Minutes of the High Peak and Hope Valley Community Rail Partnership AGM held on 16th June 2011 at Chinley

Minutes for June 2011

Minutes for June 2010

Minutes for September 2010

Minutes for December 2010

 

Present:

 

Cllr Jean Wharmby (DCC)

Cllr Tony Favell (PDNPA)

Mike Rose (Project Officer)

Cllr Chris Furness (Bradwell PC)

John Eaton (Friends of New Mills Stations)                      

Carol Evans (New Mills Vol. Centre)

Alan Jackson

Mark Barker (Northern)

John Brook (FoCS)

Beth Atkins (FoNMS)

Keith Walker (FoCS)

John Kenny ( Stockport MBC)

Cllr John Pritchard (HP parishes)

Linda Watson (Disley Parish Council)                               

Aidan Richardson (PDNPA)

Mike Hayward (Transpeak Walks)

Veronica Williams (Hadfield and Padfield Heritage Group)

Annette Hetherington (Hadfield and Padfield Heritage Group)

Gill Westall (Chinley & Buxworth Transport Group)

Richard Drabble (Chinley and Buxworth Parish Council)

John Benson (Chinley and Buxworth Transport Group)

Penny Greenwood (F of Glossop Stn)

 

 

 

 

21/11  Apologies

Apologies were received from: Neil Williams, Ray Wightman, Becky Pennyfather (DCC), Kevin Williams (DCC), Mike Crompton, Emily Davies (PDNPA), Neil Barthorpe (Network Rail), Kath Aspinwall, Stephen Briscoe, Margaret Meynell, Anthony Meynell, Martin Smith, Robin Wignall, Mark James (HPBC), Gerry Bates, John Barrett and Steve Magner.

 

22/11  Election of Chair

Cllr Jean Wharmby (DCC) was elected to chair the Partnership for the ensuing year.

 

23/11  Election of Vice Chair

Cllr Tony Favell was elected as vice chair of the Partnership for the ensuing year.

 

24/11  Election of Line, Parish and Voluntary sector representatives to serve on the Management Group

Nominations for all these positions had been sought from all members of the Partnership. The following nominations were received.  As there has only been one nomination for each position it was agreed that the following people should be appointed to the Management Group;

Line representatives:

Buxton Line – Keith Walker (Friends of Chapel station)

Glossop Line – Neil Williams (Friends of Glossop station)

Hope Valley Line - Stephen Briscoe (Hope Valley Rail Users Group)

Parish representatives:

Cheshire parishes – Cllr Linda Watson (Disley Parish Council)

High Peak parishes – Cllr John Pritchard (Whaley Bridge TC)

Hope Valley parishes – Cllr Chris Furness (Bradwell PC)

Voluntary Sector representative:

Carol Evans (New Mills Vol. Centre)

 

 

 

25/11 Public Participation

Although a member of the public, Dr Sutton, had submitted a written statement and questions, they did not attend in person.  In the absence of Dr Sutton, the questions were answered under item 30/11.  The motion he submitted was not put to the meeting.

 

26/11  Declarations of interest

Declarations of interest were received from:

·         Mark Barker (Northern): Contribution to Easy Access area at Grindleford  £2000

·         Mike Hayward – Transpeak Walks- funding for Transpeak Walks.

 

27/11  Minutes of Partnership Meeting on 15th March 2011

The minutes of the Partnership meeting held on 15th March 2011 were approved as a correct record.

 

28/11  Matters arising not otherwise on the agenda

There were no matters arising

29/11  To receive the minutes of the Partnership Management Group Meeting on 15th March 2011

The minutes were received

30/11  Update on Hope Valley Line timetable issues

Mark Barker explained that the Partnership had been working closely with Northern to introduce an additional evening stopping train each way between Manchester and Sheffield from December 2011, which will provide an 1814 departure from Sheffield .

One of the consequences of this is that there will no longer be 1718 from Manchester through the Hope Valley, this will be replaced by 1645 and 1748 departures, both existing trains which will be extended to Sheffield.  One unintended consequence was that the 1714 from Sheffield would no longer call at Dore.  This has now been resolved and the 1714 will continue to call at Dore.  Another unintended consequence is that the 1720 fast from Manchester may no longer call at Chinley – this is to accommodate a freight, 6E04/6E66. The freight operator has historic rights to operate this freight service through the Hope Valley in the evening peak, and to retime it is not a simple process.  6E04/6E66 is already being slightly retimed to make the 1814 departure possible. 

Northern had identified a solution to provide a departure from Manchester to Chinley around the time of the 1720, but this had not yet been confirmed by Network Rail.  Mark was optimistic that this would be approved.  The new 1814 from Sheffield would not call at Bamford.  Mark hoped that this stop could be introduced once the service had settled down.

Transpennine had announced that they intended to remove the Chinley stop on the 1810 from Sheffield . This was a commercial decision by Transpennine.

On the subject of openness, raised by Dr Sutton, Mark explained that Northern had involved all stakeholders in the discussions, including the Partnership, the Hope Valley Rail User Group and the Chinley and Buxworth TG. Once the new timetable had been determined, Northern would write to all those who had written to them explaining then new timetable.

Mark referred to the question from Dr Sutton about the proposal to delay the freight 6E04/6E66 in order to allow the 1720 from Manchester to call at Chinley.  He stated that Network Rail had not discussed this as being a potential solution during the dialogue that had taken place between them and Northern's train planners. Either the freight operator had not taken this forward or the proposal had been found to be unworkable.

Resolved

That the report is noted.

 

31/11  Finance report

Table 1:  2010/11 Year end income and expenditure

 

 

Year end total

 

Year end total

Salary

34668

Cheshire East Council

2000

Travel/subsistence

754

Derbyshire CC

18217

Survey

5798

GMITE

3250

Printing, marketing, publicity, stationery

2590

Transfer of funds from previous year (i)

62401

Edale car park maintenance

476

PDNPA

4000

Small projects fund

12237

Northern (ii)

0

Mobile Phones

51

Edale car park

3451

Website

356

Other (iii)

2025

ACoRP

775

 

 

Grant – Friends of Buxton Station

250

 

 

Room Hire

121

 

 

Sub total

58076

 

 

Transferred to 2011/12

37268

 

 

Total

95344

 

95344

 

Table 2:  Period 2 May 2011/12 Income and Expenditure.

 

Expenditure

Income

 

Year est.

To date

 

Year est.

To date

Salary

17945

3573

Cheshire East Council

2000

0

Travel/subsistence

1000

-35

Derbyshire CC

14000

0

Survey

 

 

GMITE

3250

0

Printing, marketing, publicity, stationery

3000

588

Transfer of funds from previous year

37268

37268

Edale car park maintenance

500

0

PDNPA

4000

0

Small projects fund

6000

0

Northern

6750

6750

Mobile Phones

51

12

Edale car park

4000

0

Website

350

0

Other

0

0

ACoRP

750

0

 

 

 

Room Hire

120

0

 

 

 

Sub total

29716

4138

 

 

 

Transferred to 2012/13

41552

 

 

 

 

Total

71268

 

 

71268

44018

 

i)  This includes £20145 transferred from the previous Partnership.

ii)  Northern paid their £15000 contribution for 2010/11 in 2009/10 financial year and it is included in the transfer of funds from previous year’s total.

iii)  The “Other” income includes a contribution from the PDNPA community rail development fund

 

Resolved

That the financial position of the Partnership is noted.

 

32/11    Capital schemes.

Work is now under way on the various capital schemes for the 2010/11 financial year.  The schemes involved are as follows:

 

Table 1: Capital schemes 2010/11 (DCC capital only)

 

 

Location

Estimate

Railway projects

Whaley Bridge station refurbishment/platform raising

50000

 

Glossop station booking hall and waiting facilities

50000

 

Chinley station waiting facility

 15000

 

Buxton station refurbishment

85000

 

 

 

 

Pedestrian Access improvements to Chinley Station

     5000

Design costs

This includes design costs for the above schemes at 12½% of works costs.

25875

Total SEMMMS Rail

capital spend

230875

 

Whaley Bridge.

Work on the major refurbishment is essentially complete.  The “Harrington hump” was recently installed on the Manchester bound platform. There are some changes to the stop boards for the hump which should be completed in the near future.

Glossop.

At the time of writing, work was is progress on Glossop station.

Chinley

Work on the shelter is complete.  A review has been requested into the tendency for rainwater to collect in one area of the shelter.

Buxton

It is hoped that work will start shortly on the improvements to Buxton Station.

 

Other rail projects

In addition to the SEMMMS capital schemes is a small project dealing with cycle rack at Chinley. It is hoped this will be carried out in the near future.

 

2011-12 capital schemes report

 

The financial year 2011/12 marks the start of a new LTP period.  There will be no SEMMMS funding for rail schemes and in the current financial climate it is highly likely that local authorities will concentrate their capital expenditure on their core activities.  For county councils, as far as transport is concerned, this means a concentration on highway maintenance and improvement, rather than investment in railway infrastructure.  For PTE’s the situation is rather different as they have responsibilities for railways.

 

Derbyshire.

It was noted that the project officers had put forward the following projects for consideration.

 

Improving accessibility to stations and trains

  • Provision of DDA compliant footbridge at Chinley. Works contribution £100k.  (It was noted that the steps on the Chinley station bridge were degrading again).
  • Provision of DDA compliant footbridge (or equivalent) at Hope station.  Works contribution £100k

(Both the Chinley and Hope projects require a thorough investigation before any accurate costings can be established.  This could (should) be done in 2011/12 with a view to implementation in 2012/13 or 2013/14. It is suggested that the CRP may wish to contribute towards such investigations).

 

Resolved

That the situation with regard to Derbyshire’s capital schemes is noted.


33/11  Small Project Fund Report

 

Table 1.  SPF Approved contributions paid during 2010/11

 

Organisation

Project

SPF(£)

Approval date

Peak Park

Stanage Bus

2000

June 2009

GMPTE, DCC and Northern

Investigation into line speed and Frequency on the Buxton line

2000

 

Manchester folk train organisers

i) Publicity and marketing (£70 quarterly until March 31st 2011)

ii) Payment of band expenses in emergency £30 per band (very rare)

300

December 2008

Transpeak Walks

Leaders’ expenses (quarterly claim)

960

December 2009

Friends of Whaley Bridge station

Refurbishment of 1857 building (linked to 2010/11 capital scheme – see Agenda Item 8 above)

2000

March 2010

Chinley and Buxworth Transport Group

Provision of planters

1031

March 2010

Stockport MBC

Signing improvements Middlewood station

596

December 2009

Poynton TC

Cycle stands at Middlewood station (see Agenda Item 11 below)

500

June 2009

Cheshire East

Signs at Middlewood

500

 

Friends of New Mills Stations

Production of mural and provision of planters at New Mills Newtown

2000

December 2009

Edale PC

Interpretation Boards

350

 

Total Paid

 

12237

 

 

Table 2.  SPF Approved contributions outstanding or ongoing

 

Organisation

Project

SPF(£)

Approval date

Manchester folk train organisers

i) Publicity and marketing (£70 quarterly until March 31st 2011)

ii) Payment of band expenses in emergency £30 per band 

280

 

 

120

December 2008

TransPeak Walks

Leaders’ expenses (quarterly claim)

960

December 2010

Chinley and Buxworth Transport Group

Covered cycle rack at Chinley

2000

December 2010

Friends of Chapel Station

Running in Boards at Chapel Station

800

December 2010

Transport for Greater Manchester

Investigation into possible additional Sunday service from Manchester to Chinley from December 2012

2000

December 2010

GM&SYPTE DCC and Northern

Investigation into extra a.m. peak hour train Manchester-Sheffield

2000

March 11

GMPTE, DCC and Northern

Investigation into half-hourly service on Buxton line

2000

March 11

Stockport MBC

Signing improvements Strines station

Up to 2000

March 11

DCC

Contribution to Derbyshire train timetable booklet

Up to 2000

March 11

Friends of Glossop Station

Enhancements to the tannoy system

Up to 2000

March 11

Total Outstanding

 

16160

 

 

The Peak Park Authority have informed us that the Information Provision at Sheffield Station is unlikely to be progressed further, so it has been removed from the list.

 

New proposals

 

Two new proposals were put to the meeting as separate reports:

 

Organisation

Project

SPF(£)

Hadfield and Padfield Heritage Group (HPHG)

Information Board at Hadfield Station for Hadfield Heritage Trail

975

Northern

Contribution to Easy Access Area at Grindleford station

2000

Total new proposals

 

2975

 

Resolved

1.       That the provision of emergency funding of up to £120 for the Manchester folk train organisers, and £280 for publicity/marketing be approved for 2011/12 and that the appointed person to receive this funding be Margaret Meynell.

2.       That the provision of £960 for Transpeak walks be approved for 2011/12.

3.       That the proposals for an Information Board at Hadfield Station and for a contribution to an Easy Access area at Grindleford be approved.

 

34/11  Sheffield Folk Train

 

It was reported that the overcrowding was less serious on the last folk train.   The Project Officer had approached the Sheffield University Union, who had agreed to stop sending student groups on the folk train.  The main problems occur during the university term, and so are likely to recur in the autumn. 

Northern is looking to discuss proposals for the autumn with the folk train organiser.

 

Resolved

That the report be noted

 

35/11  Line Survey

The Project Officer reported that the line survey of the Hope Valley and Buxton lines was now complete.  The report was expected in the near future.

A survey of residents in the Hope Valley and Chinley was planned for the near future.  The forms would be printed and analysed by the Partnership, and distributed by the Rail User Group.  If Chinley were to participate, their forms would be distributed by the Chinley and Buxworth Transport Group.  Chinley was considering whether to participate in this survey or carry out their own on-line survey.

 

Resolved:

That the report be noted.

