Metro West Phase 1 James Willcock Metro West

Metro. West Phase 1 James Willcock

Metro. West Programme • The Metro. West programme arose out of studies into developing the local rail network in 2011 / 2012 • Our local rail network is not as well developed as comparative city regions • Key driver is to deliver a ‘Metro’ style local rail network with improved frequencies and connectivity, through a phased approach • The Metro. West programme comprises of Phase 1, Phase 2 and other smaller schemes, all of which are being promoted by the councils • Key objectives of the programme are to support economic growth, job creation and the delivery of the Wo. E Joint Spatial Plan and Joint Transport Plan

Metro. West Phase 1 & 2

Metro. West Phase 1 Three local lines: • Severn Beach Line - service upgrade • Bath Spa to Bristol Line - service upgrade • Portishead Line - re-opening (5 km disused line and 9 km freight only line) 16 existing stations 2 new stations, Portishead & Pill 4 tunnels Design based on class 16 x trains initially operating in 3 car formations Extend UK passenger train network by 14 km Scheme is being promoted by North Somerset Council on behalf of the four councils We have commissioned all rail design through Network Rail – there are pro’s and con’s to this approach

Metro. West Phase 11 • Context

Metro. West Phase 1 Scheme up to early 2017 • Upgrade the Severn Beach line to ½ hourly service to Avonmouth (hourly beyond) • Upgrade the Keynsham and Oldfield Park stations to ½ hourly service • Re-open the Portishead Branch Line with a ½ hourly train service GRIP 3 Option Selection (Outline Design) encountered considerable design challenges due to the ‘unusual alignment characteristics’ of the Portbury freight line. Upshot was GRIP 3 took nearly 2 years with over 300 deliverables. The the extent of technical scope creep was such that the capital out-turn cost estimate came in at approx. £ 160 M, against a GRIP 2 estimated out-turn of £ 58 M. . . over £ 100 M more. . . ! Clearly there were considerable credibility issues for Network Rail and also the Councils as the client.

Metro. West Phase 1 Key drivers for the cost increase were: • A significant increase in the scope of work through the Avon Gorge in order to meet safety standards for passenger trains and to increase the line speed to 50 mph while also accommodating freight trains • The impact of 2 trains per hour at the Ashton Vale Road level crossing on rail safety, highway safety, traffic impact resulting in the need for an alternative access • The consequential impact from the above on the amount of land, DCO requirements and environmental mitigation needed to deliver the scheme • The increased risks associated with the project following the expanded works and recently identified constraints Clifton Tunnel No 1 – below Clifton Suspension Bridge

Metro. West Phase 1

Metro. West Phase 1

Metro. West Phase 1 Revised Scheme Scope – Summer 2017 Taking a staged approach to the delivery of the scheme: • Severn Beach Line - service upgrade remains ½ hourly • Bath Spa to Bristol Line - service upgrade remains ½ hourly • Portishead Line – initial passenger service will now be hourly The ambition remains to ultimately delivery a ½ hourly service for the Portishead line but this post opening upgrade would be a separate project with separate funding, business case and statutory processes

Metro. West Phase 1 Re-opening the Portishead Line – Further Complexities Re-opening the line requires multiple major processes: • a Development Consent Order – for powers to build and operate and acquire land compulsorily (where needed) • Habitats Regulations Assessment – due to the multiple environmental designations, i. e. SSSI x 2 and an SAC • Plus not forgetting the GRIP process !

Metro. West Phase 1 Complex governance arrangements – 4 Councils (+ WECA) promoting the scheme but led by North Somerset Interface with complex rail industry governance and regulation At Project Level there are 10 Major Work Streams Core Project Team Project Delivery Group Client PM Team Rail Network Rail Highway Network CH 2 MHill & NSC Business. Case inc Demand Modelling & Appraisal CH 2 MHill & NR Operations Environment FGW & Client CH 2 MHill Network Rail PM Team Planning & Legal Property & Land Bond Dickinson Ardent Commercial Comms Client Existing Stations Refresh Wo. E Office

Metro. West Phase 1 Lessons learnt so far – as third party rail scheme promoter • Rail engineering is far more complex than we previously thought and the challenges of delivering a major rail enhancement project are substantial • Rail design/PM costs (GRIP 1 to 5) can be eye watering compared with highway design costs. Total preparation costs for our scheme will be around 20% of the scheme out-turn • Don’t use a GRIP 2 cost estimate for setting your budget • A good Network Rail sponsor is essential who is willing and able to operate in both the rail industry world and the local government world • Continuity of Network Rail Project Team/design team/consultants is important • Don’t try to compress GRIP timescales, in fact add in some ‘breathing room’ if possible (but cost and political pressures to deliver asap)

Any Questions ?