Euston 'level decking' and over-throat development - post-Higgins plans

[swt_passenger]

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.c...ials-to-discuss-alternative-euston-cross-plan

Has there been any discussion of "Euston Cross" on here?

Yes, there was, back in 2013 when that article was current. The proposal was not supported by DfT or HS2.

 

[zoomwhoosh]

The Crossrail 2 station is going to be in exactly the same place as the Euston Cross platforms would be, so the idea really is very dead. If there's to be an underground through station in London it will be in a station box under a Royal Park.

Well, several things have to be said for this. I don't know where the Crossrail 2 station is being proposed (perhaps you can enlighten me) but the proposed location of Euston Cross is between Phoenix and Polygon. Now you're left with two alternatives.

One is you build the HS2 platforms further south. Something that appeals to me. The other is you build the HS2 platforms and CrossRail2 platforms at the same time. Its a wrinkle but not a show stopper.

As far as using a park is concerned was this actually considered in the official HS2 studies?

Incidentally Euston Square Gardens is 220m long in and of itself. So that would be a good start.

My favorite for now is the south eastern corner of Regents Park. You could build a through station there. In fact you could build a terminal station there but a through station saves space and allows you take the line and join it with HS1 in a different fashion.

My suggestion before was to build a "people mover" line to cross connect all four station complexes. And Crossrail2 is going to be built along that path? Even better. Simply build that section of the CR2 tunnel and use it for the shuttle service in the mean time.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes, there was, back in 2013 when that article was current. The proposal was not supported by DfT or HS2.

Figures. It contains the germ of some good ideas even though it wasn't fully worked out. Its a shame the HS2 people didn't go to the next level and try to distill the good ideas in Euston Cross and actually come up with a better plan. They seem to have fixated on using Euston and gotten themselves into a tangle rather than thinking literally outside the square.

 

[pablo]

Whoosh, you need to do some research. It's all been said before and HS2 considered every conceivable alternative to Euston for a terminus.
Problem seems to be NIH. Flaw in appointing HS2 Ltd. in the first place. Not objective enough.

 

[Deerfold]

The average VTWC loading in the peak is <250. That doesn't mean particular trains aren't full. They have too much First class seating, though.

What are you defining as the peak? The main VTEC train I mentioned is already full on a line with no paths to add more services. How do you add capacity there?

Other issues include the capacity waste from inter-running with lower performance Class 350, and the short Voyager formation.

Indeed - it would be much better to put fast trains on a different line where they won't have to interwork with TPE and LM trains.

Hang on...

Well, the number of trains timetabled on EC is very low. There are lots of ways of increasing throughput, with various price tags. One approach would be to look at the relative benefits of shutting Welwyn North station, compared with the cost of quad-tracking the tunnel/viaduct section.

Hmm, an awful lot of rich lawyers live near Welwyn North. That legal case could go on for years.

I'd be interested in what other ways you'd suggest for improving throughput on the ECML without widening Welwyn viaduct. Even if you quad track that section (with or without the viaduct) you're going to have disruption for years.

 

[zoomwhoosh]

Whoosh, you need to do some research. It's all been said before and HS2 considered every conceivable alternative to Euston for a terminus.
Problem seems to be NIH. Flaw in appointing HS2 Ltd. in the first place. Not objective enough.

I'm finding it hard to research actually. Google doesn't seem that interested in the nitty gritty detailed documents. So help is appreciated.

And when you say they considered very single alternative, did they consider every single possible location for a through station? Did they consider creating new connective routes? Did they consider from the start, things like the double deck down scheme? I bet they didn't. The fact that various groups are coming up with their own half baked schemes and then HS2 having to issue quite separate reports on these is quite telling.

Even the report on the DDD scheme had at least one major misadventure. In considering how to engineer their way around the tube stations they simply assumed they would leave the platform tunnels intact rather than digging down further, demolishing those and re-engineering from track level.

I'm not convinced HS2 went to the nth degree. It does look like they got fixated early on. But I'm happy to see the extensive documentation on every single idea they evaluated and be proved wrong. If only I could find it..