36/11 Concessionary fares

Following a consultation exercise, to which the Partnership responded, and which was discussed at the last Partnership meeting, the County has resolved to make savings by:

·         Withdrawal of funding for 42 local bus services, between April and October 2011.

·         Withdrawal of 73 school bus services which provide dedicated, subsidised transport for under-distance students, from the start of summer term April 2012, unless satisfactory alternatives can be introduced sooner.

·         Reduction in b-line travel concession for young people in full-time secondary education form 50% to 33% from 1 August 2011.

·         Withdrawal of the Gold Card half-fare local train travel concession fro disabled and older people form 1 August 2011.

 

37/11  LTP3

The Derbyshire Local Transport Plan (2011-26) had been finalised.  Of particular interest to the Partnership were:

·         Strengthening of the support for Community Rail

·         Support for the electrification of the Buxton line

 

38/11  Ongoing Issues

Help Points

Mark explained that Northern’s new Telecoms contractor had reviewed the help points in the Hope Valley .  They had found that the points had been wired into the lighting power supply, so they only received power when the lights were on. The batteries and chargers fitted to the help point were of the wrong type and did not work.  These were intended to keep the software live when no power was supplied.  The lights were on for only a short time in summer, so at this time of year the batteries would not have enough time with the power on to recharge the batteries.  Northern’s contractor is replacing the batteries and chargers and pricing the provision of either a photo-voltaic power source or a reliable mains supply.  They hoped to have reliable power supplies for the help points in the near future. 

There was also the problem of signal in Edale – the help points use Vodafone, but the Project Officer explained that only Orange have signal in Edale.  Mark promised to resolve this.

It was reported one of the Chapel Help Points were not working, and that it had also been wired to the lighting circuit.

 

Ticket Vending Machines

Penny Greenwood explained that the vending machine at Glossop frequently accepted only card payments and also frequently had no change.  It also had no means of selling some off-peak fares.  As a result many passengers who wished to pay were boarding trains without a ticket.  Mark Barker explained that NR employed a contractor to empty the vending machines, the ticket office staff were not allowed to do so. MB said he would investigate. 

Chris Furness said that many on-train ticket machines failed – particularly being unable to take card payments.  MB explained that the same on-train machines were used by all TOCs.  The card reader was a known weakness, and a new card reader was being trialled

 

39/11  Update on National Issues

1                     Northern Hub

The Government has approved the Ordsall curve in Manchester , which is an expensive and key component of the Northern Hub proposals.   There is no word at present on the other components of the report, particularly the redoubling at Dore.

 

2                     McNulty Report

The report, Realising the Potential of GB Rail, (published 19 May), is a review of Rail industry costs, and potential cost savings. 

A detailed benchmarking exercise was carried out comparing UK rail with France , Netherlands , Sweden and Switzerland . This showed that UK railway costs are 40% higher than those comparators.  The report observes that the legal and contractual framework is complex and adds to the industry costs. It also observes that the fare structure complex is complex, while not being efficient in managing peak demand.

 

The report rules out rail closures but highlights the levels of support going into regional franchises which are higher than for other parts of the railway.  The report recommends:

 

·         The formation of a Rail Delivery Group to lead a programme of change.  

·         Decentralisation and devolution within Network Rail.

·         Simplification of Rail Regulation with the Office of Rail Regulation as a single regulator.

·         Increased standardisation and more efficient procurement of rolling stock.

·         Less prescriptive franchises allowing TOCs more freedom.

·         Piloting more differentiated approaches for both infrastructure and operations which can maintain safety, but which can reduce the costs of less intensively used networks.

·         Benchmarking routes with different characteristics to develop these principles

·         A trade-off between flexibility in use of rolling stock and the ability to provide bespoke low-cost solutions that involve a different approach.

·         A greater degree of local decision making by PTEs and local authorities more closely aligned with budget responsibility and accountability.

·         No overall increase in fares

 

For the Partnership, the good news is that the report does not advocate closures or overall fare increases.  The increased role for PTEs and local authorities must be welcomed, along with the increased freedom for TOCs.  It is to be hoped that the changes in rolling stock procurement do not delay the replacement of the Pacer units on the Hope Valley line.

It is likely that the trail of the different approach to infrastructure and operations, which will mean closer integration, will take place on more lightly used lines, and not on any of the lines in the Partnership area.

It is unclear how the fare structure could be simplified, while managing peak demand more efficiently.

Resolved

That the report is noted.

 

40/11  Buxton-Matlock re-opening debate

Martin Smith had represented the Partnership at an Inquiry into the future of the Buxton- Matlock rail line. The line is closed, and part of it has recently been converted to use as a cycle trail, while being reserved for possible future rail use.

 

41/11  Dates and times of the next meetings

·                     September 2011: Evening meeting.  Manchester . Possible venue is GMPTE offices.

·                     December 2011 Buxton, possibly at the Pavilion Gardens .

 

Resolved

The proposed venues were agreed.

 

 

 


Minutes of the High Peak and Hope Valley Community Rail Partnership Management Group meeting held on 16th June 2011, at Chinley

 

Present:

 

Cllr Jean Wharmby (DCC), (Chair)                                

Cllr Tony Favell (PDNPA), (Vice chair)

Mike Rose (Project Officer)           

Cllr Chris Furness (HV parishes)

Gill Westall (Chinley & Buxworth Transport Group)

Cllr John Pritchard (HP parishes)

Cllr Watson ( Cheshire parishes)

Mark Barker (Northern)

Penny Greenwood (F of Glossop Stn)

Aidan Richardson (PDNPA)

 

 

 

5/11    Apologies

Steve Briscoe (HVRUG), Neil Barthorpe (Network Rail), Paul Griffiths (Cheshire East), Becky Pennyfather (DCC), Carol Evans (Voluntary sector rep)

 

6/11    Approval of Minutes of Partnership Meeting on 15th March 2011

The minutes of the Partnership Management Group Meeting held on 15th March 2011 were approved as a correct record,

 

7/11    Staffing and volunteering issues.

The Project Officer reported that The Partnership has drawn up a Volunteer agreement, which has been signed by Martin Smith and the Project Officer.  A volunteer expenses claim procedure has been agreed.  The Project Officer is working on a Volunteering Policy, which he hopes to present to the next meeting.  All of these documents can be applied to any volunteer.

 

8/11    Dates and times of the next meetings

·                     September 2011: Evening meeting.  Manchester . Possible venues are Northern’s offices, Network Rail’s offices and GMPTE offices.

·                     December 2011 Buxton, possibly at the Pavilion Gardens .

Resolved

The proposed venues were agreed.

 

 

 

Minutes for June 2011

Minutes for June 2010

Minutes for September 2010

Minutes for December 2010


Minutes of the Annual General Meeting of the High Peak and Hope Valley Community Rail Partnership, 29th June 2010.  Held at the Octagon Lounge, Pavilion Gardens , Buxton.

 

Present.

Cllr Jean Wharmby (DCC)

Martin Smith (project officer)

Mike Rose (project officer)

Margaret Meynell ( Manchester folk trains)

Beth Atkins (FoNMS)

Robert Morton ( Stockport MBC)

Neil Williams (FoGS)

Mark James (HPBC)

Adrian Barkley (Northern)

Robin Wignall (FoWBS)

Cllr John Pritchard (Whaley Bridge TC)

John Eaton (FoNMS)

Tim Nicholson (PDNPA)

Malcolm Adams (Poynton TC)

Roy Mitchell (SYPTE)

John Barrett (FoBS)

Rose Neville (FoBS)

Keith Walker (FoCS)

Mark Barker (Northern Rail)

Cllr Charles Gorst (Poynton TC)

Cllr Chris Furness (Bradwell PC)

Mike Crompton (Hayfield PC)

Tony Wills (M’cr folk trains)

Cllr Tony Favell (PDNPA)

Alan Jackson

Steve Magner (GMPTE)

 

 

Apologies.

Apologies were received from; Gill Westall (CBBPC), Cllr Jackie Pattison (Disley PC), John Brook (FoCS), Kevin Williams (DCC), Mike Hayward (Transpeak Walks), Neil Barthorpe (Network Rail), Paul Griffiths (Cheshire East), Peter Fox (HVRUG), Rebecca Pennyfather (DCC).

 

15/10  Election of Chair

Cllr Jean Wharmby (DCC) was elected to chair the Partnership for the ensuing year.

 

16/10  Election of Vice Chair

Cllr Tony Favell was elected as vice chair of the Partnership for the ensuing year.

 

17/10  Election of Line, Parish and Voluntary sector representatives to serve on the Management Group

Nominations for all these positions had been sought from all members of the Partnership. The following nominations were received.  As there has only been one nomination for each position it was agreed that the following people should be appointed to the Management Group;

Line representatives:

Buxton Line – Keith Walker (Friends of Chapel station)

Glossop Line – Neil Williams (Friends of Glossop station)

Parish representatives:

Cheshire parishes – Cllr Jackie Pattison (Disley PC)

High Peak parishes – Cllr John Pritchard (Whaley Bridge TC)

Hope Valley parishes – Cllr Chris Furness (Bradwell PC)

Voluntary Sector representative:

Mike Crompton – (DRCC etc)

Hope Valley Line Representative.

Two nominations had been received for the position of Hope Valley Line representative, and the Project Officers asked Partnership members to determine which person should be appointed to the Management Group.  After some discussion and a tied vote it was decided that both should be appointed on the basis that on e could substitute for the other in case of absence.  The following two people were appointed;

John Eaton (Friends of New Mills stations),

Stephen Briscoe (Hope Valley Rail Users Group)

 

18/10  Public Participation.

Alan Jackson, formerly the GVRUG representative on the Partnership, spoke about the forthcoming December timetable changes on the Sheffield-Manchester line and the effect the introduction of the 1814 ex Sheffield would have on the service pattern between New Mills Central and Manchester .  He strongly supported the desire to have the 1814 from Sheffield , but felt that the ensuing 47 minute gap created in the NMC-Manchester frequency was detrimental.

He suggested that one of the trains that currently terminates at Marple could be extended to terminate at New Mills in order to plug the gap.  In responding, Mark Barker (Northern) said that the adjustments to the timetable to give the 1814 ex Sheffield had been carefully thought out to minimise any impact on the Goyt Valley service patterns and had been agreed with GMPTE.  He stated that the timetable would now be difficult to change until December 2011 and that the best way forward would be to engage with GMPTE’s ongoing consultations about the December 2011 timetable.  Tony Favell (PDNPA) formally thanked Mark Barker for helping to secure a much needed improvement to the evening peak service from Sheffield .

 

19/10  Declarations of interest.

The following declarations of interest had been received:

·         GM&SYPTE, DCC and Northern: Investigation into extra a.m. peak hour train Manchester-Sheffield  £2000

·         GMPTE, DCC and Northern: Investigation into half-hourly service on Buxton line  £2000

  • PDNPA reps, re contribution to Stanage bus  Up to £2000
  • Stockport MBC:  Signing improvements Strines station  Up to £2000
  • DCC:  Contribution to Derbyshire train timetable booklet  Up to £2000
  • Friends of Glossop Station:  Enhancements to the tannoy system  Up to £2000
  • Margaret Meynell ( Manchester folk trains): Emergency funding for Manchester folk trains  Up to £120
  • Cllr Charles Gorst and Malcolm Adams (Poynton TC): Middlewood station expenditure

 

20/10  Minutes of the Partnership meeting held on 16th March 2010

The minutes of the Partnership meeting held on 16th March 2010 were approved.

 

21/10  Matters arising not otherwise on the agenda.  (Numbers in brackets relate to the 16th March minutes)

Beth Atkins (FoNMS) asked if the pages of the minutes could be numbered in future.  This was agreed.

(04/10)  2009/10 capital programme.  To note that the estimate for the Grindleford and Hathersage CCTV is now £31000, not £30000. and that the Edale footpath scheme is virtually complete at a lower cost than anticipated.

(06/10)  Northern Hub Study Report.  Cllr Furness queried whether the reference to loops on the HVL at Chinley and Grindleford was still correct as a recent version of the Midland railway Society’s newsletter referred to loops at Hope and Grindleford, with no mention of Chinley.  Neither of the project officers had heard that there was any change in the Northern Hub proposals since March, but there had been a recent reference to improvements of “the line into Sheffield ”.  It was felt that this was the London Sheffield main line, not the HVL or a refeence to Dore junctions.  Roy Mitchell (SYPTE) confirmed that the reference was to the main Sheffield London line and related to the re-signalling proposals, not the Dore junctions.

(11/10)  Reports from folk train organisers. It was reported that the problems outlined at the 16th March meeting on the Sheffield folk trains, were still persisting.

 

22/10  Finance report

The Project Officers presented the Finance report. Partners noted that, at present, we have yet to receive funding from one of the five core funders and the carryover from last financial year has yet to be credited to our budget.  Also it was noted that in 2009/10 we had received two payments of £15000 from Northern in the course of the financial year, because of different financial year-end arrangements.  In 2010/11 therefore, Northern’s contribution was showing as zero.

The Project Officers drew attention to the amount outstanding in grants from the Small projects Fund (SPF) and expressed the hope that those who had been granted funds would soon complete their schemes and bill the Partnership. 

It was also pointed out that, unless the Partnership adopted a much higher spending profile than hitherto, there would be a considerable amount remaining in budget at the end of the financial year and this could conceivably mean that the Partnership could continue, at least until the start of the new franchise period (September 2013).  Partners considered that this was well worth examining further.

