Heathrow Southern Link proposals

matt_world2004 · 18 Jun 2019

They should be required to have Heathrow rail stations in zone 6 for both pay as you go and season ticket purposes as condition of any airport expansion.

RailUK Forums

kevin_roche · 18 Jun 2019

civ-eng-jim said:
Are they not led by two different organisations? Western Rail Link is DfT/Network rail and is planned regardless of whether Heathrow gets its third runway. But is the airport expansion not a predominantly private venture?

You are correct. The airport expansion is a private venture. The Western Access is being planned etc by Network Rail. (I'm not aware of who is funding it) IIRC someone promised a rail link to Woking when Terminal 5 was built but it did not happen. I see that Network Rail has some words about supporting a Southern Access to Heathrow in it's plan for CP6 but not a promise to fund or build it. There is a plan mentioned earlier for another private venture to build one but I believe it is held up awaiting approval by the government. I was hoping Heathrow plans might shake that loose.

kevin_roche · 18 Jun 2019

matt_world2004 said:
They should be required to have Heathrow rail stations in zone 6 for both pay as you go and season ticket purposes as condition of any airport expansion.

I guess that might need some funding from Heathrow to bring about too.

matt_world2004 · 18 Jun 2019

kevin_roche said:
I guess that might need some funding from Heathrow to bring about too.

Or reduce the tfl rail access fees and lower hex fares

kevin_roche · 18 Jun 2019

It looks like the Guardian agrees with me. I just found this article.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jun/15/heathrow-airport-extension-rail-link-staines-dft

Left in a siding: the rail link that could make Heathrow greener

Bill Badger · 18 Jun 2019

Heathrow Southern Railway, who are promoting one of the southern access proposals have issued a news release to coincide with the launch of the consultation urging respondents to press Heathrow to commit to a southern rail access before they introduce road pricing; carrot before the stick basically.

https://heathrowrail.com/heathrow-s...l-routes-as-consultation-on-expansion-begins/

kevin_roche · 18 Jun 2019

Maybe the people at Heathrow who are planning new Ultra Low Emission Zone should read this:

https://medium.com/radical-urbanist...ey-was-investing-in-alternatives-b1497027879a

but regardless of the policy, there’s a common denominator to their success: investment in alternatives. Whether cities adopt congestion pricing or regulations to restrict vehicle use, they must improve transit services,

As the examples of London and Oslo show, both congestion pricing and vehicle restrictions can gain public support and effectively reduce car use in urban centers. However, regardless of whether cities chose to pursue one or the other, their success will depend on investing in alternatives and giving more road space to those other uses.

USBT · 19 Jun 2019

Well in case you haven’t noticed, there’s an election going on for the next Tory leader and hence PM. And one of the candidates (can you guess who) is against Heathrow expansion full stop. One wonders what will happen if (likely when) Boris gets in. (Let’s hope we don’t have another inquiry over the feasibility of Boris Island).

Someone should grill the candidates on Heathrow, and in particular easier ground transport access from outside London, aka western and southern (actually south western) access lines.

The Ham · 19 Jun 2019

USBT said:
Well in case you haven’t noticed, there’s an election going on for the next Tory leader and hence PM. And one of the candidates (can you guess who) is against Heathrow expansion full stop. One wonders what will happen if (likely when) Boris gets in. (Let’s hope we don’t have another inquiry over the feasibility of Boris Island).

Someone should grill the candidates on Heathrow, and in particular easier ground transport access from outside London, aka western and southern (actually south western) access lines.

Although a lot of focus is put on the 4tph to the southwest (i.e. via Woking) there was also the (IIRC) 4tph between Waterloo & Heathrow via Clapham Junction. That would allow fairly good access to Heathrow from a lot of the area to the south of it.

edwin_m · 19 Jun 2019

USBT said:
Well in case you haven’t noticed, there’s an election going on for the next Tory leader and hence PM. And one of the candidates (can you guess who) is against Heathrow expansion full stop. One wonders what will happen if (likely when) Boris gets in. (Let’s hope we don’t have another inquiry over the feasibility of Boris Island).

