FPASTS STAG 1 plus – Rail Elements (Ellon Rail Study)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Windsor Park & Ride (Overview & Scrutiny Panel – 29 th October 2007)
Advertisements

North East Transport Consultative Forum 31 st October 2011 Nestrans’ Regional Transport Strategy Review.
RTS Re-fresh North East Transport Consultative Forum Tuesday 30th October 2012.
TravelWatch SouthWest MetroWest - from concept to delivery James White 4 October 2014.
/02-July-141 CP5 Enhancements Delivery Plan Audrey Laidlaw Lead Strategic Planner.
North East Transport Consultative Forum Woodhill House, Aberdeen 2 nd October 2014.
1West of England Area Rail Studies - David Crockett 08/02/2012 West of England Area Rail Studies Outline Summary This presentation summarises the work.
1 Nottingham-Lincoln Stakeholder Board – Network Rail update Doreen Marsh – 26 th February 2015.
MTF Rail Development Forum
UGDIE PROJECT MEETING Bled September WP6 – Assessment and Evaluation Evaluation Planning  Draft Evaluation plan.
ACT CANADA 2014: Using Business Cases To Get Great Projects Financed and Delivered December 1, 2014| Michael Sutherland.
John Provan Head of Regulatory Policy Rail Strategy.
Presentation to: Inaugural meeting of North East Rail Forum – July 2014 Jerry Farquharson Director of Business Planning First ScotRail.
CREATING THE CASE FOR MORE TRAVEL CHOICES John Bartels, City of Port Phillip and Ainsley Nigro, GHD Cost Benefit Analysis for Implementing Separated Bike.
Paul Roberts – TIF Technical Manager Presentation to the TPS – 3 June 2009.
Bus Rapid Transit: Chicago’s New Route to Opportunity Josh Ellis, BRT Project Manager Metropolitan Planning Council.
Key Transport Policy Issues for 2010 Stephen Clark Deputy Clerk to the Authority 18 January 2010.
 Aims & Objectives  To reinstate a railway station at Beattock.  To increase tourism in the Beattock & Moffat area  Environmental - access to the.
Mid Wales LTP Stakeholder Workshop 3 rd October Presentation by Ann Elias and Janice Hughes.
1 Presented by Tom Harrington WMATA Office of Long-Range Planning TPB Technical Committee June 6, 2008 Future Metrorail Capacity Needs.
Corridors 4 corridors and 6 routes:
Hong Kong Railway plus Property Funding Model Disclaimer: The views expressed in this document are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect.
Scotland’s Railways Malcolm Reed Chief Executive Transport Scotland.
Date Create your footer by changing copy in the Header and Footer section1 Network Rail’s Strategic Agenda Calvin Lloyd.
International Logistics Centres for Western NIS and the Caucasus Georgia: Areas in the vicinity of Tbilisi airport Ministry of Economy and Sustainable.
Heat Network Partnership Workshop Glasgow 8 September 2015.
Industry Briefing 25 May 2016.
Northern Lights Express Minneapolis/Duluth-Superior Passenger Rail Alliance February 24, Northern Lights Express Minneapolis/Duluth-Superior Passenger.
STAMFORD CAPACITY AND LIMITS TO GROWTH STUDY SOUTH KESTEVEN DISTRICT COUNCIL FINAL REPORT PRESENTATION PRESENTERS: UNA McGAUGHRIN JESSE HONEY 14 TH DECEMBER.
Aberdeen City Briefing 13 th May Project Scope – Phase 1 Transport Scotland’s specification for delivery by Mar 2019: Half hourly service between.
SEStran Regional Model Midlothian Local Development Plan Transport Appraisal Final Summary Report.
PowerPoint Title Sub heading if required Northern Powerhouse Rail Freight meeting 17 th May 2016.
SMITH SCOTT MULLAN ASSOCIATES 1 KING’S PARK PRIMARY SCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 03 February 2016.
Scotland Route Utilisation Strategy. Slide 2 What is a RUS? A blueprint for the future of the route  Provides a series of options that funders may choose.
TfN Freight AND RAIL UPDATE
High Speed Rail Some Development Principles
MetroWest Phase 2 LGA PT Consortium Visit 7th September 2017
MetroWest Phase 1 James Willcock.
Public Conference December
West of England Joint Transport Study
A Presentation to: River to Sea TPO Board October 26, 2016.
A Presentation to: River to Sea TPO BPAC November 9, 2016.
Regional Roads Committee
River to Sea TPO - CAC/TCC
Cycling in Edinburgh – 2016 Current position and potential
Western Orbital Local Liaison Forum 11TH September 2017.
PRASA ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN 2015/16 to 2017/18
The Regeneration of Swanley
Fishermans Bend Draft Framework Transport Recommendations
East Coast Route Study November 2016 update.
Revolution in Rail Scott Prentice Head of Business Development.
New Public Transport Infrastructure
2009 Minnesota MPO Conference August 11, 2009
I-85 Corridor Light Rail Transit Feasibility Study
KEYNOTE STAGE SPONSOR.
Head of Strategic Planning
North Suburban Planning Council
Impact of Borders Railway
3 November 2017 Fraserburgh and Peterhead to Aberdeen Strategic Transport Study: STAG Part 1 Plus Bob Nicol: Project Director David Murtagh: Project Manager.
Members’ Workshop Wednesday 17th April 2019 Woodhill House Aberdeen
Kent Route Study – Draft for Consultation
GEML SOBC GEML Rail Conference July 2019
Great Eastern Mainline
Delivering the North East Chelmsford Growth Ambition
Western Orbital: M11 J11 Park and Ride Provision
North East Transport Consultative Forum Thursday 30th May Woodhill House Aberdeen
Trans Wilts Conference
GCP Transport Update Meeting for: M11 J11 Park & Ride Engagement Group
Histon Road LLF Resolutions and Programme
Life Cycle Costing.
Presentation transcript:

