South West of Scotland Transport Partnership Militia House English Street Dumfries DG1 2HR Appendix Scottish Government A consultation on the Councillors Code of Conduct - 3

59 The Councillors Code of Conduct Consultation on possible amendments of provisions on conflicts of interest December 2016

60 Background Section 1 of the Ethical Standards in Public Life etc (Scotland) Act 2000 requires the Scottish Ministers to issue a code of conduct for councillors. The current version of the Code was issued in 2010 and can be found at pdf. The current version of the Code was issued following a limited review of the Code that the Scottish Government carried out in The Scottish Government does not currently have any plans to carry out a further review of the Code. The 2000 Act states that Ministers shall issue a councillors code only after it has been laid before and approved by a resolution of the Scottish Parliament. The same applies to any revision or re-issue of the Code. The aim of the Code is to set out clearly and openly the standards that councillors must comply with when carrying out their council duties. All local authority councillors in Scotland are obliged to comply with the Code and with any guidance on the Code issued by the Standards Commission for Scotland. The current Guidance was issued in 2015 and can be found at CoCGuidanceSTANDALONEFINAL.docx. Purpose of this consultation The Scottish Government has been asked to consider making changes to the Code to address a specific issue relating to Sections 5 and 7 of the Code on declarations of interest in connection with quasi-judicial or regulatory matters. The purpose of this consultation is to seek views on whether such changes should be made, and if so what form those changes should take. The issue Section 5 of the Councillors Code of Conduct requires a councillor to declare an interest in a matter and not take part in discussion or decision-making by their council of that matter where a member of the public knowing of the interest would reasonably regard the interest as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the councillor s discussion or decision-making (the objective test ). This applies to both financial and non-financial interests. The Code says that non-financial interests that ought to be declared include membership or holding office in a public body. Paragraph 5.7 of the Code provides that notwithstanding its general provisions relating to declarations of interest, there is no need for a councillor to withdraw from the council s discussion of or voting on a matter where a general or specific exclusion applies. The specific exclusions are described in paragraph 5.18 of the Code, and include interests that a councillor may have as a member or director of an outside body where the councillor has been nominated or appointed, or whose appointment has been approved, by the councillor s local authority. However, they do not apply: in respect of any matter of a quasi-judicial or regulatory nature where the body in question is applying to the local authority for a licence, a consent or an approval, is making an objection or representation or has a material interest concerning

61 such a licence, consent or approval or is the subject of a statutory order of a regulatory nature, made, or proposed to be made, by the local authority. An example of an outside body to which councillors are appointed is Nestrans, the statutory Transport Partnership for the Aberdeen City and Aberdeenshire areas. Nestrans is one of seven regional Transport Partnerships (RTPs) set up across Scotland under the Transport (Scotland) Act 2005 to provide a co-ordinated approach to transport planning and delivery between different local authority areas. The 2005 Act provides that it is the duty of each RTP to draw up a strategy for transport within its region. In addition Ministers can confer other transport functions on an RTP, such as installing bus lanes and providing subsidised bus services. Nestrans itself describes its purpose as being to develop and deliver a long-term regional transport strategy and take forward strategic transport improvements that support and improve the economy, environment and quality of life across Aberdeen City and Shire. Under the 2005 Act, the Board of Nestrans is made up of councillors from the councils in its area as well as non-councillor members appointed by the Scottish Ministers. As part of its role, Nestrans comments on major planning matters that may affect transport in its area. The consideration of such matters by the relevant council is a quasi-judicial matter in terms of the Councillors Code of Conduct. The Standards Commission was asked by Aberdeen City Council on behalf of Nestrans to grant a dispensation to allow members of Nestrans who are councillors to take part in the Council s consideration of matters of a quasi-judicial or judicial nature in which Nestrans has an interest. The example given was of Nestrans having commented on a major planning application that had transport implications before the application was considered by the Council. However, the Commission decided that it could not grant such a dispensation since to do so would be contrary to the terms of the Code. In reaching that decision the Commission felt that the declarable interest would be a councillor s membership of Nestrans, and so that the conflict of interest - and thus the need for the councillor not to take part in consideration of the issue by the Council - could not be avoided simply by the councillor not taking part in discussion of the matter by Nestrans. The result is that councillors who are also nominated or appointed by their councils to be members of Nestrans cannot take part in their council s discussion of or taking decisions on quasi-judicial or regulatory matters in which that body has an interest. Nestrans and its member councils have argued that: this may adversely affect the ability of partnership bodies such as Nestrans to influence council decisions on important issues for instance, most major planning applications will have potential transport implications; and this might also make it difficult to find councillors who are willing to serve on such bodies, since faced with having to choose between being members of the outside body and keeping the ability to take part in their council s consideration of issues in which the body has an interest councillors are likely to prioritise the latter and so decline to become members of outside bodies. It has been suggested that these factors could prejudice the ability of such bodies properly to perform their functions. They might also make it difficult or even