 

Table 1:  2009/10 Year end income and expenditure

 

 

Year end total

 

Year end total

Salary

17061

Cheshire East Council

2000

National insurance

875

Derbyshire CC (ii)

12599

Pension

3063

GMITE

3250

Travel/subsistence

257

Northern 09/10 & 10/11

30000

Training

0

PDNPA

4000

Equipment purchase

0

Trans Peak walks

0

Miscellaneous expenditure

7657

Edale car park

5054

a)  Printing, marketing, publicity, stationery

3745

Transfer of funds from previous year

40424

b) Edale car park maintenance

596

 

 

c) Small projects fund

1485

 

 

d) Other

       1831

 

 

Sub total

28913

 

 

Small Projects fund committed (unspent)

15800

 

 

Unallocated

52614

 

 

Total

97327

 

97327

 

Table 2:  Period 2 (May 2010) Income and Expenditure.

 

Expenditure

Income

 

Year est.

To date

 

Year est.

To date

Salary

27813

2318

Cheshire East Council

2000

0

National insurance

1805

150

Derbyshire CC (ii)

20766

1730

Pension

4992

416

GMITE

3250

3250

Travel/subsistence

695

58

Northern 10/11 (v)

0

0

Training

500

0

PDNPA

4000

4000

Equipment purchase

1524

127

Trans Peak walks

0

0

General office expenditure (iv)

3121

0

Edale car park (i)

5000

751

Projects & activities

2250

0

(iii) Transfer of funds from previous year

68414

0

Printing, marketing, publicity, stationery

5610

0

Other income (vi)

0

951

Edale car park maintenance

1000

560

 

 

 

SPF grants

27800

750

 

 

 

Sub total

74610

4379

 

 

 

Small Projects fund committed (unspent)

0

27050

 

 

 

Unallocated

28320

 

 

 

 

Total

103430

31429

 

103430

10682

 

i)  The income from Edale station car park is shown as 5000 which is about the same as in 2009/10. 

ii)  Derbyshire County Council’s contribution is in the form of capital salaries for the delivery of the SEMMMS railway schemes.  The figure in the “to date” column increases monthly.

iii)  This includes £20145 transferred from the previous Partnership.

iv)  Includes subscriptions e.g. ACoRP, Partner member expenses and room hire

v)  Northern paid their £15000 contribution for 2010/11 in 2009/10 financial year and it is included in the transfer of funds from previous year’s total.

vi)  The “Other” income is a contribution from the PDNPA community rail development fund

Resolved

That the financial position of the Partnership is noted.

 

23/10  2010-11 capital schemes report

It was reported that Derbyshire’s Capital Programme for 2010/11 is still not finally approved.  The problem initially was that Derbyshire County Council has had to find around £6 million to deal with the effects of the severe winter weather on its road network.  This involved reviewing all the schemes in the 2010-11 programme with the result that the amount available for rail schemes was cut back.   The programme has been further delayed because of recent cuts in DfT grant amounting to around 25%.  A revised programme has yet to be drawn up.

Partners discussed the effects of possible expenditure reduction scenarios on the various rail schemes originally put forward for delivery this financial year with a view to prioritising schemes in order of importance and ease of speedy delivery.  The results are as follows:

Whaley Bridge station refurbishment/platform raising

Partners put this scheme highest in their priority order.  The original estimated contribution from DCC was £50000.  This was reduced in the first round of cut backs to £25000, but it was pointed out that the original £50000 was the estimated price for the installation of a “Harrington” hump, (a raised platform on the Manchester bound side of the station) which, when added to Network Rail’s £1 million+ expenditure on the station, would create a fully accessible station.  The Partnership considered that, if at all possible, the original £50000 should be reinstated as to fail to make the station fully accessible at this stage would be a real lost opportunity.  The £25000 in the current estimates is not sufficient to enable the “Harrington” hump to be constructed. 

It was reported that Network Rail’s contractors will be on site in early July so there is no doubt that their element of the scheme will go ahead.  It was also pointed out that an earlier scheme (joint with DCC and HPBC and for which HPBC are the budget holders) for the improvement of the station car park is being held in abeyance until the more extensive station works are complete. 

Glossop station booking hall and waiting facilities.

Partners put this scheme second in their priorities.  The original estimated contribution was £50000 and this was reduced in the first round of cutbacks to £25000.  The DCC contribution was to be matched by funding from Northern Rail and the whole scheme would involve moving the ticket office and waiting facilities to a more commodious location and generally improving the ambience of the station, which is the 3rd busiest in the county with over 700000 passengers per year.  A further reduction in the amount DCC contributes will mean that Northern have to reconsider whether their contribution can achieve the desired effects or whether the scheme as a whole would fall. 


Buxton station refurbishment

The original estimated contribution from DCC was £250000.  This has been reduced in the first round of cutbacks to £125000.  This was to be more than matched by expenditure by Network Rail from its maintenance budget and from the National Stations Improvement Programme (NSIP).  Northern Rail confirmed that Network Rail’s maintenance expenditure was still going ahead and that some, if not all the NSIP funding was safe.  The scheme does not involve the development of DB Schenker’s land at the back of the station.  If Derbyshire can contribute to the refurbishment of the station then the retention of the NSIP funding is far more likely and a more comprehensive refurbishment can be achieved, involving the booking hall, waiting facilities and bringing back into use some of the semi redundant buildings, most of which are listed.  An early decision on funding is required in order to finalise designs, although preliminary investigation is in progress.                 


Chinley station waiting facility

The original estimated contribution was £15000 and this sum was retained after the first round of cuts on the grounds that the existing shelter is of poor standard and ideally needs replacement.  It is one of a number of issues at Chinley, but is the only “easy win”.  In discussion it became clear that a simpler, cheaper scheme could be devised, whereby the existing shelter is refurbished and the entrance arrangements altered to prevent what was described as “a howling gale” sweeping through.  It was also felt that this reduced scheme could incorporate new information panels, which the Partnership could fund (up to £2000) and could still easily be delivered within the 2010/11 financial year.  Partners felt that a reduced scheme at Chinley should go ahead if at all possible with any surplus from this scheme being redirected towards achieving the Whaley Bridge , Glossop and Buxton projects.


Cycle parking

The original estimated contribution from DCC was £10000 and this did not alter in the first round of cutbacks.  The only site positively identified at this stage is Chinley (a site in the existing car park), but this would not cost anything like £10000 to implement.  It was suggested that cycle racks should be installed at Chinley with any surplus from this scheme being redirected towards achieving the Whaley Bridge , Glossop and Buxton projects

 

Resolved

1.                  That the situation with regard to Derbyshire’s 2010-11 capital schemes is noted.

2.                  That Derbyshire be urged to retain the funding for the various SEMMMS rail schemes with available funds being directed first of all to the Whaley Bridge project, then to the Glossop and Buxton projects.

3.                  That a more modest scheme for improving the waiting facilities at Chinley be further investigated, with the Partnership funding up to £2000 towards improved information provision at the shelter.

4.                  That cycle racks be installed at Chinley station and DCC be urged to direct any surplus from the Chinley shelter and cycle rack projects to the Whaley Bridge , Glossop and Buxton schemes

 

24/10  Small Projects Grant report and proposals

Partners received a report on the Small Projects Fund. Table 1 below shows those approved contributions which are still outstanding.

 

Table 1.  SPF Approved contributions still outstanding

 

Organisation

Project

SPF(£)

Approval date

Friends of Whaley Bridge station

Refurbishment of 1857 building (linked to 2010/11 capital scheme)

Up to 2000

March 2010

Friends of Chinley station

Provision of planters

1180

March 2010

PDNPA

Contribution to Stanage bus

Up to 2000

June 2009

Poynton TC

Cycle stands at Middlewood station

880

June 2009

Manchester folk train organisers

i) Publicity and marketing (£70 quarterly until March 31st 2011)

ii) Payment of band expenses in emergency £60 per band (very rare)

280

120

December 2008

TransPeak Walks

Leaders’ expenses (quarterly claim)

960

December 2009

Stockport MBC

Signing improvements Middlewood station

Up to 2000

December 2009

PDNPA

Information provision Sheffield station

Up to 2000

December 2009

Friends of New Mills Stations

Production of mural and provision of planters at New Mills Newtown

Up to 2000

December 2009

Total Outstanding

 

15420

 

 

Partners noted that one of these schemes is inextricably tied into the 2010/11 capital programme and another (Middlewood) is awaiting Northern/Network Rail approval to begin.  Two more projects are ongoing costs for organising the Manchester folk trains or guided walks, so there is no doubt these sums will be spent. Partners noted that the Manchester folk trains are now being organised by Margaret Meynell and so any emergency payment of band expenses will fall to her rather than, as hitherto, to Tony Wills.  The Project Officers agreed to urge other recipients of SPF grants to progress their projects as quickly as possible.

 

Partners then considered a number of new proposals for SPF funding, most of which have yet to be translated into formal requests. 

 

Table 2.  New SPF proposals

 

Organisation

Project

SPF(£)

GM&SYPTE DCC and Northern

Investigation into extra a.m. peak hour train Manchester-Sheffield

2000

GMPTE, DCC and Northern

Investigation into half-hourly service on Buxton line

2000

PDNPA

Contribution to Stanage bus

Up to 2000

Stockport MBC

Signing improvements Strines station

Up to 2000

DCC

Contribution to Derbyshire train timetable booklet

Up to 2000

Friends of Glossop Station

Enhancements to the tannoy system

Up to 2000

Total new proposals

 

12000

 

The various proposals were considered.

Investigation into an extra a.m. peak hour train from Manchester to Sheffield and return. (see also minute number 27/10).  It was pointed out that neither GMPTE nor Derbyshire had any funding for such a study.  Roy Mitchell (SYPTE) confirmed that they too had no funds for such work.  Mark Barker (Northern) pointed out that even without a study it was possible to say that the proposed service enhancement would require additional rolling stock and crew, which, given the peak hour nature of the proposed service, would be extremely expensive.  He doubted that the rolling stock would be available in the short term and advised that the best course of action was to seek to make enhancements of the HVL local service at the time of refranchising in 2013.  Partners agreed with this course of action but suggested that the HVRUG should continue their investigations with a view to putting forward a comprehensive proposal for the 2013 refranchising consultations.


Investigation into half-hourly service on Buxton line.
This proposal was suggested shortly after the previous meeting of the Partnership.  It is for a study into providing a half hour frequency service in the off-peak between Manchester and Buxton.  (The peak hour services are already half hourly).  The Chair and Vice Chair were consulted and agreed a contribution up to £2000.  Cllr Wharmby expressed the view that she hoped members would agree with their action as the study directly addresses a long standing aspiration of this Partnership.  Derbyshire County Council has already let the contract for the Buxton line study and the report is due in early July. 


Contribution to Stanage bus
The PDNPA’s possible application for further funding for the Stanage bus was queried as the connections between train and bus are not particularly good and when the funding was agreed last year we requested information about rail/bus usage, which has not yet been received.  It was reported that patronage information would be made available shortly, at which stage the Project Officers would examine the details and suggest a course of action to be approved by the Chair.


Contribution to Derbyshire train timetable booklet. 
The suggested contribution was on the basis that DCC’s timetable booklet would include information about the rail partnerships and the heritage lines in the county.  Derbyshire has managed to get funding from the train operators for the current issue, and therefore does not require SPF support at this stage, but they may do so for the next edition later in the year.  Partners were asked to approve this funding should it be required.


Provision of a tannoy system at Glossop station.
 The proposal by Friend of Glossop station is for a simple tannoy system to allow the booking office staff to make announcements to passengers on the platform in the event of any delays or cancellations.  A cheap system has been identified through the good offices of GMPTE and this will cost less than the £2000 mentioned in the report.


Resolved

1.      That the number of outstanding SPF schemes is noted with some disquiet and that the various organisations are urged to progress their projects as quickly as possible.

2.      That the provision of emergency funding for the Manchester folk train organisers be approved up to £120 this financial year and that the appointed person to receive this funding be Margaret Meynell .

3.       That in the light of there being no contributions forthcoming from GMPTE, SYPTE or Derbyshire (for an investigation into an extra a.m. peak hour train from Manchester to Sheffield and return), and in the light of the perceived problems of rolling stock, crew and funding for any such service enhancement, the Partnership should not proceed with a study on its own at this stage, but should seek to make enhancements of the HVL local service an issue at the time of re-franchising in 2013. In the meantime, it is hoped that the HVRUG will continue their investigations with a view to putting forward a comprehensive proposal for the 2013 re-franchising consultations.

4.      That the Partnership approves the action of the Chair and Vice Chair in agreeing to a contribution of up to £2000 towards an investigation into a half-hourly service on Buxton line.

5.      That a further contribution to the Stanage bus be approved, subject to examination of patronage information and consultation with the Chair of the Partnership.

6.      That a contribution of up to £2000 to Derbyshire train timetable booklet be approved, if required.

7.      That the contribution towards the provision of a tannoy system at Glossop station be approved.  

 

25/10  LTP3

The Partnership considered an item on the production of LTP3.  It was clarified that the five national goals for transport were those of the previous government, but, so far as was known, they had not changed.  The Partnership was asked to endorse the comments already sent to Derbyshire County Council and to agree to the sending of similar comments to the other transport authorities in the Partnership’s area.

Resolved

That the Partnership;

1.      Notes and approves the comments made to the Derbyshire LTP3 consultation

2.      Agrees to send similar comments to the other transport authorities whose LTP’s impinge on the Partnership’s area.

