Consultation Question 14a) Do you think these are the right priorities for stations in the new franchise?
b) Which priorities would you change or add, and why?
c) At which stations do you think co-ordination between transport modes could be improved?
d) How do you believe these areas could be improved, e.g. through timetabling connections or through physical works at the location?
e) What do you believe are examples of best practice elsewhere which could be relevant for stations on the Great Western franchise network?
Explanatory textStations, and the journey to and from them, are a key component of passengers’ overall journey experience. Stakeholders have highlighted a number of areas where the franchise specification could focus attention:
●● Improving station facilities. This includes the provision of seating, shelters, accurate, up-to-date information, improving accessibility for those with disabilities to and within the station, improving designs to allow a greater throughput of passengers, and maintaining safety and security.
●● Improving car and cycle parking, particularly where a shortage of car parking spaces may be acting as a barrier to future growth, and a greater provision of electric car charging points.
●● Improving access for pedestrians and cyclists, with clear direction signs and safe, well-lit routes.
●● Improving accessibility, physical interchange and co-ordination between rail services and other modes of transport.
●● Working with local communities to bring disused station buildings back into community use, e.g. as cafes or community hubs.
●● Co-operating with local authority schemes for station improvements and redevelopment of the areas surrounding stations.
We will consider the case for requiring the franchisee to set aside funds for station improvements, as we have done in some recent franchise competitions, and whether a portion of this should be dedicated for improvements at smaller stations.
We would also expect the franchisee to co-operate with locally-promoted schemes for station improvements and improvements to the areas around stations, and to continue work on developing station ‘master plans’ for some stations.
We expect to require the franchisee to develop proposals for better co-ordination with other transport modes, building on the approach used in recent franchise competitions, and will consider the case for encouraging the franchisee to develop and update more Station Travel Plans and make better use of them, in consultation with passengers and other local stakeholders. We will consider whether we should require the franchisee to provide more electric car charging points.
We will expect the franchisee to continue to improve security at stations, including areas such as staff awareness, availability of
CCTV▸ coverage and engagement with the Secure Stations Scheme.
See
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=19037 for the background to this topic
I am - astonished - that no-one has followed up on this section. But then there are so many topics within the section that perhaps is too much to bite off all at once? Here are some starters:
1. I am going to boldly suggest that accurate and up to date information should be really cheap to provide and should be a high priority. And keeping people fed with that information - especially at unmanned stations.
From my mailbox:
[person] rang 03457 484950, there were 11 people waiting and he was told that there would be taxis sent to collect us, this was at 9.58am. We waited until 10.25 and he rang again, was told taxis would be there shortly. 10.46 no taxis so we decided to go home.
2. We are developing a master plan for Melksham - lots of us working together.
We would also expect the franchisee to co-operate with locally-promoted schemes for station improvements and improvements to the areas around stations, and to continue work on developing station ‘master plans’ for some stations.
But should the franchise include a requirement to facilitate the implementation of the master plan - otherwise we're going to end up with Corsham or Portishead disease, where the whole thing in consulted on and planned and that takes to long that when it's completed it's already out of date and it needs to be consulted on and planned again!
3. On planning station access
●● Improving access for pedestrians and cyclists, with clear direction signs and safe, well-lit routes.
●● Improving accessibility, physical interchange and co-ordination between rail services and other modes of transport.
●● Co-operating with local authority schemes for station improvements and redevelopment of the areas surrounding stations.
Yes, yes, yes ... I'm astonished to see local authority plans in Chippenham around the station that appear to look at the area as ripe for development yet don't consider the flow of passengers through. Hiding the lovely old station behind office and residential blocks may make commercial sense, but isn't it going to clog the who area up bearing in mind the number of people who have to pass through?
4. Improving use of near-station buildings for transport use
●● Working with local communities to bring disused station buildings back into community use, e.g. as cafes or community hubs.
Why on earth limit it to disused station buildings? Why not disused buildings at or near the station? And why not add a requirement to look at building that come up for sale or let near the station and consider if they have new rail or community use?
Tying points 4 and 5 together ... rail passenger numbers have doubled in the last 20 years and there are a lot more people around - should it not be part of the
TOC▸ 's responsibility to act as guardian of the development for the future - a future where we are being ever-more encouraged to use public transport, and where the social stigma of using the bus or train because we can't afford a car is fading?