 

[pablo]

There are over a hundred threads on here that contain links to relevant documents. Try starting in the middle somewhere and working either way until, hey presto!.

 

[Voglitz]

What are you defining as the peak?

The evening peak.

The main VTEC train I mentioned is already full on a line with no paths to add more services. How do you add capacity there?

What part of the line has no paths to add more services?

Indeed - it would be much better to put fast trains on a different line where they won't have to interwork with TPE and LM trains.?

Actually, it wouldn't, because of the huge cost of a new line. All that's required is the ability to run outer LM at linespeed, and grade separation where they come off.

Hmm, an awful lot of rich lawyers live near Welwyn North.

Rich lawyers, with big cars. Who could, perhaps, quite easily drive to Garden City.

I'd be interested in what other ways you'd suggest for improving throughput on the ECML without widening Welwyn viaduct. Even if you quad track that section (with or without the viaduct) you're going to have disruption for years.

Another obvious way is to reform access charging, to discourage capacity waste from short trains (e.g. First Hull).

 

[Deerfold]

The evening peak.

Odd, I've been talking about the more compressed morning peak which is when the busiest trains are.

What part of the line has no paths to add more services?

I believe it's rather crowded through the Welwyn viaduct.

Rich lawyers, with big cars. Who could, perhaps, quite easily drive to Garden City.

I'm sure they can. I'm equally sure they won't want to.

Another obvious way is to reform access charging, to discourage capacity waste from short trains (e.g. First Hull).

I can see this point, but you're looking at fairly small capacity increases there - certainly a good place to look for some small early increases.

 

[zoomwhoosh]

There are over a hundred threads on here that contain links to relevant documents. Try starting in the middle somewhere and working either way until, hey presto!.

Oh yeah, See ya next year

Seriously, I have looked here too, but I've yet to find a document that shows HS2 going to the kinds of lengths I think are needed. Yes I've seen several of their reports dealing with alternatives to their original Euston proposal, and their backflip, and their double backflip with pike. But no, not an exhaustive evaluation from the beginning. And seriously, this does not surprise me. It happens with many complex projects. I see the same mistakes being made in Australia where the government commissioned AECOM to write a report on HSR and they gold plated it everywhere, failed to revisit their assumptions and generally got stuck in certain thought patterns.

 

[pablo]

Ha ha, well you can't expect peeps to distill complex documents into simple answers to save you the bother of reading the background to all this..

 

[Voglitz]

Odd, I've been talking about the more compressed morning peak which is when the busiest trains are.

The latest available figures showed 61% intercity occupancy into Euston in the am high peak.

I believe it's rather crowded through the Welwyn viaduct.

Another option is to extend MML electrification beyond Sheffield, to facilitate a second intercity route from West Yorkshire to London.

 

[swt_passenger]

Euston Cross mentioned in passing in "The Government Response to the HS2 Design Refinement Consultation", November 2013:

2.0.8 HS2 Ltd has examined the Euston Cross proposal at a high level. From their analysis it is clear that this would be a substantially more expensive proposal – broadly estimated at a net additional cost of £4bn to £6bn. The construction of an underground railway station between Euston and Kings Cross would be technically challenging and add many years to the construction programme. If parts of the new station had to be constructed using an ‘open box’ method, as HS2 Ltd’s engineers believe, then parts of the Somers Town Estate would need to be demolished to make way for the temporary construction works. Such a strategic rethinking of HS2 would require a substantially greater justification in terms of future passenger demand east of Euston than we consider to exist. For these reasons, the Secretary of State is clear that Euston Cross is not a realistic alternative to the revised Euston scheme.

page 6 of https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/264078/8758.pdf

 

[Deerfold]

The latest available figures showed 61% intercity occupancy into Euston in the am high peak.

And into Kings Cross? And on the commuter trains into Euston?

Another option is to extend MML electrification beyond Sheffield, to facilitate a second intercity route from West Yorkshire to London.

Well, that's going to need a lot of speeding up - and capacity increases North of Sheffield.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The latest available figures showed 61% intercity occupancy into Euston in the am high peak.

The main reason for this is the outrageous fares, which are set to maximise profit, not occupancy.