 

26/10  Middlewood station issues

The Partnership considered an item on the train service at Middlewood station in response to a request from Poynton Town Council.  It was pointed out, that despite there being no road access to the station, the footpath links to Higher Poynton were good and had recently been improved, though there was a question of lighting the route.  It was noted that the patronage at Middlewood had increased substantially, though from a very low base.    The Project Officers pointed out that GMPTE and Northern were not in favour of stopping additional trains at Middlewood and if the half-hourly frequency came about it was quite likely that some “skip-stop” arrangement would be needed in order to facilitate the overall improvement.   It was suggested that the running timings of the trains that didn’t call at Dove Holes or Middlewood were the same as those that did call, the only difference being a later departure from Buxton.  Mark Barker (Northern) said that the company considered Poynton station to be the one which better served the community.  However, he felt that there was evidence of recreational use of the station and this could be better promoted, especially at weekends, the Sunday service being hourly in any case.  In response to a question Mark Barker said that introducing Middlewood as a request stop would require the trains to be timed as if they were going to stop, so there was no running time advantage, however, he did agree to examine the possibility of stopping an extra train in the evening peak to break up the 2 hour gap between the 1718 and the 1918.  A lot would depend on the loading of this train as many trains on the Buxton line in the evening peak were already full and standing at least as far out as Hazel Grove.  It was agreed that there was very little information about the users of Middlewood station, i.e. where they come from and what their journey purposes are.  Partners were asked to agree to help Poynton town council and Stockport MBC to mount a survey of users.

 

Resolved

That the Partnership offers technical and financial assistance to Poynton town council and Stockport MBC to undertake a survey of Middlewood station users.

 

27/10  December 2011 timetable submissions for the Hope Valley line

In part, this matter had already been discussed under Agenda Item 10 (Minute 24/10(3) refers).  The Partnership is wholly supportive of improvements to the HVL weekday service frequency.  However, as neither the PTE’s nor Derbyshire have any funding for a feasibility study or for any such service, and as the proposed service enhancement would require additional rolling stock and crew, (which, given the peak hour nature of the proposed service, would be extremely expensive), it was considered that the best course of action was to seek to enhance the HVL local service at the time of re-franchising in 2013.  Partners agreed with this course of action but suggested that the HVRUG should continue their investigations with a view to putting forward a comprehensive proposal for the 2013 re-franchising consultations.

 

It was suggested that the Summer Sunday hourly frequency on the Hope Valley line should be made an all year round facility and that this could be considered for the December 2011 timetable change, failing which, like the weekday suggestions, it should form part of the renegotiated franchise agreement.  The Partnership was supportive of this and also supportive of the possibility of stopping some of the TPE or EMT Sunday trains at Chinley.  This would give a Stockport – Peak District facility, by change onto/from the local service at Chinley. 

 

Resolved.

  1. That in the light of there being no contributions forthcoming from GMPTE, SYPTE or Derbyshire (for an investigation into an extra a.m. peak hour train from Manchester to Sheffield and return), and in the light of the perceived problems of rolling stock, crew and funding for any such service enhancement, the Partnership should not proceed with a study on its own at this stage, but should seek enhancements of the HVL local service at the time of re-franchising in 2013. In the meantime, it is hoped that the HVRUG will continue their investigations with a view to putting forward a comprehensive proposal for the 2013 re-franchising consultations.
  2. To request making the Summer Sunday hourly frequency on the Hope Valley line an all year round facility as from the December 2011 timetable change, failing which, like the weekday suggestions, it should form part of the renegotiated franchise agreement. 
  3. To request the stopping some of the TPE or EMT Sunday trains at Chinley with effect from the December 2011 timetable change, to give a Stockport – Peak District facility, by change onto/from the local service at Chinley. 

 

28/10  December 2011 timetable submissions for the Buxton line

This matter had already been discussed under Agenda Item 10 (Minute 24/10(4) refers).  The Partnership is wholly supportive of improvements to the Buxton line weekday service frequency. 

The Project Officers reported that the study commissioned by Derbyshire was due to report on 5th July and that hopefully this would demonstrate that the service could be increased to half-hourly without any requirement for additional rolling stock or crews, and thus be achievable at minimum extra cost.

 

Resolved.

That the Partnership supports moves to increase the service frequency on the Buxton line to half-hourly.

 

29/10  Partnership publicity and website        

 

Since the last Partnership meeting, the Partnership website has been rebuilt.  The information is now up to date and it has much more comprehensive news, links to other organisations and some information on or achievements and plans.   Cllr Furness, who had raised the subject at the previous meeting, described it as perfect.  The website URL is http://www.hvhptp.org.uk/.

 

The Partnership has poster cases at many stations in the partnership area.  The one at Manchester Piccadilly and those on the Hope Valley line from Chinley to Grindleford have now been updated and it is hoped to update many further cases in the near future.  An A3 poster describing the Partnership and its activities has been put up at many stations.  Copies are available form the project officers.

 

The July to September folk trains and walks leaflet was available at the meeting.

 

The Partnership plans to produce Rail Ale guides to the Hope Valley and Buxton lines, and to work with Northern Rail to produce a Buxton line guide. These would be available for the summer of 2011.  These guides should encourage off-peak travel on the Buxton line, without increasing the peak load. Another possibility under consideration is a Partnership newsletter.

 

Resolved.

That the publicity and website proposals are supported.

 

30/10  Buxton Line 150th Celebrations

The 150th anniversary of the line from Whaley Bridge to Buxton, and also the Midland line in to Buxton, falls in May/June 2013.  The meeting felt that this anniversary should be celebrated.  After discussion, a date of 15th June was agreed as the preferred date, with the 8th June as second choice.  The proposed celebrations would include a special train from Rowsley to Buxton, and fairs at Buxton and Whaley Bridge stations.ward

A working group consisting of representatives of the friends of Buxton, Chapel and Whaley Bridge stations and Mike Rose was set up to progress this and would report to the next meeting.

Resolved

That the Partnership support the Buxton line 150th celebrations

 

31/10  Urgent Items

There is a meeting in Manchester at 1 pm on 23rd September between British Transport Police and station and line groups.  There is also a meeting with BTP in Preston on 24thJuly.    Please contact the project officers for further details.

 

The meeting expressed its appreciation to Tony Wills for his hard work in running the Manchester Folk trains over many years.

 

32/10  Dates and times of the next meetings

·                     Wednesday 15th September 2010: Bradbury House, Glossop 6 40pm

·                     Wednesday 8th December 2010: Chinley Community Centre 10 00am

·                     March 2011: SYPTE offices Sheffield (Unless finance is forthcoming, this may be the final meeting of the Partnership).


 

Minutes of the HP&HVCRP Management Group Meeting, 29th June 2010.  Held at the Octagon Lounge, Pavilion Gardens , Buxton.

 

Present.

Cllr Jean Wharmby (DCC)

Martin Smith (project officer)

Mike Rose (project officer)

Robin Wignall (FoWBS)

Cllr John Pritchard (HP Parishes)

Adrian Barkley (Northern)

Steven Briscoe (HVRUG)

Cllr Tony Favell (PDNPA)

John Eaton (FoNMS)

Tim Nicholson (PDNPA)

Cllr Chris Furness (HV Parishes)

Roy Mitchell (SYPTE)

Keith Walker (FoCS)

 

 

 

Apologies.

Apologies were received from; Cllr Jackie Pattison (Disley PC), John Brook (FoCS), Kevin Williams (DCC), Paul Griffiths (Cheshire East), Rebecca Pennyfather (DCC), Mark Barker (Northern)

 

06/10  Approval of minutes of Partnership Management Group held on 16th March 2010

The minutes of the Partnership Management Group meeting held on 16th March 2010 were approved.

 

07/10 Matters arising not otherwise on the agenda

There were no matters arising not otherwise on the agenda

08/10  Future of the Partnership

 

Introduction.

At the meeting of the Management Group on 16th March it was agreed that the Partnership should work on the basis that it will cease to exist as at March 31st 2011 and, unless circumstances change, should not enter into any commitments that would extend beyond that date unless one or other of the funding partners is prepared to guarantee the ongoing work. (Minute 03/10 refers).  It is however, worth noting that Northern’s franchise has been extended to September 2013, and they have said that they would be willing to continue their funding.

 

The members of the Management Group wanted the Partnership to continue after March 2011.  In the event that the local authorities and the Peak Park were unable to contribute, they felt it should be possible to use the reserves, the money from Edale car park, and the contribution from Northern to continue the Partnership for some time. The project officers agreed to report back to the next meeting on continuing the Partnership.

 

Apportioning any remaining funds

 

The easiest apportionment would be to simply use the percentage contribution from each core funder over the lifetime of the Partnership and apply this to any remaining funds.  The proportions are:

Cheshire County Council/Cheshire East Council               5.4%               

Derbyshire County Council                                              39.7%

Greater Manchester PTE/ITE                                          8.5%

Northern Rail                                                                 35.7%

Peak District National Park Authority                               10.7%

Total                                                                            100%

 

It is suggested that, subject to any changes arising out of this year’s contributions, these proportions are agreed in the event of any distribution of remaining funds.

 

Edale car park pay/display machine revenues and maintenance.

The Edale car park pay/display machine is the property of the Partnership.  The revenue from the machine comes to the Partnership and amounts to around £5000 each year.  The National Park Authority staff deal with routine maintenance like renewing ticket rolls, collecting the money etc and for this they charge a small fee which is deducted from the revenue prior to it being received by the Partnership.  There is an annual maintenance contract.

 

Production of the folk train and guided walk leaflets

The folk train and guided walk leaflets form the largest single item of publicity expenditure of the Partnership, amounting to around £3000 per year.  On top of this could be added the origination costs, which are largely absorbed in house by Derbyshire County , the distribution costs and the maintenance of the distribution lists, which are again absorbed in house by DCC.  It is most unlikely that the County Council would be willing to continue with the publication of the leaflet in the event of the Partnership ceasing to exist.  The last leaflet could be the January-March 2011 version, though it would be possible for the Partnership to fund the April-June 2011 version if funds permitted and the contract was placed before 31st March 2011.

 

Maintenance (or removal procedures) for the CRP’s website and events line.

The CRP’s website is independent of the County Council’s and in the event of the Partnership ceasing to exist it is assumed that the website would be formally closed down.  It is worth noting that the Sheffield folk trains and the guided walks programme have their own web-sites in any case so there would be no issue there.  The Manchester folk train organisers may wish to consider setting up something similar and for this there would be a possibility of funding from the SPF. 

 

The events line is provided by GMPTE and which gives details of the guided walks and folk trains would also cease, though it would be open to the folk train and guided walk organisers to make arrangements with GMPTE for a similar facility.

 

Resolved

That Project Officers report to the next meeting on continuing the Partnership after March 2011 using the using the reserves, the income from Edale car park, the contribution from Northern and other that funds that may be available.

 

That, in the event of the Partnership ceasing to exist on March 31st 2011, and that there is no successor group:

1)         Subject to any changes arising out of this year’s contributions, any remaining funds should be distributed in
            accordance with the following proportions;

·        Cheshire County Council/Cheshire East Council                5.4% 

·        Derbyshire County Council                                                  39.7%

·        Greater Manchester PTE/ITE                                                8.5%

·        Northern Rail                                                                         35.7%

·        Peak District National Park Authority                                10.7%

 

2)         The Edale station pay/display machine and its revenues/maintenance should pass to the franchisee, with the
            proviso that, if the Partnership were to be resurrected the revenues etc should revert to it.

 

3)         The last guided walk/folk train leaflet should be either the January-March 2011 version, or the April-June 2011
            version if funds permitted and the contract was placed before 31st March.

 

4)         Options for the continued publication of the guided walk/folk train leaflet post March 31st 2011 should be
            considered.

 

5)         The Partnership’s website should be formally closed down and GMPTE events line arrangements should
            cease with effect from 31st March 2011.

 

6)                 The guided walk and folk train organisers should be urged to make arrangements with GMPTE for
            use of the events line.

 

 

09/10  ACORP review of new Government proposals for transport.

 

The new Government has presented its budget and the first tranche of spending cuts. 

 

Full details have not been published, but press reports indicate that the Department for Transport is expected to cut back on the rolling stock procurement programme, the National Stations Improvement Programme (NSIP) and the electrification programme.  Regarding rolling stock, contracts have been let for the first two tranches of HLOS which were announced in March and therefore these will be happening. The first of these takes effect next month, and the second in May 2011 which may benefit peak travellers from Buxton and New Mills Central. However the rolling stock procurement review seems likely to affect the Thameslink programme.  Northern Rail is dependent on this for cascaded class 319s for the north-west electrification schemes.  There is no specific news on these as yet.

 

On stations, the £50m for the worst 10 category B stations, including Manchester Victoria , has been withdrawn.  Whilst this withdrawal of funding does not directly affect the Partnership’s, it is nevertheless very unfortunate, given the importance of Manchester Victoria and the clear need to improve this station.  It is not clear at this point what, if any, effect there will be on NSIP. Buxton was to be funded from tranche 1, so should be ok, but this cannot be taken as definitive.

 

Resolved

That the Management Group notes the points raised and agreed to lobby relevant MPs in order to alleviate the effects of the proposed cuts and stress the need for continued investment, particularly on the important Sheffield-Manchester route

 

10/10  Matters referred to the Management Group by the Partnership.

There were no Matters referred to the Management Group by the Partnership.

 

11/10  Urgent items

There were no Urgent items.

 

12/10  Dates and times of the next meetings

·                     Wednesday 15th September 2010: Bradbury House, Glossop 6 40pm

·                     Wednesday 8th December 2010: Chinley Community Centre 10 00am

·                     March 2011: SYPTE offices Sheffield (Unless finance is forthcoming, this may be the final meeting of the Partnership).