62 impossible to comply with relevant statutory requirements for the membership of such bodies. Since the Standards Commission has decided that it cannot legally grant dispensations in such cases, it appears that the issue could only be addressed by changing the relevant terms of the Code. The proposal The proposal is to amend the Councillors Code of Conduct so that councillors who are appointed or nominated by their councils to be members of an outside body would not be prevented from taking part in their council s discussion of a matter of a quasi-judicial or regulatory nature in which that other body had an interest solely because of their membership of that body. It is suggested that this could be done by extending the current specific exclusion in the Code for councillor members of a public body, so that it would include quasijudicial or regulatory matters in which that body had an interest. This would enable councillor members of a public body to take part in their council s consideration of and decision-taking on such matters, although they would still need to declare their interest as a member of that public body. There would be a need to make consequential changes to para. 7.5 of the Code, which reiterates the principle that the specific exclusion does not apply to quasi-judicial or regulatory matters. However, the Scottish Government would be open to considering other options. Although the issue has been raised specifically in relation to Nestrans, and by implication to other Regional Transport Partnerships, it would seem capable of arising in connection with other public bodies that could have an interest in quasijudicial or regulatory matters for which councils are responsible. We would therefore welcome views on whether any change to the Councillors Code of Conduct should cover all public bodies to which councillors may be appointed or nominated by their councils, not just Regional Transport Partnerships. For consideration is whether such an extension of the current specific exclusion for members of other public bodies would apply in all cases, or only where the councillor had not participated in the body s decision-making on the matter or attended any meeting of the body at which the matter was discussed. The latter formulation would be similar to the other specific exclusion that is currently in the Councillors Code of Conduct, which is for councillor members of the Cairngorms National Park Authority.

63 Responding to this Consultation We are inviting responses to this consultation by 20 March Please respond to this consultation using the Scottish Governments consultation platform, Citizen Space. You view and respond to this consultation online at: You can save and return to your responses while the consultation is still open. Please ensure that consultation responses are submitted before the closing date of 20 March If you are unable to respond online, please complete the Respondent Information Form (see Handling your Response below) to: Tony Romain Local Government Policy and Relationships Local Government and Analytical Services Division The Scottish Government Area 3G North Victoria Quay Edinburgh EH6 6QQ Handling your response If you respond using Citizen Space ( you will be directed to the Respondent Information Form. Please indicate how you wish your response to be handled and, in particular, whether you are happy for your response to published. If you are unable to respond via Citizen Space, please complete and return the Respondent Information Form attached included in this document. If you ask for your response not to be published, we will regard it as confidential, and we will treat it accordingly. All respondents should be aware that the Scottish Government is subject to the provisions of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 and would therefore have to consider any request made to it under the Act for information relating to responses made to this consultation exercise. Next steps in the process Where respondents have given permission for their response to be made public, and after we have checked that they contain no potentially defamatory material, responses will be made available to the public at If you use Citizen Space to respond, you will receive a copy of your response via .

64 Following the closing date, all responses will be analysed and considered along with any other available evidence to help us. Responses will be published where we have been given permission to do so. Comments and complaints If you have any comments about how this consultation exercise has been conducted, please send them by to or to the postal address provided above. Scottish Government consultation process Consultation is an essential part of the policy-making process. It gives us the opportunity to consider your opinion and expertise on a proposed area of work. You can find all our consultations online: Each consultation details the issues under consideration, as well as a way for you to give us your views, either online, by or by post. Consultations may involve seeking views in a number of different ways, such as public meetings, focus groups, or other online methods such as Dialogue ( Responses will be analysed and used as part of the decision making process, along with a range of other available information and evidence. We will publish a report of this analysis for every consultation. Depending on the nature of the consultation exercise the responses received may: indicate the need for policy development or review inform the development of a particular policy help decisions to be made between alternative policy proposals be used to finalise legislation before it is implemented. While details of particular circumstances described in a response to a consultation exercise may usefully inform the policy process, consultation exercises cannot address individual concerns and comments, which should be directed to the relevant public body.

65 Councillor Code of Conduct Amendment RESPONDENT INFORMATION FORM Please Note this form must be completed and returned with your response. Are you responding as an individual or an organisation? Individual Organisation Full name or organisation s name Phone number Address Postcode The Scottish Government would like your permission to publish your consultation response. Please indicate your publishing preference: Publish response with name Publish response only (anonymous) Individuals only Do not publish response We will share your response internally with other Scottish Government policy teams who may be addressing the issues you discuss. They may wish to contact you again in the future, but we require your permission to do so. Are you content for Scottish Government to contact you again in relation to this consultation exercise? Yes No

66 Councillor Code of Conduct Amendment Consultation questions 1. Do you agree or disagree that the Councillors Code of Conduct be amended so that councillors who have been nominated or appointed by their councils to membership of a Regional Transport Partnership can take part in discussion of decision-taking on matters of a quasi-judicial or regulatory nature in which that body has an interest? Agree Disagree 2. If you agree How should the amendment be worded? 3. If you disagree please explain why you do so. 4. If you agree - should that amendment apply to all public bodies, not just RTPs? Yes No 5. If you have answered no please explain why. We would also ask if respondents have any other comments or suggestions about the provisions of the Code on declarations of interest as regards councillors who are also members of other bodies.

67 Crown copyright 2016 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/opengovernment-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at The Scottish Government St Andrew s House Edinburgh EH1 3DG ISBN: (web only) Published by The Scottish Government, December 2016 Produced for The Scottish Government by APS Group Scotland, 21 Tennant Street, Edinburgh EH6 5NA PPDAS84758 (12/16) w w w. g o v. s c o t