FPASTS STAG 1 plus – Rail Elements (Ellon Rail Study) Member Briefing 03 November 2017

Structure Approach Option Specification Feasibility: Operational Engineering Costings Demand Forecasting Benchmarking Appraisal Findings

Background FPASTS STAG Part 1 completed 2015/16 Fraserburgh and Peterhead to Aberdeen Strategic Transport Study Reopening rail line between Aberdeen/Dyce and Ellon identified as one option for further consideration Prior to taking forward to STAG 2, greater confidence required as to technical and operational feasibility, and potential demand STAG 1 adopted two approaches to forecasting demand: One approach suggested scheme operating costs would be higher than revenue benefits Alternative approach suggested scheme revenues would cover operating costs Capital costs estimated between £130M-£260M Annual revenue forecasts estimated between £1.3M-£5.6M with operating costs estimated at £2.2M AECOM appointed to undertake “STAG 1+” exercise

Approach Initial Option Development Stakeholder Consultation (Network Rail, ScotRail, Transport Scotland) Assessment of Operational Feasibility Assessment of Engineering Feasibility Identification of Additional Infrastructure Finalisation of Options Development of Option Costs (Rough Order of Magnitude) Development of Mode Choice Model (Demand and Revenue Forecasting) Benchmarking Appraisal in line with STAG, including Economic Appraisal

Option Specification: Baseline Assumptions The alignment should be based on the corridor of the existing F&B Way (the old railway alignment from Dyce to Ellon; now a cycleway); Primary focus should be connecting Aberdeen-Dyce to an Ellon town station (this also allows future extensions north to remain possible). Ellon Parkway Station (i.e. station adjacent to A90/P&R) viewed as an additional option; The opportunity for an additional station in the Newmachar/Kingseat area will be considered in all options; Design line speed should be assumed as 75mph (maximum); Rolling stock assumed to be Class 158s (confirmed with ScotRail); Opening Year assumed as 2021 (for appraisal purposes); New stations on the route (i.e. Newmachar and Ellon) would be un-manned; A shared walk/cycle route facility is to be maintained alongside the railway;

Option Specification: Baseline Assumptions The future baseline position regarding the existing railway between Aberdeen and Dyce should be assumed to include the following: Infrastructure enhancements as planned in CP5 HLOS: two track railway from Kittybrewster to Dyce, but railway remains single track through tunnels north of Aberdeen station; Resignalling; Passenger services on the existing railway are assumed to broadly operate as per the December 2019 timetable, which was kindly supplied by ScotRail. This is moving towards the aspiration of a standard off peak hour service of: 1 train between Aberdeen and Inverness 1 train between Aberdeen and Inverurie 1 train between Montrose and Inverurie