 

Minutes for June 2011

Minutes for June 2010

Minutes for September 2010

Minutes for December 2010


Minutes of the High Peak and Hope Valley Community Rail Partnership meeting held on the evening of  16th September 2010 at Glossop

Present:

Cllr Jean Wharmby (DCC)

Cllr Tony Favell (PDNPA)

Mike Rose (project officer)

Becky Pennyfather (DCC)

Keith Walker (FoCS)

John Brook (Chapel PC)

Penny Greenwood (F of Glossop Stn)

John Eaton (FoNMS)

Ray Wightman (Chinley Transport Group)

Gill Westall (Chinley & Buxworth Transport Group)

Carol Evans (New Mills Vol. Centre)

Tim Nicholson (PDNPA)

Adrian Barkley (Northern)

Mark Barker (Northern)

Mike Hayward (Transpeak Walks)

Neil Williams (F of Glossop Stn)

Charles Gorst (Poynton Town Council)

Cllr Harold Davenport (Cheshire East Council & Disley PC)

Cllr John Pritchard (HP parishes)

 

 

Cllr Mrs Jean Wharmby in the Chair

33/10  Apologies
Apologies were received from Martin Smith (project officer), Margaret Meynell, Peter Fox (CBT & HVRUA), Kevin Williams (DCC), Cllr Jackie Pattison (Cheshire parishes), David Marsden (HP&DDAP), Robert Pickford (HVRUA), Beth Atkins (FoNM), Mark James (HPBC), Alan Jackson, Robert Morton (Stockport MBC), Neil Barthorpe (Network Rail), Robin Wignall (FoWBS), Gerry Bates (Sheffield folk trains), Cllr Chris Furness (HV parishes)

34/10  Approval of Minutes of Partnership Annual General Meeting on 29th June 2010
The minutes of the Partnership Annual General Meeting held on 29th June 2010 were approved as a correct record.

35/10  Matters arising
There were no matters arising.

36/10  To consider the application of High Peak Access to Join the Partnership.
High Peak Access is a newly formed group - the amalgamation of the four High Peak Access Group i.e. Hope Valley Access; Glossop Access; Buxton Access and New Mills Access. 
Resolved
The application of High Peak Access to Join the Partnership was approved.

37/10  December 2010 Hope Valley Line timetable issues
Introduction.

Partners will be aware that for many years there has been pressure to improve the local service frequency on the Hope Valley line and that a major constraint has been the capacity of the Dore junctions, which are single line.  A particular issue has been the lack of a local train leaving Sheffield between 1714 and 1914, thus reducing the line’s attractiveness as a commuter route to Sheffield.  At the previous meeting of the Partnership we were informed that a scheme had been worked out that would allow an extra train to run from New Mills to Sheffield in order to provide an 1814 departure back to Manchester.  This scheme had the approval of the two PTE’s, Northern Rail and Network Rail.  However, since then, Network

Rail have apparently changed their mind about the practicality of the proposal on the grounds that the extra New Mills-Sheffield train would conflict with freight train paths and would require alterations to passenger train timings on the main line between Dore and Sheffield.  Accordingly, Northern Rail have written to the Partnership (and others) to advise that they cannot now introduce the extra service. 

Understandably, this development has raised a lot of issues and a considerable amount of annoyance, having had a cherished goal snatched away at the last minute.  There are two principal issues; the practicality of operating the proposed service given the freight train pathing requirements and the need for capital investment to reinstate the double track Dore junctions and curves.

Practicality of operating the proposed service
Northern state that they have examined various options to try and resolve the problem which seems to be entirely centred around the New Mills –Sheffield leg of the journey.  Northern have clarified that they have looked at the possibility of running the New Mills –Sheffield train express or skipping stops and this does not solve the problems.  However, the Hope Valley Rail Users Group has examined the passenger and freight working timetables and considers that a solution is possible on the basis that the problem freight trains either do not exist or run at times different from those in the official working timetable. 

It is suggested that the prospect of introducing the extra afternoon service should be re-examined in the light of the RUG’s report with a view to getting the additional train introduced in December as previously envisaged, or, if this is not now practical, introduced from next May.

Reinstatement of the double track Dore junctions and curves.
At the heart of this discussion is the question of the junctions at Dore.  The junction is a triangular arrangement with the Sheffield-London main line being the eastern part of the triangle. Originally the arrangements were standard double junctions which allowed trains to pass from/to the Hope Valley line without conflicting with one another.  In addition, there were four tracks from Dore and Totley station into Sheffield and the station itself had four platform faces, two each on the Hope Valley and Chesterfield lines.

In the 1970’s the junction arrangements were “rationalised”.  The main line is now the only double track section.  The other two sides are single track, signalled for reversible working.  The southern curve is quite sharp and partly in tunnel and its length is such that a long freight waiting for access onto the main line can stretch back onto the HVL, blocking it. The north curve contains Dore and Totley station which now has a single platform face and is unstaffed.  The junctions from the north and south curves onto the main line are of the “single lead” type. 

Almost at once it became apparent that the revised arrangements were a potential capacity constraint, and they have bedevilled any hope of improving the local service ever since.  The question of reinstating the double track north (and south?) curves has been considered from time to time but now appears to be muddled up with much greater capacity constraints towards Manchester.  A recent letter from the Secretary of State for Transport (Philip Hammond) exemplifies this.  It needs to be made clear to the DfT and the Network Rail, that Dore junction alteration is NOT dependent on delivery of the Manchester hub capacity enhancements, but is a scheme worthy of attention in its own right.  The capacity enhancement it creates affects trains east of New Mills, not west thereof, and in re-doubling the junctions the passage of both freight and passenger services onto the Sheffield-London main line would be greatly eased, giving the opportunity to enhance the local service to hourly frequency, which has been a long standing aspiration of this Partnership.

The local MPs, Nick Clegg, Andrew Bingham and Patrick McCloughlin have all expressed interest in taking up the issue of the 1814 train.

Kevin Williams of DCC has written to the freight operators asking them to release freight paths to allow the proposed trains to run. No response had been received at the time of the meeting.

Tony Favell has spoken to Lefarge, who are probably the client for the freight trains.  Lefarge are keen to help.
John Brook asked that the Chinley stop on the 1810 TPX from Sheffield be retained as the – it might have been dropped if the 1814 ran.

The chance of introducing the changes in Dec 10 has gone and May has probably gone. The next realistic opportunity for change is now December 2011.

Resolved
1)         That the Partnership ask Northern and Network Rail to re-examine the prospect of introducing the extra
            afternoon service in the light of the RUG’s report with a view to getting the additional train introduced as soon
            as possible.
2)         That the Partnership should ask Network Rail what their plans are for the Dore redoubling, and in which
            schemes does it sit.
3)         That the Chair of the Partnership should write to the Secretary of State for Transport pointing out the
            importance of progressing the Dore junctions scheme independently of any other capacity enhancements,
            especially those in Greater Manchester. 
4)        That the Chair of the Partnership should seek a meeting with the Secretary of State on the matter of the Dore
            junctions and should involve the two PTE’s (especially South Yorkshire) and Derbyshire County Council in
            such a meeting at member level.
5)         That the local MP’s concerned, (Nick Clegg, Andrew Bingham and Patrick McCloughlin) should be copied in
            on the correspondence and asked to use their influence to bring about the Dore junctions scheme. 

38/10  Finance report

The Project Officers presented the Finance report.  They reported that the current financial position was very healthy, especially as Northern Rail has paid their 2010/11 contribution already.  The Project officers pointed out the discrepancy between the committed expenditure on the Small Projects Fund and the amount actually spent.  This was the subject of the next agenda item.

Table 1 below sets out the financial situation of the Partnership as at the end of August 2010.  and the budget for 2010/11.  The changes in headings are as a result of changes in Derbyshire County Council’s financial reporting system.  If there are any material changes they will be reported to the meeting orally.  Partners will note that, at present, we have yet to receive funding from one of the five core funders but the carry-over from last financial year has been credited to our budget.
Partners will also note that the Project Officers have not included a sum for redundancy payments as agreed by the Management Group at the March 2010 meeting (Minute 03/10 refers).  If the Partnership continues beyond March 31st 2010 there may be a requirement for redundancy payments, but this will need to be calculated at the time.
Table 1:  2010/11 Income and Expenditure.

Expenditure

Income

 

To date

Year Est.

 

To date

Year est.

Salary

9271

29707

Cheshire East Council

0

2000

National insurance

598

1660

Derbyshire CC (ii)

6920

22014

Pension

1664

5323

GMITE

3250

3250

Travel/subsistence

159

448

Northern 10/11 (v)

0

3750

Equipment

0

162

PDNPA

4000

4000

Printing & stationery

559

2236

Edale car park (i)

751

3000

General office expenditure (iv) (vii)

4875

3121

(iii) Transfer of funds from previous year

62401

62401

Projects & activities

476

8221

Other income (vi)

951

0

Mobile telephones

27

108

DCC studies budget (vii)

0

4250

Postage (viii)

130

520

 

 

 

Computer software

254

1000

 

 

 

Grants (including SPF grant)

3420

27050

 

 

 

Sub total

21433

79556

 

 

 

Small Projects fund committed (unspent)

23630

0

 

 

 

Unallocated

33210

25109

 

 

 

Total

78273

104665

 

78273

104665

i)  The income from Edale station car park is shown as £3000 which is based on the quarterly receipts for the 1st quarter of this year. 
ii)  Derbyshire County Council’s contribution is in the form of capital salaries for the delivery of the SEMMMS railway schemes.  The figure in the “to date” column increases monthly. 
iii)  This includes £20145 transferred from the previous Partnership and Northern paid their £15000 contribution for 2010/11 in 2009/10 financial year.
iv)  Includes subscriptions e.g. ACoRP, Partner member expenses, and room hire
v)  The estimated sum from Northern is based on them paying for January to March 2011, i.e. until the end of the current Partnership.
vi)  The “Other” income is a contribution from the PDNPA community rail development fund.
vii)  The general office expenditure includes £4250 towards the Buxton line study, which is to be reimbursed from DCC’s studies budget.
viii)  The Partnership is now being charged for mailing out the folk train leaflets.

Resolved
That the financial position of the Partnership is noted.

39/10  Capital Schemes Report

As at June 7th 2010 Derbyshire’s Capital Programme for 2010/11 has been approved.  The problem initially was that Derbyshire County Council has had to find around £6 million to deal with the effects of the severe winter weather on its road network.  This was followed by cuts in the Government allocation.   This has involved reviewing all the schemes in the 2010-11 programme with the result that the amount available for rail schemes has been cut back.
Table 1: SEMMMS schemes 2010/11 (DCC capital only)

 

Location

Estimate

Railway projects

Whaley Bridge station refurbishment/platform raising

50000

 

Glossop station booking hall and waiting facilities

50000

 

Chinley station waiting facility

 15000

 

Buxton station refurbishment

85000

 

Hope Valley Line Signing

2000

 

Pedestrian Access improvements to Chinley Station

5000

Design/capital salaries

This includes DCC’s contribution to Partnership Officer salaries, and design costs for the above schemes at 12½% of works costs.

25875

Total SEMMMS Rail capital spend

 

232875

Whaley Bridge.   The cost of the raised platform known as an Easy Access Area  (formerly known as a Harrington Hump) is £50,000 and would be wholly paid by the Partnership.  The hump would provide access to a limited number of doors on a train.  Network Rail are planning to raise the other platform in 2011/12, which would then provide a fully accessible station.  This project is able to proceed quickly.  Discussions are in progress with Network Rail.

Glossop: It is hoped that this can proceed quickly.  This is slightly over budget because of additional wiring costs.

Chinley: Significant improvements are planned to the existing shelter at Chinley.  These will close the gaps at the top and bottom of the existing shelter and position both openings on the same side of the shelter to prevent the wind and rain from blowing through the shelter.   This has come in under budget.  The project officer would speak to Mark James of High Peak about the Chinley station access.

Buxton: Major repairs are already planned by Network Rail. A feasibility report on station improvements with options and costs is expected shortly.  Funding from the National Stations Improvement Plan is available for Buxton station.

Signing and Pedestrian Access Improvements:   Further work is required on these projects.

Resolved

  • That the situation with regard to Derbyshire’s 2010-11 capital schemes is noted.
  • That the broad split between the projects is approved.  Any changes before the next meeting to be approved by the Chair and Vice-Chair.

    40/10  Small projects fund          
    Introduction.

    At the last meeting Partners received a report on the Small Projects Fund and agreed that, because the Partnership is due to finish on March 31st 2011, the only  projects that should be approved this year should be those which can be completed and paid for by 31/03/2011 (Minute 05/10 refers).  Table 1 below shows those approved contributions which are still outstanding at the time of writing this report.

    Table 1.  SPF Approved contributions still outstanding

    Organisation

    Project

    SPF(£)

    Approval date

    Friends of Whaley Bridge station

    Refurbishment of 1857 building (linked to 2010/11 capital scheme – see Agenda Item 8 above)

    Up to 2000

    March 2010

    PDNPA

    Contribution to Stanage bus

    Up to 2000

    June 2009

    Poynton TC

    Cycle stands at Middlewood station (payment in progress)

    880

    June 2009

    Manchester folk train organisers

    i) Publicity and marketing (£70 quarterly until March 31st 2011)
    ii) Payment of band expenses in emergency £30 per band (very rare)

    280
    120

    December 2008

    TransPeak Walks

    Leaders’ expenses (quarterly claim)  payment is expected shortly

    960

    December 2009

    Stockport MBC

    Signing improvements Middlewood station

    800

    December 2009

    PDNPA

    Information provision Sheffield station

    Up to 2000

    December 2009

    Friends of New Mills Stations

    Production of mural and provision of planters at New Mills Newtown (payment in progress)

    Up to 2000

    December 2009

    Total Outstanding

     

    11040

     

    One of these schemes is inextricably tied into the 2010/11 capital programme and another (Middlewood) is awaiting Northern/Network Rail approval to begin.  Two more projects are ongoing costs for organising the Manchester folk trains or guided walks, so there is no doubt these sums will be spent. That still leaves £6800 worth of schemes where either the work has not been carried out or no invoices have been raised against the Partnership.  It is strongly suggested that the various organisations concerned should be urged to progress their projects as quickly as possible.