Someone should grill the candidates on Heathrow, and in particular easier ground transport access from outside London, aka western and southern (actually south western) access lines.

Looks like Boris is rowing back on his opposition to Heathrow.

Depending on the service pattern, the southern link could give better access to Heathrow from a lot of the Southern network by changing at Clapham Junction, if some of the fast London-Staines trains run to Heathrow instead of their current destinations. This would however disadvantage the current destinations!

3141 · 19 Jun 2019

edwin_m said:
Looks like Boris is rowing back on his opposition to Heathrow.

It does indeed. In the TV debate last night he declined to confirm that he would lie down in front of the bulldozers, and said he remained concerned about air and noise pollution. As PM he might square the circle by ensuring that at least one new rail link to Heathrow gets built, so air pollution from road traffic will be reduced.

edwin_m · 19 Jun 2019

So he's no longer lying down, he's just lying.

3141 · 19 Jun 2019

edwin_m said:
So he's no longer lying down, he's just lying.

Brilliant!

si404 · 19 Jun 2019

kevin_roche said:
I guess that might need some funding from Heathrow to bring about too.

Which is surely the point - they get a massive regulatory advantage by being allowed to increase their customers by 50% while their competitors for the London air market aren't, therefore they should be paying significantly towards infrastructure enhancements to get this higher number of people there, rather than demanding the taxpayer foot the entire bill of subsidising their effective monopoly - I know we have recently flirted with 'Third Way' corporatist economics (with taxpayers subsidising certain private profits even in good times, and also paying off certain private losses) but it should have died with the banker bailouts. If nothing else Heathrow taking a positive approach (like, say Gatwick's) to paying towards support infrastructure would help reduce opposition to their deeply controversial project.

In the case of the Elizabeth line fares, they didn't pay a penny towards the construction of the project, based on them being "full" and thus apparently unable to see any benefit. If the airport is to be 50% bigger then the "full" argument bares no weight anymore and they owe money towards Crossrail.

kevin_roche · 19 Jun 2019

si404 said:
Which is surely the point - they get a massive regulatory advantage by being allowed to increase their customers by 50% while their competitors for the London air market aren't, therefore they should be paying significantly towards infrastructure enhancements to get this higher number of people there, rather than demanding the taxpayer foot the entire bill of subsidising their effective monopoly

I do agree.

si404 said:
In the case of the Elizabeth line fares, they didn't pay a penny towards the construction of the project, based on them being "full" and thus apparently unable to see any benefit.

In the Guardian article linked above they say:

As a precondition of Heathrow expansion, parliament has stipulated that the proportion of passengers travelling to and from the airport on public transport must rise from 39% to 50%.

Heathrow agrees that the economic and environmental benefits are clear. A spokeswoman said: “Heathrow is keen that this project is moved forward at the earliest opportunity, and we will pay our share towards the cost.”

I think they should pay all of it.

In the consultation they are making a big thing of how the pollution in the area will be reduced because of the public transport plans. The plans being consulted on do however include the construction of some very large new car parks but the plans for rail are only mentioned in passing. This is what annoys me.

They are also planning major works on the M25 and the early construction of Southern Access would mitigate those road works. I think the airport should build that before being allowed to start work on the M25.

The current network rail plans for Western Access will take 5 years to build.

I think they should be starting work now on this new rail link.

coppercapped · 19 Jun 2019

si404 said:
SNIP

In the case of the Elizabeth line fares, they didn't pay a penny towards the construction of the project, based on them being "full" and thus apparently unable to see any benefit. If the airport is to be 50% bigger then the "full" argument bares no weight anymore and they owe money towards Crossrail.

To expand on the un-snipped part: it was in fact the Civil Aviation Authority which stopped BAA/Heathrow paying any contribution as it was found to fall outside the airport's remit. The cost would have had to have been recovered from landing fees and that was found to clash with the legal requirements laid on BAA/Heathrow.