Infrastructure and Rolling Stock Requirements: Option Specification Ref Description Infrastructure and Rolling Stock Requirements: Option 1 Aberdeen/Dyce – Newmachar – Ellon Town Centre Service: Hourly Service New Stations at Newmachar and Ellon Town Centre (old station site) Single platform stations at Newmachar and Ellon Town Centre Two train sets required Option 2 Aberdeen/Dyce – Newmachar – Ellon Town Centre Service Half-hourly Service Elimination of remaining single track section north of Aberdeen Dynamic loops at Newmachar and two platforms required at Newmachar (only one platform required at Ellon Town Centre) Three train sets required Option 3 Aberdeen/Dyce – Newmachar – Ellon Town Centre – Ellon Park & Ride Service New stations at Newmachar, Ellon Town Centre (old station site) and Ellon Park & Ride Dynamic loops at Newmachar and two platforms required at Newmachar Double track between Ellon and Ellon Park & Ride and two platforms at both Ellon Town Centre and Ellon Park & Ride Four train sets required

Operational Feasibility Option 1: Hourly Service to Ellon town centre Aberdeen/Dyce – Newmachar – Ellon Town Centre Service: Hourly Service New Stations at Newmachar and Ellon Town Centre (old station site) Feasible with the currently planned infrastructure enhancements between Aberdeen and Inverurie Ellon branch can be single track for Option 1, however this results in high utilisation of the branch infrastructure. Single platform stations at Newmachar and Ellon Town Centre Two train sets required

Operational Feasibility Option 2: Half-hourly Service to Ellon town centre Aberdeen/Dyce – Newmachar – Ellon Town Centre Service Half-hourly Service New Stations at Newmachar and Ellon Town Centre (old station site) Not feasible without elimination of the single track section north of Aberdeen because the quantum of trains using that single line is too great. Additional infrastructure is needed to support Option 2 including: Dynamic loops at Newmachar: Two platforms at Newmachar and one platform at Ellon town centre Three train sets required

Operational Feasibility Option 3: Half-hourly Service to Ellon P&R Aberdeen/Dyce – Newmachar – Ellon Town Centre – Ellon Park & Ride Service Half-hourly Service New stations at Newmachar, Ellon Town Centre (old station site) and Ellon P&R Not feasible without elimination of the single track section north of Aberdeen because the quantum of trains using that single line is too great. Additional infrastructure is needed to support Option 3 including: Dynamic loops at Newmachar and two platforms at Newmachar Double track between Ellon and Ellon Park & Ride and two platforms at both Ellon town centre and Ellon Park & Ride Four train sets required

Engineering Feasibility Site walk-through and review of structures conditions report to determine main constraints and possible works required to enable rail reinstatement Engineering assessment has informed ‘bottom-up’ costing exercise NOTE: Track alignment shown in this figure is indicative only. The purpose of the sketch is to show an indicative potential corridor and would be subject to design development at a later stage. The alignment would be rationalised through design to minimise land take, minimise the impact on neighbouring properties, and provide a compliant track horizontal and vertical geometry. Dyce Tie-In

Engineering Feasibility Newmachar S-Bends

Engineering Feasibility NOTE: Track alignment shown in this figure is indicative only. The purpose of the sketch is to show an indicative potential corridor and would be subject to design development at a later stage. The alignment would be rationalised through design to minimise land take, minimise the impact on neighbouring properties, and provide a compliant track horizontal and vertical geometry. Connection to Ellon Park & Ride

Estimated Capital Costs Option Costings Item Estimated Capital Costs   Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Construction Cost (allowance) £122.5M £139.6M £171.0M Design Costs (incl. design, project management, cost management, site supervision) 15% £18.4M £20.9M £25.7M Schedule 4 - Allowance for disruption to Network 6% £8.5M £9.6M £11.8M Network Rail costs 10% £15.0M £17.0M £20.8M Optimism Bias 66% £108.4M £123.6M £151.4M TOTAL £273M £311M £381M