    New proposals

    The following new proposals have been notified, though few of these have yet been translated into a formal request for funding.  The PDNPA have recently supplied further information on the Stanage bus which will be considered by the project officers. 
    Agenda Item 11 on this agenda relates to a further investigation into requirements for a half-hourly frequency service on the Buxton line so the proposed contribution to that further work is subject to a separate resolution.
    The requests from Edale and Hope parish councils relate to the village information boards at the stations, which were the subject of discussion at previous meetings.  The Chair and Vice Chair have given approval for this expenditure as the parish councils were keen to progress the matter.  This action needs to be approved by the Partnership.
    Neil requested that the new tannoy system at Glossop be installed ahead of the station refurbishment if this is practical.   Northern agreed to investigate.

    Organisation

    Project

    SPF(£)

    GMPTE, DCC and Northern

    Further Investigation into half-hourly service on Buxton line (see Agenda Item 11 below)

    Up to 2000

    PDNPA

    Contribution to Stanage bus

    Up to 2000

    Stockport MBC

    Signing improvements Strines station (formal request expected imminently)

    Up to 2000

    DCC

    Contribution to Derbyshire train timetable booklet (formal request unlikely until December)

    Up to 1000

    Friends of Glossop Station

    Enhancements to the tannoy system (formal request received)

    Up to 2000

    Edale parish council

    Replacement of village information signs at station

    350

    Hope parish council

    Replacement of village information signs at station

    350

    Total new proposals

     

    10700

    Cllr Harold Davenport of Cheshire East Council outlined a bid for a small projects fund to acquire some disused railway land adjacent to Disley Station, which would be tidied up and merged with the adjacent Memorial Park.  He agreed to submit further details to the Project Officers.

    Resolved

    1. That the number of outstanding SPF schemes is noted with some disquiet and that the various organisations are urged to progress their projects as quickly as possible.
    2. That the various new SPF proposals are noted.
    3. That the actions of the Chair and Vice Chair in agreeing a contribution to Edale and Hope parish councils for the provision of replacement  information boards at the stations are approved.

     

    41/10  Buxton-Manchester Train Service Enhancement Study

    Between May and July this year Northern Rail undertook a study on behalf of Derbyshire County Council and this Partnership to examine the feasibility on an enhanced train service between Manchester and Buxton.  The aspiration was to achieve a half hourly frequency service Mondays to Saturdays inclusive.
    At one stage it was thought that the only way this enhancement could be achieved would involve major track and signalling work at Buxton.  This has now been shown not to be the case, so the service enhancement only requires additional crews, the rolling stock already being available.
    A further aspiration was to achieve a 50 minute Manchester-Buxton journey time.

    The conclusion reached by Northern Rail is that a working timetable can be devised that will accommodate a half-hourly frequency service.  The additional trains would operate on a semi-fast basis, omitting certain lesser used stops, e.g. Middlewood, Furness Vale and Dove Holes.  This would give a 51 minute journey time Buxton to Manchester and 53 minutes Manchester to Buxton. However, the aspiration for a 50 minute journey time cannot be achieved without line speed enhancements.  Northern consider that some further performance monitoring is required to demonstrate the impact on operational performance of the proposed new timetable and to confirm its practicality.  This is important because the previous Buxton line service ran through to Blackpool and was amongst the worst performing service in the NW.  The trains that would be used to provide the enhanced Buxton service are those which currently operate the Hazel Grove-Preston service, so there is a possibility that the earlier reliability problems could recur if the trains are extended to Buxton and turn-round times at termini are decreased.  Staffing requirements also need refinement, but it would seem that the additional staffing needs are relatively small.

    Looking into the enhancements needed to provide a 50 minute service will require more detailed investigation.

    The study findings are very encouraging and it is suggested that Derbyshire County Council should be urged to commission the additional work required to further the introduction of this enhancement, in particular the work needed to assess the robustness of the proposed new timetable and its impact on staffing and rolling stock diagrams.  The Partnership also needs to consider whether to offer a further modest sum towards this further work, i.e. up to £2000 as with the previous study.  It is considered that the line speed enhancement examination can be left aside for the moment. 

     

    Resolved
    That the Partnership;

    • Urges Derbyshire County Council to commission the additional work required to further the introduction of this enhancement, in particular the work needed to assess the robustness of the proposed new timetable and its impact on staffing and rolling stock diagrams. 
    • Agrees a further sum up to £2000 as with the previous study.  It is considered that the line speed enhancement examination can be left aside for the moment. 

    42/10  Line Survey

    It is now 2 years since the last line survey was carried out.  This would appear to be a good time to carry out a new survey of the lines.  The project officers propose a survey in October/November to replicate the time of year of the last two surveys.  This would be carried out in conjunction with the Peak Park Authority.

    There was a discussion of the idea of surveying non-rail users, to see why they do not use rail.  It was suggested that Friends Group members might be willing to undertake some of this surveying.  The project officer agreed to consider this.

    Resolved
    That the Partnership authorise the expenditure of £5000 on a line survey. 

    43/10  Buxton Line 150th Celebrations
    The project officers have spoken to several officers at High Peak Council, and have determined Saturday 15th June 2013 as the day for the 150th Celebrations.   The plan is to hold events at Whaley Bridge and Buxton, with a possible event at Chapel.   The Friends of Buxton station are actively researching a possible steam fair.   The project officers are talking to railtour promoters about the possibility of running one or two steam specials on that day.

    Resolved
    That the report be noted.

    44/10  Shaping the future of rail franchising

    The Department for Transport has published a consultation document on rail franchising. It can be viewed on
    http://nds.coi.gov.uk/clientmicrosite/Content/Detail.aspx?ClientId=202&NewsAreaId=2&ReleaseID=414591&SubjectId=36
    It is proposing longer franchising periods of around 12-15 years, more discretion for franchisees and a reduction of.  Part of the objective is to reduce the cost of the railway to the taxpayer.

    Options being considered for future longer franchises are:

    • The removal or deduction of support for franchise operators whos revenues decline.
    • The Government retaining risk in respect of GDP, and adjusting franchise payments in line with GDP.
    • Using profit sharing, to ensure to ensure the Government gains if a franchise proves unexpectedly profitable.

    Approaches being considered:
    A         For the franchisee to accept full risk throughout the franchise.  This might encourage the bidders
                to increase their bid prices to cover the risk.
    B         Central Government retains some GDP risk.  There is no other revenue support in the vent of a downturn in
                traffic. Central Government is protected by profit sharing if the franchise proves unexpectedly profitable.
    C         A system of reviews during the franchise period, either at fixed points or if there is a major change in
                circumstances.
    D         Some form of mechanism for the Government to alter what it buys.

    Residual Value
                The paper proposes that operators can recoup some of the value of long-term investments at the end of a
                franchise, subject to safeguards.

    Consultation responses are invited by 18th October. 

    The report from ACoRP on rail franchising has not yet been published.   The project officers felt that the position was not clear enough to put a recommended response to the meeting.   The project officers would write a response once ACoRP had published their views, and circulate it to the Partnership members.

    Resolved
    That the Partnership note the report

    45/10  Urgent Items

    Overcrowding on the Buxton line
    Harold Davenport raised the issue of overcrowding on the Buxton line on weekdays and Saturdays. He pointed out that it was impossible to collect fares after Disley/Hazel Grove on some trains due the crowding.  Mark Barker explained that the DfT controlled the allocation of diesel trains, and that there was a serious shortage.  From expecting 182 coaches, Northern have now received 10 in June 10 and are expecting further increments of similar size, subject to deliveries to other train operating companies which are themselves running late.  Northern hope to increase on additional Buxton train in the morning peak from 2 to 4 coaches in December 2011.

    Tannoy system on the buxton line
    John Brook raised the point that there had been a tannoy system installed at Chapel one year previously, and it had never been used.   It was suggested that this was also the case at Furness Vale and Middlewood.
    Mark Barker agreed to investigate.

    Litter Bins at Edale
    Tony Favell congratulated Adrian Berkley on the fox-proof litter bins at Edale.

    Glossop Pigeons
    Glossop now has a potato with feathers as a traditional bird scarer.  They are hoping for some netting.

    Edale Station approach
    Traffic priorities on the approach road to Edale village are being changed so that the main route will now lead to the station car park.  This is likely to increase the use of the station car park.

    46/10  Dates and venues for future meetings

    • Wednesday 8th December 2010: Chinley Community Centre 10 00am
    • March 2011: SYPTE offices Sheffield

    Minutes of the Partnership Management Group meeting held on 16th September 2010

    Present.


    Cllr Jean Wharmby (DCC)

    Cllr Tony Favell (PDNPA)

    Mike Rose (project officer)

    Becky Pennyfather (DCC)

    Keith Walker (FoCS)

    John Eaton (FoNMS)

    Tim Nicholson (PDNPA)

    Adrian Barkley (Northern)

    Mark Barker (Northern)

    Neil Williams (F of Glossop Stn)

    Cllr John Pritchard (HP parishes)

    Cllr Harold Davenport (Cheshire East)

    Cllr Jean Wharmby in the chair

    13/10  Apologies

    Apologies were received from Kevin Williams (DCC), Chris Furness

    14/10  Approval of Minutes of Partnership Management Group Annual General Meeting on 29th June 2010

    The minutes of the Partnership Annual General Meeting held on 29th June 2010 were approved as a correct record.

    15/10  Matters arising
    There were no matters arising.

    16/10  Future of the Partnership

    This item was deferred until the next meeting.

    05/10  Dates and venues for future meetings
    The following dates have been agreed.

      • Wednesday 8th December 2010: Chinley Community Centre 10 00am
      • March 2011: SYPTE offices Sheffield
      • It was agreed to keep one evening meeting a year.  Manchester was suggested and agreed as a possible future venue

    Minutes for June 2011

    Minutes for June 2010

    Minutes for September 2010

    Minutes for December 2010

     

    Minutes of the High Peak and Hope Valley Community Rail Partnership meeting held on 8th December 2010 at Chinley

    Present:

    Martin Smith (project officer),

    Mike Rose (project officer)

    Gill Westall (Chinley & Buxworth Transport Group)

    Emily Davies (PDNPA)

    Bob Hobson (Chinley & Buxworth Transport Group)

    Neil Williams (F of Glossop Stn)

    Keith Walker (FoCS)

    John Eaton (Friends of New Mills Stations)

    Cllr John Pritchard (HP parishes)

    Robin Wignall (FoWBS)

    Theo McLauchlan (Northern)

    Mark Eastwood (Northern)

    John Kenny (Stockport MDC)

    Ray Wightman (Chinley & Buxworth Transport Group)

    John Barrett (Friends of Buxton Station)

    Carol Evans (New Mills Vol. Centre)

    Becky Pennyfather (DCC)

    Steve Briscoe (Hope Valley Rail Users Group)

    Adrian Barkley (Northern)

    Mike Hayward (Transpeak Walks)

     

    47/10  Chair
    In the absence of the Chair and Vice-Chair, Martin Smith was elected Chair for the meeting.

    48/10  Apologies
    Apologies were received from: Cllr Jean Wharmby (DCC), Cllr Tony Favell (PDNPA), Kevin Williams (DCC), Paul Griffiths (Cheshire East), Alan Jackson. (High Peak Access Group), John Brook. (FOCS), Mark James (HPBC), Mark Barker (Northern), Cllr Chris Furness (HV parishes), Steve Magner (GMPTE), Cllr Charles Gorst (Poynton Town Council); Gerry Bates (Sheffield folk trains), Cllr Jackie Pattison (Cheshire parishes), Margaret Meynell, Beth Atkins (FoNM),

    49/10  Approval of Minutes of Partnership Meeting on 16th September 2010
    The minutes of the Partnership Annual General Meeting held on 16th September 2010 were approved as a correct record.

    50/10  Matters arising
    Long Line PA and Help Points
    Northern reported that the long line PA had been made to work at Chapel, although initially there had been problems with excessive volume.  There was thought to be a problem with a cut cable which was being resolved.  The long line PA on the Buxton line was analogue, which was causing problems and it was hoped to move to a digital system.
    Telent, Northern’s contractor, had completed their review of the lines and was now working through the problems. Adrian could not speak for Grindleford but the help points at the other Hope Valley stations were working apart from Edale, and the long line PA at Edale was now working. 
    The SIM cards in the help points were provided by Vodafone, but there was no Vodafone signal in Edale, so Northern were working towards providing Orange SIM cards for Edale, as Orange have a transmitter in Edale.

    51/10  To receive the minutes of the Partnership Management Group Meeting on 16/09/10
    The minutes of the Partnership Management Group Annual General Meeting held on 16th September 2010 were received.

    52/10  Hope valley freight train lengthening

    Network Rail are examining a number of schemes aimed at ensuring that selected routes on the national network will be made capable of carrying longer trains from key origins to selected destinations.  Train lengthening schemes being developed to GRIP 2 for review by the Strategic Freight Network Steering Group are:
    • Felixstowe to Nuneaton via London;
    • Southampton to West Coast Main Line; and
    • Peak Forest and Hope Valley to London and the South East.