LeeLivery · 19 Jun 2019

kevin_roche said:
I do agree.

In the Guardian article linked above they say:

I think they should pay all of it.

In the consultation they are making a big thing of how the pollution in the area will be reduced because of the public transport plans. The plans being consulted on do however include the construction of some very large new car parks but the plans for rail are only mentioned in passing. This is what annoys me.

They are also planning major works on the M25 and the early construction of Southern Access would mitigate those road works. I think the airport should build that before being allowed to start work on the M25.

The current network rail plans for Western Access will take 5 years to build.

I think they should be starting work now on this new rail link.

I agree. There should absolutely be no expansion without Southern Rail access. As a South Londoner, I'm not too fond of the expansion full stop, but the idea of it going ahead with the possibility of no rails being laid to the south is mad. It makes a total mockery (as if people believe it anyhow) of their idea of not breaching air limits. Heathrow should at least front 50% of any cost and there should be no added charge to any rail service serving the airport, just like Gatwick.

si404 · 19 Jun 2019

kevin_roche said:
They are planning major works on the M25 and the early construction of Southern Access would mitigate those road works. I think the airport should build that before being allowed to start work on the M25.

unless the plans have become a lot more extensive, the M25 works are for two reasons:

1) because you can't build R3 without rebuilding the M25 in a tunnel under it (to do the M25 works after the airport works means either a gap in the runway, or earthworks in the middle of the motorway - neither will work!)
2) the internal road network of Heathrow is changing, affecting Junction 14/14A (this might have been dropped in the lastest plans)

Both these changes mean a modest improvement between just south of J14 and J15 will be done - paid for by Heathrow as it's entirely to do with these airport related changes.

6 lane tunnels are considered too wide, and the weaving situation was bad before with the more expansive upgrades related to T5 and will be worse when in a tunnel. Highways England demanded braided sliproads and auxillary carriageways on safety grounds, though it will help capacity too.

edwin_m · 19 Jun 2019

kevin_roche said:
I think they should pay all of it.

There is some side benefit from this too. In particular if the trains from the south-west are extended through Heathrow to link with the Hex paths to Old Oak and Paddington it provides much better access to HS2 from a big slice of the network south-west of London. This would of course require Heathrow to stop seeing Hex as a moneyspinning luxury shuttle and more as part of the rest of the network - which they may be more keen to do when they see the amount of passengers that Crossrail takes away from it.

matt_world2004 · 19 Jun 2019

Local residents are going to be upset if congestion charges extend much beyond the perimeter road many of the surrounding roads are used for non airport business.

Class 170101 · 23 Jun 2019

I would be of the view that Heathrow should be required to build the extra infrastructure out of its own pocket including public transport. However both should be virtually operational alongside each other (except M25 for reasons as described above). Should the 3rd Runway open without the improvements in public transport then its use should be limited to the number of slots required to widen the night time (no) flying window that Heathrow has apparently promised to implement and no further slots agreed to, to maxmise Heathrow Airport's use with the 3rd Runway until the public transport options are constructed and opened.

matt_world2004 · 23 Jun 2019

The DfT should place an requirement on heathrow for an 80% modal share of non taxi public transport for journeys to and from the airport. This is TfLs target for greater London and 50% modal share for the aiport is too low

DerekC · 23 Jun 2019

As a matter of national transport strategy (if only we had one), government should make sure the Southern Access is built in conjunction with Heathrow expansion. It could and should have been built relatively cheaply when T5 and M25 widening happened more than ten years ago. It will be absolutely inexcusable if it doesn't happen this time.

kevin_roche · 24 Jun 2019

DerekC said:
As a matter of national transport strategy (if only we had one), government should make sure the Southern Access is built in conjunction with Heathrow expansion. It could and should have been built relatively cheaply when T5 and M25 widening happened more than ten years ago. It will be absolutely inexcusable if it doesn't happen this time.