Demand Forecasting Development of mode-choice model forecasting tool ASAM4 base demand Model satisfactorily calibrated/ validated Peterhead to Aberdeen (unweighted) Journey Times (2036) Source: AECOM Mode Choice Model   Car Bus P&R Ellon P&R Bridge of Don Rail (hourly service) Rail (half-hourly) Journey Time (minutes) 66 102 89 90 83

Benchmarking versus STAG 1 study: Element STAG 1 STAG 1+ Capital Costs £130m-£260m £160m-£230m Operating Costs £2.2m £2.9m-£5.3m Revenue £1.3m-£5.6m £1.7m-£2.5m versus STAG 1 study: Demand forecasts benchmark satisfactorily against Borders Line and Larkhall Demand forecasts benchmark well against similar stations which share geographical and demographic characteristics: Station Status Population (Census 2011) Distance to Aberdeen (miles) No. of Trains per hour (approx.) Patronage Numbers (actual and forecast) Stonehaven Existing 11,431 16 1-2 (3 during peaks) 535,698 Inverurie 12,654 17 1 (2 during peaks) 533,972 Laurencekirk 2,925 30 circa 1 (more during peak) 104,488 Ellon Appraisal 10,268 1 to 2 320,000-440,000 (2021) Newmachar 2,460 11 80,000-110,000 (2021)

Present Value of Benefits (£) Present Value of Costs (£) Appraisal Updated appraisal against TPOs (STAG 1), Implementability and Govt’ Objectives Financial appraisal indicates a requirement for franchise subsidy Economic appraisal based on costs and demand results (TEE) suggests scheme would deliver “poor value for money” - Sensitivity Analysis suggests: Significant increases in demand and/or decreases in cost required to obtain breakeven BCR Newmachar strengthens the case, but not economically viable as standalone scheme Application of Network Rail growth rates and increasing car parking costs in Aberdeen City centre strengthens the economic case but BCR remains <0.5 Options Present Value of Benefits (£) Present Value of Costs (£) Net Present Value (£) BCR Option 1: Aberdeen/Dyce – Ellon Service (hourly) 81,641 336,046 -254,405 0.24 Option 2: Aberdeen/Dyce – Ellon Service (half-hourly) 111,447 404,072 -292,625 0.28 Option 3: Aberdeen – Ellon Service (A90 P&R site; half-hourly) 118,193 499,062 -380,870

Key Messages Strong case for the scheme when considering the TPOs, public acceptability, safety, integration and social inclusion Technically feasible – but there would be significant challenges Key issues around value for money and affordability Capital costs outweigh the benefits derived

Thank You & Questions Richie.Fraser@aecom.com

Benchmarking (2) Ellon 320,000-440,000 (2021) Newmachar 80,000-110,000 (2021) Station Key Details Demand Forecast (2015) Actual Demand 15/16 16/17 17/18 Most Recent* Tweedbank P&R – 235 spaces, 37 miles from Edinburgh by car. 21,621 300,602 N/A As per Yr 1 Galashiels No P&R, 33 miles from Edinburgh by car. 23,431 213,760 Stow P&R – 33 spaces, 26 miles from Edinburgh by car. 5,843 39,656 Gorebridge P&R – 73 spaces, 11 miles from Edinburgh by car. 90,019 59,304 Newtongrange P&R – 56 spaces, 10 miles from Edinburgh by car. 52,918 86,398 Eskbank P&R – 248 spaces, 8 miles from Edinburgh by car. 130,525 128,298 Shawfair P&R – 59 spaces, 6 miles from Edinburgh by car. 61,860 13,202

Benchmarking (2) Ellon 320,000-440,000 (2021) Newmachar 80,000-110,000 (2021) Station Key Details Demand Forecast (06/07) Actual Demand 06/07 07/08 08/09 Most Recent* Larkhall P&R – 200 spaces, 18 miles from Glasgow by car. 217,700 268,700 307,900 323,300 420,366 Merryton P&R – 80 spaces, 18 miles from Glasgow by car. 169,100 81,100 97,600 99,500 113,546 Chatelherault P&R – 100 spaces, 16 miles from Glasgow by car. 38,000 17,300 23,500 41,000 85,898 Kelvindale No P&R, 3.5 miles from Glasgow by car. 43,900 95,000 107,700 109,500 91,570