    The Peak Forest and Hope Valley to London Freight Train Lengthening scheme is designed to allow longer freight trains to be run through the Hope Valley.  The main works of interest to the Partnership are:

    • New infrastructure at Dowlow, Hindlow and Peak Forest
    • Redoubling of the freight line at Chinley South
    • Lengthening of the Buxton Up Refuge Sidings

    These projects are funded and are expected to be carried out during 2013/14. There are no funds at present for loops in the Hope Valley or at Dore, which begs the question of the effects on capacity when the longer freight trains stand at the Dore South curve.  It is understood that loops at Grindleford and Dore South curve are under consideration for later introduction and may form part of the Northern Route Utilisation Study deliberations.
    Resolved
    That the Partnership note the report

    53/10  Hope Valley Line timetable issues
    Although at the previous meeting of the Partnership it was resolved that the Chair of the Partnership should write to the Secretary of State for Transport and seek a meeting with him on the matter of the Dore junctions, (Minute 37/10 refers) neither of these actions has taken place because discussions are ongoing with the freight operators to see if the necessary paths can be provided to allow the introduction of an 1814 local passenger train ex Sheffield.  The question of the Dore Junctions is intimately tied up with the Northern Route Utilisation Strategy. Negotiations are being pursued further in the hope of resolving the freight issues and introducing the extra train at the earliest available opportunity.  On the question of the Dore capacity enhancements, it may still be necessary to apply political pressure if the outcome of the Northern RUS is not satisfactory.  The HVRUG representative reported that the User Group were in discussion with the quarry and cement companies whose trains were the cause of the problem.  The Chair stressed that the User Group should make sure that Kevin Williams (DCC Rail Officer) was copied in on any such discussions so that there was a consistent approach to the issues.  (Kevin is in discussion with the Freight TOC’s and Network Rail)

    Northern expressed the view that time must be allowed for the industry process.  The relevant parties were still working on the May 2011 timetable, and as soon as this was complete they would look at the Hope Valley proposals.

    Resolved


    1)         That the Partnership noted the progress being made on the question of introducing an additional evening
                peak service out of Sheffield.

    2)         That the Partnership press the case for the Dore junctions enhancement through the Northern RUS
                consultation process and should seek a specific meeting with Network Rail on this issue, in company
                with SYPTE and DCC

    3)         That the three local MP’s concerned (Nick Clegg, Patrick McCloughlin and Andrew Bingham) should be
                appraised of the discussions and asked to use their influence to bring about the Dore junctions scheme as
                soon as possible.  

    54/10  Sheffield Folk Train
    There have been a number of problems with the Sheffield folk train, which has been overcrowded, with few fares being collected.  It had been felt that some students had discovered that it was possible to take the folk train without being asked to pay, and so the folk train had become popular as a very cheap evening out.  It was also felt that many of these passengers were not interested in the folk music.

    Northern reported that in future they will have revenue protection staff on the station to ensure that passengers have a ticket before boarding the train, plus an additional member of staff on the train.

    55/10 Finance report
    Table 1 below sets out the financial situation of the Partnership as at the end of October 2010 and the budget for 2010/11.  Partners noted that the Project Officers have not included a sum for redundancy payments as agreed by the Management Group at the March 2010 meeting (Minute 03/10 refers).  If the Partnership continues beyond March 31st 2010 there may be a requirement for redundancy payments, but this will need to be calculated at the time.

    Table 1:  2010/11 Income and Expenditure. (to end October 2010)

    Expenditure

    Income

     

    To date

    Year Est.

     

    To date

    Year est.

    Salary

    14894

    29707

    Cheshire East Council

    2000

    2000

    National insurance

    1047

    1660

    Derbyshire CC (ii)

    12110

    22014

    Pension

    2913

    5323

    GMITE

    3250

    3250

    Sick pay

    1330

    0

     

     

     

    Travel/subsistence

    362

    621

    Northern 10/11 (v)

    0

    3750

    Equipment

    0

    0

    PDNPA

    4000

    4000

    Printing & stationery

    1147

    2236

    Edale car park (i)

    3451

    3451

    General office expenditure (iv) (vii)

    6852

    3121

    (iii) Transfer of funds from previous year

    62401

    62401

    Projects & activities

    3492

    8221

    Other income (vi)

    951

    0

    Mobile telephones

    27

    108

    DCC studies budget (vii)

    0

    4250

    Postage (viii)

    388

    665

     

     

     

    Computer software

    254

    1000

     

     

     

    Grants (including SPF grant)

    3420

    27050

     

     

     

    Sub total

    36126

    79712

     

     

     

    Small Projects fund committed (unspent)

    23630

    0

     

     

     

    Unallocated

    28407

    25404

     

     

     

    Total

    88163

    105116

     

    88163

    105116

    i)     The income from Edale station car park is shown as £3451 which is the actual income as at the end of
            September 2010.  The next six month’s income will be credited in April 2011. 
    ii)    Derbyshire County Council’s contribution is in the form of capital salaries for the delivery of the SEMMMS
            railway schemes.  The figure in the “to date” column increases monthly. 
    iii)   This includes £20145 transferred from the previous Partnership and Northern paid their £15000 contribution
            for 2010/11 in 2009/10 financial year.
    iv)    Includes subscriptions e.g. ACoRP, Partner member expenses, and room hire
    v)    The estimated sum from Northern is based on them paying for January to March 2011, i.e. until the end of the
           current Partnership.
    vi)   The “Other” income is a contribution from the PDNPA community rail development fund.
    vii)  The general office expenditure includes £4250 towards the Buxton line study, which is to be reimbursed from
           DCC’s studies budget.
    viii) The Partnership is now being charged for mailing out the folk train leaflets.

    Resolved
    That the financial position of the Partnership is noted.

    56/10  Future of the Partnership

    The Partnership was given a copy of a Cabinet Member minute setting out Derbyshire County Council’s view on the continuation of the CRP.  The County Council’s agreement to continue the Partnership was greatly welcomed.  As a consequence of this decision, the other core funding partners (Cheshire East, Greater Manchester ITE, Northern Rail and the Peak District National Park Authority) have been asked if they are able and willing to continue their funding contributions.  At the time of writing none of the core funding partners has been able to confirm their contribution, as they are all in the throes of setting budgets for next year.  It is looking promising for a continuation of the Partnership.
    It was noted that a report on the staffing situation of the Partnership was an agenda item for the Management Group.

    Community Rail Designation.

    To date, the Partnership has not sought to have any of the lines or services within the Partnership’s area formally designated as Community Rail lines/services.  Primarily this has been because half of the key funding stream for the Partnership was coming from LTP capital and a lot of project officer time was devoted to delivering the various capital projects.  This will no longer be the case after March 2011 and it is considered appropriate that we now investigate getting the three lines – or at least the three local services – formally designated as Community Rail lines/services.  Achievement of formal designation would open up the possibility of a different funding stream.  The Chair reported that he had prepared a draft prospectus and sent it to DfT for consideration/comment.  He confirmed that copies would be sent to partners prior to any final version being sent to the Department for Transport.

    Resolved

    1.  That the Partnership;

    • note the report,
    • welcomes Derbyshire County Council’s commitment to continuing the Partnership, and
    • agrees to seek formal Community Rail designation for the three lines, or their local services, whichever is the more appropriate.

    2.  That the Project Officers produce the necessary prospectus for designation and circulate it for comment prior to a final       version being submitted to DfT.

    57/10  2010-11 capital schemes report

    SEMMMS capital schemes.
    This financial year is the last in which there will be SEMMMS capital expenditure.  A total of £225,000 has been allocated to rail projects and these are detailed in Table 1 below.
    Letters of agreement have been sent to Northern for signature and an order for these works has also been issued.  The schemes involved are as follows:

    Table 1: SEMMMS schemes 2010/11 (DCC capital only)

     

    Location

    Estimate

    Railway projects

    Whaley Bridge station refurbishment/platform raising

    50000

     

    Glossop station booking hall and waiting facilities

    50000

     

    Chinley station waiting facility

     15000


     

    Buxton station refurbishment

    85000

    Design costs

    This includes design costs for the above schemes at 12½% of works costs.

    25000

    Total SEMMMS Rail

    capital spend

    225000

    Whaley Bridge.   The cost of the raised platform known as an Easy Access Area, (formerly known as a Harrington Hump) has now come at £41,000, which is well below the expected cost.  This will release additional funds for the other station projects. The County Council will fund this. The hump will provide access to a limited number of doors on a train.  Network Rail are in the process of raising the other platform as part of a major refurbishment of the station.  When complete the station will be fully accessible.

    Glossop:
    It is hoped that this can proceed quickly, but at the last count problems had been encountered with the refurbishment of the waiting room because of a leaking roof and rotten joists.  Northern had approached Network Rail to ask to be allowed to repair these problems at Network Rail’s expense. The response form Network Rail was awaited.

    Chinley:
    Significant improvements are planned to the existing shelter at Chinley.  These will close the gaps at the top and bottom of the existing shelter and position both openings on the same side of the shelter to prevent the wind and rain from blowing through the shelter.

    Buxton:
    Major repairs are already planned by Network Rail, and Network Rail has funds available to be added to Partnership funds for the refurbishment of the station.
    The Partnership Offices reported that Northern had submitted proposals for Buxton station.  They had considered the proposals with the Friends of Buxton station, and were in agreement that the proposals were far from satisfactory.
    Northern’s proposal contained in particular:

    • 3 new shelters on platform 1 (the far and rarely used platform) at a cost of £225,000.
    • A new CIS system
    • Long lead PA
    • Help points
    • Improved lighting for platform one.

    The Partnership Officers and Friends agreed that what was required was:
    A new CIS system
    Long lead PA
    Improved lighting for platform one.
    A café/ paper stall
    A wider walkway to platform one – possibly covered

    It was felt that the help points were not required, and the shelters on platform one were a complete waste of money.  There is already an adequate shelter on platform one.

    A detailed response had been sent to Northern.

    Other rail projects
    In addition to the SEMMMS capital schemes there are two small projects dealing with signing and access improvements.  These are being paid for wholly by the County Council and will be delivered by the County Council rather than by railway partners, as the majority of the works are on highway rather than on railway land.   Further work is required on the design of these projects.

    Table

     

    Hope Valley Line Signing

    2000

     

    Pedestrian Access improvements to Chinley Station

    5000

    Design/capital salaries

    This is DCC’s design cost for the above schemes at 12½% of works costs.

    875

    Total

     

    7875

    2:  Other railway projects 2010/11


    Resolved

    1. That the situation with regard to Derbyshire’s 2010-11 capital schemes is noted.

    2. That, with regard to the works at Buxton station, the Chair and Vice Chair of the Partnership should be authorised to agree the Partnership’s final stance on the proposals.

    3. That the Partnership’s views on the proposals for Buxton station are conveyed to Derbyshire County Council prior to the County Council agreeing the exact form of works at the site and the level of their contribution.

    58/10  Small Projects Grant report
    Introduction.

    At the last meeting Partners received a report on the Small Projects Fund and agreed that, because the Partnership is due to finish on March 31st 2011, the only  projects that should be approved this year should be those which can be completed and paid for by 31/03/2011 (Minute 05/10 refers). As the future of the Partnership is no longer in doubt, this stricture need no longer apply though it would still be appropriate to encourage SPF scheme promoters to progress their projects as swiftly as possible.  Table 1 below shows those approved contributions which are still outstanding at the time of writing this report.

    Table 1.  SPF Approved contributions still outstanding

    Organisation

    Project

    SPF(£)

    Approval date

    Friends of Whaley Bridge station

    Refurbishment of 1857 building (linked to 2010/11 capital scheme

    Up to 2000

    March 2010

    Poynton TC

    Cycle stands at Middlewood station (see Agenda Item 11 below)

    688

    June 2009

    Manchester folk train organisers

    i) Publicity and marketing (£70 quarterly until March 31st 2011)
    ii) Payment of band expenses in emergency £30 per band (very rare)

    280
    120

    December 2008

    TransPeak Walks

    Leaders’ expenses (quarterly claim)

    960

    December 2009

    Stockport MBC

    Signing improvements Middlewood station

    Up to 2000

    December 2009

    PDNPA

    Information provision Sheffield station

    Up to 2000

    December 2009

    Friends of New Mills Stations

    Production of mural and provision of planters at New Mills Newtown

    Up to 2000

    December 2009

    Stockport MBC

    Signing improvements Strines station

    Up to 2000

     

    DCC

    Contribution to Derbyshire train timetable booklet

    Up to 2000

     

    Friends of Glossop Station

    Enhancements to the tannoy system

    Up to 2000

     

    Total Outstanding

     

    14048

     

    New proposals

    Two new proposals have been notified since the last meeting

              A. From the National Trust at Lyme Park. This has not yet been translated into a formal request for funding.
                   The Trust would like to improve the pedestrian signing from Disley station to Lyme Park and Hall.  This
                   would seem to be a very reasonable suggestion and it is recommended that the application is approved
                   in principle, with the usual maximum of up to £2000 and with the caveat that the work  must be
                   substantially completed by March 31st 2011. 

             B.  From the Chinley and Buxworth Transport Group.  To install a covered cycle rack adjacent to the car park
                   at Chinley station.  The ground will require a considerable amount of preparation, so it is recommended
                   that the usual maximum of £2000 is applied, and with the caveat that the work must be substantially
                   completed by March 31st 2011. 

             C. From the Friends of Chapel Station: To install running in boards at Chapel Station at a cost of £800.

             D. From Greater Manchester PTE: Review to look at the possibility of running additional Sunday services
                  from Manchester to Chinley at a cost of up to £2000.

    Resolved

    1. That the situation with regard to the Small Projects Fund be noted
    2. That the suggested signing scheme at Disley/Lyme Park be approved in principle and the Chair and Vice Chair be authorised to agree the detailed scheme.
    3. That the proposal for a covered cycle rack adjacent to the car park at Chinley station, and for the running in boards at Chapel be approved.
    4. That the sum of up to £2000 be approved towards an enhancement to Sunday services to Chinley.

