Agenda item

(To receive a report on behalf of Network Rail which provides the Committee with an update on the Network Rail Account Plan, the purpose of which is to provide strategic direction for the development and delivery of schemes which interact with the railway infrastructure in Lincolnshire)

Consideration was given to an item which provided the Committee with an update on the strategic direction for the development and delivery of schemes which interact with the railways infrastructure in Lincolnshire.

The Committee was advised that this was a strategic item and assurance was sought from Network Rail on the future progress of the schemes listed in the report.

A number of visitors from Network Rail were welcomed to the Committee:

·         Paul McKeown (Director of Route Sponsorship)

·         Neil Henry (Head of Operations South)

·         Joe Cookson (Public Affairs Manager)

The Committee was advised that Network Rail operated a very large network of track, as the County Council did with the highways network, so there was an opportunity for the two to interact on a regular basis.  It was noted that this was the first time that the action plan had been presented in the format included in the report.

The representatives from Network Rail were provided with the opportunity to explain their roles and responsibilities as follows:

·         Paul McKeown – advised members that Network Rail worked in conjunction with a number of train operating companies, both franchises and open access operators.  He advised that he was responsible for the London North Eastern and East Midlands route, which was one of 8 subsidiaries and ran from London to the Scottish Borders, and including Lincoln.  This represented about 20% of the UK's rail infrastructure.  In his role, he represented clients who were carrying out works to this infrastructure, and this included the east coast programme where updates were being carried out to enable the route to increase its capacity.

·         Neil Henry – Advised that he was responsible for the south end of the route, which was everything south of Doncaster, and all the operational staff linking into maintenance and the day to day organisation of these works, including working closely with the train operators.  It was also noted be was also responsible for ensuring that the worked were carried out, not necessarily for planning the work.

·         It was reported that there was now a formalised structured governance and interface with stakeholders in place, which had not existed previously.

·         There were two main Network Rail projects which were relevant to Lincolnshire – the Lincoln Eastern Bypass and Lincoln High Street.  It was reported that governance was in place for the Lincoln Eastern Bypass, and work had been underway for the 72 hour blockade of the railway line to allow the steel beams for the bridge to be hoisted into place.  It was noted that this had been a major engineering operation which had been successfully delivered with only one minor problem.   It was reported that work continued but this had been a key milestone.  There were regular meetings with LCC on the progress of the project.

·         In relation to the Lincoln High Street foot bridge, Network Rail apologised for the additional disruption but advised that this was due to the additional work which needed to be completed on the bridge and steps.

Members of the Committee were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers and guests present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         In terms of joint schemes, it was queried whether there was any update in relation to the proposed two bridges for the western growth corridor.  It was reported that Network Rail were aware of the project but it was not proposed that they would be directly involved in the construction of the bridges.  Network Rail's role would be to ensure that the proposed bridges were of a safe and efficient design.  It was confirmed that these bridges, if they were built, would not be funded by Network Rail.

·         It was noted that if schemes were developer led, they were not joint schemes in the context of the information presented in the report.  However, it was also noted that if a project was not listed on the account plan in the report it did not mean that Network Rail were not aware of it.

·         A query was raised in relation to the track from Barnetby to Grimsby as there were attempts to upgrade the rail traffic on this route, and assurance was sought that this stretch of track would be maintained and upgraded accordingly.  Members were advised that this route was part of the East Midlands franchise, but from a Network Rail perspective, when a franchise was submitted, they were asked by the DfT to comment and evaluate and if there were likely to be significant impacts then they would require these to be addressed.  Members were assured that the condition of the existing rail track would be maintained to current standards.

·         In relation to the Brayford Bridge construction in Lincoln, it was noted that the planning application had been submitted to the City Council which had then been declined, and then an appeal had been submitted, and the outcome was awaited.  Network Rail had chosen to continue with the commercial activity in the hope of a successful appeal to avoid any additional delay.

·         Members commented that they welcomed this session with Network Rail and commented that they should be held regularly.

·         It was commented that if the Joint Line was to be electrified to Doncaster, this would benefit authorities both north and south of Lincolnshire.  Members were advised that suggestions such as these needed to be captured and included in the considerations for the east coast strategy. 

·         There was a need to identify the requirements over a 25-40 year time scale.

·         There was a need to collectively focus on what the outcomes were that all stakeholders wanted to achieve.

·         It was suggested that the Sleaford to Spalding line would have more benefit if it was a dual shift line rather than a one shift line.

·         Members were advised that Network Rail worked through a commercial contract, and it was their responsibility to manage the programme of works.  If there was to be a direct impact on train operations, then Network Rail would be responsible and would be contractually bound to pay compensation to the train operating companies, if they did not hand back the railway on time.

·         The Chairman thanked Network Rail for the assurance that the repair work for the High Street bridge would be compete before the Christmas Market.

The Committee expressed its appreciation to the representatives from Network Rail for attending the meeting, and it was requested whether they would come back again the following year.

RESOLVED

1.    That the comments made in relation to the work being undertaken as part of the Account Plan and Joint Schemes listed in Appendix A  be noted; and

2.    That assurance was sought on the future progress of the schemes listed.