My feelings entirely. It seems it was scuppered by the plan to use some local level crossings which would have resulted in the cars having to wait a lot longer. The more expensive Heathrow Southern Railway plan has tunnels which would avoid the level crossings so there is hope that that problem has gone. What is needed is someone (Heathrow) to stump up the cash to make the tunnels happen. In the meantime we could be fobbed off with a service via reading using the Western Access. Plans for which are more advanced. In my mind that is a poor alternative and won't get people to switch from cars.

hwl · 24 Jun 2019

kevin_roche said:
What is needed is someone (Heathrow) to stump up the cash to make the tunnels happen. .

As I've already said multiple times in relation to the new access schemes - Heathrow can't afford the rail schemes and the runway + terminal hence the need for external funding for rail. The Heathrow scheme is about maxing out CAA regulated RAB to maximise tax efficiency for the owners.

Gatwick is much cheaper comparatively and they can afford non airport related items (like the proposed station works).

And just 9 weeks till the 40 year no expansion at Gatwick moratorium is up, and Gatwick have met all the conditions for expansion after expiry (and get guaranteed no opposition from local authorities as part of the original deal)

kevin_roche · 24 Jun 2019

Another rather depressing take on https://www.transport-network.co.uk/Expansion-at-what-cost-Heathrow-publishes-masterplan/15944

A specific document on surface access states: ‘We can deliver our mode share targets without Western and Southern Rail Links’. It adds: ‘We can do this through targeted improvements to bus and coach services and by varying the level of our vehicle access charge we can do this through targeted improvements to bus and coach services and by varying the level of our vehicle access charge.'

Heathrow said it will put income from road user charges towards improving public transport, raising the possibility that passengers, rather than the airport, will pay for new rail links.

kevin_roche · 24 Jun 2019

And for the motorists Transport Network reports:

Plans to divert the M25 through a tunnel under Heathrow's third runway would mean years of disruption for drivers while it is built, the RAC has warned.

The full article at https://www.transport-network.co.uk/Expansion-at-what-cost-Heathrow-publishes-masterplan/15944

reddragon · 24 Jun 2019

My understanding is that the main cause of traffic at Heathrow are those who work there, often at unsocial hours and have free / cheaper parking spaces. Local travel reports always tie in traffic problems with main shift start / end times.

An action to ban on site parking & replace it with P&R trains would be an ideal solution.

hwl · 24 Jun 2019

kevin_roche said:
Another rather depressing take on https://www.transport-network.co.uk/Expansion-at-what-cost-Heathrow-publishes-masterplan/15944

Crossrail will make a reasonable dent in the gap they need to close especially as regards stopping services.
Heathrow need to deny they need rail improvements as they can't afford to fund them, that will be left to passengers as hidden cost! The impass has effectively landed on Dft desk with the southern proposers needing to force TOC to use the new infrastructure and pay for it.

reddragon said:
My understanding is that the main cause of traffic at Heathrow are those who work there, often at unsocial hours and have free / cheaper parking spaces. Local travel reports always tie in traffic problems with main shift start / end times.

An action to ban on site parking & replace it with P&R trains would be an ideal solution.

Indeed - the Western Rail access connecting to the reliefs shown the main purpose is to turn many GWML stations to the west into P&R sites for staff.

DfT /Highways England also seem to be in denial that roads can effectively become full well before 100% of theoretical capacity when the traffic flow is very turbulent e.g. with close junctions and lots of lane changing. the M25 almost needs 3 through lanes segregated through the M4 and T5 Junctions and then extra lanes on the outside just to constrain the those leaving entering /leaving from M4 /T5 etc. It would also make the runway deck spans cheaper to engineer.

Bald Rick · 24 Jun 2019

reddragon said:
My understanding is that the main cause of traffic at Heathrow are those who work there, often at unsocial hours and have free / cheaper parking spaces. Local travel reports always tie in traffic problems with main shift start / end times.

An action to ban on site parking & replace it with P&R trains would be an ideal solution.

A substantial proportion of people who work at ‘Heathrow’ don’t work anywhere near one of the 4 stations.

Heathrow Southern Link proposals

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member