    59/10  Buxton-Manchester Train Service Enhancement Study

    Introduction

    At the last meeting of the Partnership, partners considered a report on the Buxton-Manchester train service enhancement study.
    It was resolved that the Partnership;

    • Urges Derbyshire County Council to commission the additional work required to further the introduction of this enhancement, in particular the work needed to assess the robustness of the proposed new timetable and its impact on staffing and rolling stock diagrams. 
    • Considers whether to offer a further modest sum towards this further work, i.e. up to £2000 as with the previous study.  It is considered that the line speed enhancement examination can be left aside for the moment.  (Minute 41/10 refers)

    Progress since September

    Since the last meeting, and despite the Partnership’s offer of further funding, Derbyshire County Council have not been able to commission the additional work so far.  This is disappointing as the outcome of the earlier study was encouraging.  It is important that the prospect of enhancing the Buxton line services is not relegated to the back burner so, if there is no change in the situation by the time the Partnership meets, it is suggested that the Partnership officers should meet the relevant officers from Derbyshire, Northern Rail and Network Rail with a view to progressing the additional work.
    Northern reported that they would not be allowed to make changes in May 2012 because of the Olympics, so the proposed date for the new service would be December 2012.

    Resolved
    That the Partnership note the report and the Partnership officers be charged with meeting the relevant officers from Derbyshire, Northern Rail and Network Rail with a view to progressing the additional work.

    60/10  Line survey

    It was noted that it is now 2 years since the last line survey was carried out and a new survey of the lines is required.  Because of delays in setting up the survey, it is now planned to carry out the survey in the spring of 2011. 

    Resolved
    That the Partnership notes the report.

    61/10  Buxton Line 150th Celebrations
    The date of the celebrations has now been confirmed as Saturday 15th June 2013.  The Friends of Buxton station and are proposing a steam fair t be at Buxton station.  They have spoken to some steam fair operators who are interested, but are not prepared to commit themselves so far ahead.
    The Partnership Officers have approached a steam train operator with a view to running one or two steam specials on the day.  The steam train operator has not yet responded.

    Resolved
    That the Partnership notes the report.

    62/10  Shaping the Future of Rail Franchising
    The Partnership submitted the following response to the Department for Transport consultation on the future of Rail Franchising:

    Key Points
    1          We feel that our Partnership and Community Rail Partnerships generally bring considerable added value to
                the franchise, and to the travelling public.  We help to improve the stations and train services, and
                promote the lines within the community.   The net effect of this is to increase ridership on the railway,
                and consequently reduce road traffic.  All of these results bring value for money for the taxpayer.
    2          Franchises should be of sufficient length to allow Partnerships and Franchisees to build relationships and
                to invest.
    3          The key sources of core funding for Community Rail Partnerships are TOCs and local authorities.  We feel
                that Franchise specifications should include the provision of funds for Partnerships by the TOCs.
                Franchises should be awarded to applicants who will work closely with Partnerships.
    4          Franchises should be allowed more discretion than at present to change services and respond to changes
                in local circumstances, seasonal variations and local events.
    5          We feel that the awarding of franchises should be based on quality of proposal, and not just on the lowest
                bid.  We feel this will bring a better outcome for the taxpayer as well as for rail passengers.

    Response to specific questions

    Franchise specification

    • Is the suggested model of specification practical and would it deliver good outcomes for passengers and taxpayers? What are the key unresolved issues? Are there alternative models that work better, and what are these?
                  Response:

                  We welcome the proposal to increase franchise length.
                  We welcome the proposal to consult other bodies – and feel that it is crucial that Community Rail
                  Partnerships are consulted as part of the process.
    • What factors should be considered in determining franchise length?
                  Response:

                  A longer franchise will allow trust to be developed between the TOC and stakeholders. This is
                  particularly important for Community Rail Partnerships, who want to invest staff time and money into
                  their local railway. This requires a degree of trust which takes time to develop, and a long enough
                  period for

                 the partnership initiatives to be justified.  Such initiatives may include landscaping and station
                  gardens, as well as passenger facilities such as seating, improved station access or even the
                  provision of staff and sale of tickets.
                 A longer franchise will also make investments more attractive.
       
    • Would the proposal to supply an initial “affordability” figure for premium or subsidy help bidders submit realistic proposals? Response: Yes, but this figure should be a guide rather than a target.  It would be good to allow bidders to offer additional services for a small extra cost. Bidders should be encouraged to offer solutions working with partners such as Community Rail Partnerships, as this could offer lower cost solutions.  

    Franchise procurement

    • What are the benefits and downsides to the procurement process outlined in the document?
    • How can we reduce the complexity of bidding, while still protecting taxpayers and passengers (especially given a greater focus on quality)?
                  Response: We approve of your suggestion that the bids will be assessed on quality of services
                  offered as well as on the financial bid.  
                  TOCs who are seeking renewal of their franchises should be assessed in part on their previous
                  performance, and whether the have kept up their investment throughout the franchise period.
                             
      Contract design and management
    • What services, outcomes and commitments should be contracted?
                  Response:
      It is essential that every franchise should include a commitment to work with and financially                      support the Community Rail Partnerships established for the group of services within the franchise. The                      minimum amount should be specified in the franchise agreement.
       
    • What is the best way to structure outcome measures based around passenger satisfaction levels?
                  Response:
      This should be done through passenger numbers, and also through the National
                  Passenger Survey.
    • What sanctions should be used to ensure operators deliver their commitments, including outcome measures?
                  Response:
      These should be:
      • Financial Penalties
      • In serious cases, early termination of the Franchise
      • In the event of failure to fund passenger facilities, payment by the Franchisee to a Community Rail Partnership or Local Authority or Network Rail to carry out the works.
    • What level of performance bond and/or parental guarantees are appropriate?
                  Response:
      No comment.

    Revenue risk

    Should the risk inherent in forecasting revenue over a longer period be shared between operators and government, and if so, how? What are the
    • merits or drawbacks of review points? What are the merits or drawbacks of economic indexation compared to the existing revenue support/share or leaving revenue risk entirely with the operator?
                  Response:
      We would support the idea of review points.  There must be a review mechanism to
                  guard against deteriorating performance by a TOC, or failure to support community commitments.   

    Franchise investment

    • How can we add to incentive from longer franchises to remove the barriers to private sector investment?
                  Response:
        Potential franchisees should be encouraged to include investment commitments in their
                  bids, or to commit to an investment budget.
    • How can we encourage investments with long payback periods throughout the franchise term, not just at the start?
                  Response:
      There is an issue with some TOCs cutting back on investment towards the end of their
                  franchises.  A system must be in place and used in practice to reward TOCs end of the franchise
                  where they have invested in projects with a longer payback. These projects would need to be
                  approved in advance, and Community Rail Partnerships should be consulted on such projects where
                  they are on CRP lines. TOCs who are seeking renewal of their franchises should be assessed in part
                  on their previous performance, and whether the have kept up their investment throughout the
                  franchise period.

    Cost control and efficiency

    • How can the government incentivise operators to control cost increases over the life of the franchise, and to improve cost efficiency?
                 Response: 
      On some rural routes, costs could be controlled by giving the TOC more control of
                 infrastructure investment and maintenance policy.  If a line is maintained to a higher standard than is
                 required for the passenger service in order to allow freight, this extra cost should not be borne by the
                  TOC.
                 Resolved
                 That the Partnership note the report and approve the comments made.

    63/10              Northern Route Utilisation Strategy
    The NRUS Covers rail investment in north of England for next 20 years.  A draft is now out for consultation, with responses required by 14th January 2011.  Publication of the final version is expected in Spring 2011.  Network Rail specifically asks for contributions to assist in developing this latest RUS.  They particularly want comments on the demand forecasting methodology and the options to address the issues that have been identified.

    Whilst broadly welcoming the NRUS and its long term vision for rail development in the area, the Partnership felt that there are a number of clarifications and missing elements which need to be addressed in the final version.  These are;

    Demand forecasting (local passenger)
    1          What do the passenger growth percentages mean in terms of increased patronage on the local services,
                consequent overcrowding and the impact on rolling stock requirements, infrastructure requirements or
                service levels?
    2          There needs to be an investigation in this RUS as to how these issues are to be dealt with.
     
    Demand forecasting (Freight).

    3          The NRUS needs to give an indication of the anticipated growth in freight traffic on the Hope Valley line,
                and to show how the additional traffic can be accommodated.  It is clear
    that the freight train lengthening
                scheme for the Peak District to the London area does not include funding for additional loops in the Hope
                Valley or for the much needed loop on the Dore south curve.  In this case the RUS must show how the
                additional freight trains can be accommodated.  Additional freight trafficand failure to build the Dore south
                curve loop will result in delays to Hope valley trains whenever a freight iswaiting to be allowed on the
                Midland main line at Dore, as these trains will tail back on to the Hope Valley line.

    Peak and off-peak crowding between Sheffield and Manchester.
    4          At Manchester Piccadilly the longer trains will prevent double occupation of platforms.  There is already
                considerable congestion at the station approach.  The NRUS needs to clarify how the local trains from
                Manchester to Buxton, Sheffield and Hadfield, and additional trains to Leeds can be accommodated in
                Manchester Piccadilly and on its approaches, without the Northern Hub works being carried out.

    5          The NRUS needs to take account of aspirations for enhancements in the local services on this route to
                address issues of access into Manchester and Sheffield for other than longer distance traffic.

    Strategic connectivity across the north of England.
    6          The Partnership is wholly supportive of the Northern Hub proposals. The Partnership feels that the Northern
                Hub proposals for Manchester and the Dore redoubling should be carried out urgently, to allow additional
                traffic to use the railway.  Failure to do this will result in a lack of capacity on the railway, and deteriorating
                reliability.

    7          The NRUS needs to clarify what is meant by “New sections of track between Sheffield and Manchester to
                allow faster trains to overtake stopping services”.  Is this referring solely to passenger services or to freight
                as well?  If the latter (which we understand to be the case), the RUS needs to be clearer about the
                allocation of capital costs when considering service enhancements and not load the whole lot onto the local
                service as seems to be the case in the examples quoted.

    Accommodating peak services into the Manchester Piccadilly station area.
    8          This issue must take into account the Northern Hub proposals including the suggested increase in service
                frequency on the Sheffield- Manchester and Leeds-Manchester routes and the diversion of the latter via
                Victoria. The Piccadilly capacity issue should be re-examined in the light of the Northern Hub proposals
                and the aspirations for additional services on both the north and south trans-Pennine routes.
     
    Peak and off-peak crowding on the Leeds-Manchester route.
    9          This issue needs to be re-visited in the light of the Northern Hub proposals, which never gets a mention in
                this section of the NRUS.  The suggested solution in this NRUS as it stands would further exacerbate the
                capacity issues over the Guide Bridge-Manchester section of line by increasing the number of North Trans-
                Pennine services by one an hour in each direction and should be opposed.

                Northern agreed that they were concerned about the Northern Hub work being deferred until 2024, and
                were concerned about the lack of mention of the Hope Valley stopping services.
                Steven Briscoe added that the Hope Valley User Group would add that they would like to see fast Hope
                Valley services stopping at Hope station.

    Resolved
    1.         That Network Rail be thanked for giving the Partnership the opportunity to comment on the draft RUS
    2.         That the comments in paragraphs 1 to 9 above be approved and sent to Network Rail as the Partnership’s
                response to the consultation on the Northern RUS

    64/10  Any other Business
    Following discussion of bus substitution arrangements on the Buxton line, Northern agreed to look into the possibility of running trains from Manchester to Buxton via Chinley when trains were unable to run from Manchester to Buxton via Hazel Grove.

    65/10  Dates and times of the next meetings

    • Tuesday the 15th March 2011 at 10.15 a.m. at the SYPTE offices in Broad Street West, Sheffield S1 2BQ.   This is 10 minutes walk from the station.
    • June 2011 Annual General Meeting, possibly at New Mills Town Hall.
    • September 2011: Evening meeting.  Manchester. Possible venues are Northern’s offices, Network Rail’s offices and GMPTE offices.
    • December 2011 Buxton, possibly at the Pavilion Gardens.

    Resolved
    The proposed venues were agreed.

    Minutes of the High Peak and Hope Valley Community Rail Partnership Management Group meeting held on 8th December 2010 at Chinley

    Present:

    Martin Smith (project officer),

    Mike Rose (project officer)

    Emily Davies (PDNPA)

    Neil Williams (F of Glossop Stn)

    Keith Walker (FoCS)

    Cllr John Pritchard (HP parishes)

    Carol Evans (New Mills Vol. Centre)

    Becky Pennyfather (DCC)

    Steve Briscoe (Hope Valley Rail Users Group)

    Adrian Barkley (Northern)

    Theo McLauchlan (Northern)

    Mark Eastwood (Northern)

    John Eaton (Friends of New Mills Stations)

     

     

     

    18/10  Chair
    In the absence of the Chair and Vice-Chair, Becky Pennyfather was elected Chair for the meeting. 

    19/10  Apologies
    Apologies were received from: Cllr Jean Wharmby (DCC), Cllr Tony Favell (PDNPA), Kevin Williams (DCC), Paul Griffiths (Cheshire East), Mark Barker (Northern), Cllr Chris Furness (HV parishes)

    20/10  Approval of Minutes of Partnership Meeting on 16th September 2010
    The minutes of the Partnership Management Group Annual General Meeting held on 16th September 2010 were approved as a correct record.

    21/10  Dates and times of the next meetings

    • Tuesday the 15th March 2011 at 10.15 a.m. at the SYPTE offices in Broad Street West, Sheffield S1 2BQ.   This is 10 minutes walk from the station.
    • June 2011 Annual General Meeting, possibly at New Mills Town Hall.
    • September 2011: Evening meeting.  Manchester. Possible venues are Northern’s offices, Network Rail’s offices and GMPTE offices.
    • December 2011 Buxton, possibly at the Pavilion Gardens.

    Resolved
    The proposed venues were agreed.

    22/10  Exclusion of the press and public
    The meeting resolved to exclude the press and public. At this point the project officers left the meeting.

    23/10  Staffing issues.      
    A staffing issue was then discussed and the following decision was taken. 

    Resolved

    Minutes for June 2011

    Minutes for June 2010

    Minutes for September 2010

    Minutes for December 2010