Agenda item

Report of the Corporate Director of Regeneration and Local Services – Head of Transport and Contract Services, Regeneration and Local Services.

The Chairman introduced the Head of Transport and Contract Services, Adrian Whitewho was in attendance to give an overview as regards North East Combined Authority (NECA) Transport Activity (for copy see file of minutes).

The Head of Transport and Contract Services reminded the Committee that when the NECA was formed in April 2014 it took on the role of “Transport Authority” for the whole area coving the seven NECA Local Authorities: County Durham; Gateshead; Newcastle; North Tyneside; Northumberland; South Tyneside; and Sunderland.  He noted this had included the responsibility in terms of producing a Local Transport Plan.  Members were reminded that NECA had delegated back, to County Durham and Northumberland, the operational delivery of public transport, with Nexus having the responsibility for the Tyne and Wear Authorities.  It was reiterated that NECA retained that responsibility for strategy and policy, being able to look in terms of economic and planning issues at a regional level.

The Committee were reminded that NECA would respond to national issues, for example to the Department for Transport (DfT), such as the “Northern Powerhouse” and other issues as set out within the report.  The Head of Transport and Contract Services explained that NECA, along with the Tees Valley Combined Authority, Cumbria and North Yorkshire had established a unique partnership with Northern Rail in establishing the North East Rail Management Unit (NERMU) to co-manage the rail franchise in the North East.

The Head of Transport and Contract Services also noted that in respect of local transport that the NECA Transport Team worked closely with the North East Local Enterprise Partnership (NELEP) in relation to major transport capital investments, for example Horden Station, a prioritised scheme attracting £3.34m from regional funding.

Members noted ongoing issues, such as the North of Tyne Mayor, the Metro/Tyne and Wear and added that while there was a lot of good work ongoing there were still a number of challenges ahead.

The Chairman thanked the Head of Transport and Contract Services for his update report and asked Members for their comments and questions.

Councillor J Clare noted that it was vital to adopt a regional approach and that it was important to hang on to NECA.  He added that devolution was complex, however the benefits in terms of the economy and transport were vital and splintering would be bad.

Councillor J Atkinson noted that many trains from London stop at York and Darlington, but not Durham station and also noted that the line came very close to the Newton Aycliffe Trading Estate.  The Head of Transport and Contract Services noted that the issue in terms of stopping on the mainline at Durham was historic, and always there is a fight for more trains to stop at Durham, with more doing so recently as Durham has had more passengers than Darlington in the last two years.  It was noted however, that Durham was a through station, while Darlington was an interchange hub, linking to Bishop Auckland and Tees Valley.  The Head of Transport and Contract Services noted that in relation to creating any additional stops, this would be difficult as there was not enough space in the timetable. 

He added there was the Bishop Auckland branch line, near to Hitachi, and that there were schemes, for example working with “Recyke y Bike” to make cycles available for the staff to make the one mile journey.  It was noted the hourly service from Bishop Auckland was a huge improvement.

Councillor R Crute noted that NECA had strategic responsibility and asked if there was a split, what implications could there be for the Council, both strategically and financially.  The Head of Transport and Contract Services noted that it was hugely complicated and that in terms of Tyne and Wear, if there was a split there would be a need for management arrangements for Nexus, or there is the possibility of a Joint Committee of “North of Tyne” and “South of Tyne” that could operate.  He noted that he felt that “Transport for the North” would not have conversations with each Local Authority and that there would need to be some mechanism to be able to lobby regionally.

Councillor J Maitland noted the train travelling from Sunderland to London did not stop at Seaham and asked whether this could be possible, taking pressure off Durham.  The Head of Transport and Contract Services noted that the operators on the East Line paid fares into a pot and the split they then received was based upon the number of services provided and how fast they ran and accordingly, additional stops could make the services unviable.  He noted conversations as regards the new station at Horden and that the issue is the time impact upon journeys when considering new stops.

Councillor J Clare asked as regards a link from the Main East Coast Line to Newton Aycliffe, the Forrest Park phase 2, and a rail interchange.  The Head of Transport and Contract Services noted that the market had been approached as regards the idea, having a useful site next to the motorway with good links.  He added that there was good potential; however it was at a very early stage.

Councillor P Howell noted that NECA was complex and asked how reassured could the “South of Tyne” be in terms of transport issues.  The Head of Transport and Contract Services noted that the NECA transport team was based at Newcastle, however he reminded NECA that the NECA boundary extended down to the Tees Valley and also there were links directly to Highways England and the DfT, as well as looking to align where possible with the Tees Valley Combined Authority as appropriate.

Councillor A Patterson noted that if the East Coast Line was “full” what implications did this have in terms of Durham City and regeneration.  The Head of Transport and Contract Services noted that the “Northern Powerhouse” in relation to rail was about connectivity, Leeds, Sheffield, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle.  He added that while we could champion Durham’s case, the “Northern Powerhouse” was a push for speed, for example Leeds to Newcastle was currently 90 minutes, with an aim to reduce this to 60 minutes.  He added that NECA would push the case for the whole NECA area.  It was added that improving capacity was a different issue, with Darlington Station being a constraint in terms of cross over lines.  The Head of Transport and Contract Services noted that with a mix of freight, local and fast trains, there was a need to leave bigger “gaps” to allow for the different types to operate together on two-track lines.  He added that you would need four-track, or sections where you could separate off freight to allow fast trains to pass.  The Head of Transport and Contract Services noted that there would be a need to look to help in terms of the resilience of the services.

Councillor J Atkinson asked as regards whether a Darlington relief road would be likely.  The Head of Transport and Contract Services noted the Tees Valley Combined Authority working with Highways England and together with Garden Village proposals and possible objections to new roads being developed; a scheme may come forward in around 5 years or so.  

Resolved:       

That the Economy and Enterprise Overview and Scrutiny Committee note the progress report.