Neil

 

[zoomwhoosh]

Ha ha, well you can't expect peeps to distill complex documents into simple answers to save you the bother of reading the background to all this..

I wasn't asking for simple answers. I was just asking if anyone has a link or two that points to HS2s exhaustive consideration of its London station options. Ok?

 

[Geezertronic]

The main reason for this is the outrageous fares, which are set to maximise profit, not occupancy.

Neil

They could also be used as a tool for putting people off using the train, which has unfortunately been the case for me as my company have determined it is cheaper for me to drive than catch the train.

Yet the peak EBWs still seem to be packed

 

[Bletchleyite]

They could also be used as a tool for putting people off using the train, which has unfortunately been the case for me as my company have determined it is cheaper for me to drive than catch the train.

Yet the peak EBWs still seem to be packed

The outrageous fares are a bit more "affordable" for that shorter journey (and at the moment Chiltern isn't really an option).

Neil

 

[pablo]

Well, several things have to be said for this. I don't know where the Crossrail 2 station is being proposed (perhaps you can enlighten me) but the proposed location of Euston Cross is between Phoenix and Polygon. Now you're left with two alternatives.

One is you build the HS2 platforms further south. Something that appeals to me. The other is you build the HS2 platforms and CrossRail2 platforms at the same time. Its a wrinkle but not a show stopper.

As far as using a park is concerned was this actually considered in the official HS2 studies?

Incidentally Euston Square Gardens is 220m long in and of itself. So that would be a good start.

My favorite for now is the south eastern corner of Regents Park. You could build a through station there. In fact you could build a terminal station there but a through station saves space and allows you take the line and join it with HS1 in a different fashion.

My suggestion before was to build a "people mover" line to cross connect all four station complexes. And Crossrail2 is going to be built along that path? Even better. Simply build that section of the CR2 tunnel and use it for the shuttle service in the mean time.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Figures. It contains the germ of some good ideas even though it wasn't fully worked out. Its a shame the HS2 people didn't go to the next level and try to distill the good ideas in Euston Cross and actually come up with a better plan. They seem to have fixated on using Euston and gotten themselves into a tangle rather than thinking literally outside the square.

Erm. Asking for a link?
If you can see the rush to answer your multitudinous questions here, you may discern that the answers are spread over voluminous documents, published during the past few years.

 

[glbotu]

My favorite for now is the south eastern corner of Regents Park. You could build a through station there. In fact you could build a terminal station there but a through station saves space and allows you take the line and join it with HS1 in a different fashion.

I assume you mean an underground through station, built in a box between Chester Road and Outer Circle.

I don't know about the topological nature of the land here, so I'm going to assume that there wouldn't be any issues with a TBM under London Zoo, however, I'd suggest that there would be an issue making it a through station though, because immediately south you have

The Metropolitan Railway
The Bakerloo Line
The Jubilee Line
The Victoria Line
The Post Office Railway (I think)

All of which have to be avoided.

In addition I don't think anyone would be endeared to digging a big hole in a Royal Park, nor would the owners of the obscenely expensive houses around the area be particularly happy with the extent of required work right at their doorstep (and they're the sort of people with the money to have real political contacts).

 

[edwin_m]

To be fair the HS2 documents were never very easy to find to start with, and I think some have gone in the move to .gov.uk. However I think the process of optioneering for the London terminus is documented somewhere in the "London to West Midlands and Beyond" report which has now popped up on Railways Archive.

http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/do...hor=all&publisher=all&published=all&submit=Go

 

[zoomwhoosh]

I assume you mean an underground through station, built in a box between Chester Road and Outer Circle.

I don't know about the topological nature of the land here, so I'm going to assume that there wouldn't be any issues with a TBM under London Zoo, however, I'd suggest that there would be an issue making it a through station though, because immediately south you have

The Metropolitan Railway
The Bakerloo Line
The Jubilee Line
The Victoria Line
The Post Office Railway (I think)

All of which have to be avoided.

In addition I don't think anyone would be endeared to digging a big hole in a Royal Park, nor would the owners of the obscenely expensive houses around the area be particularly happy with the extent of required work right at their doorstep (and they're the sort of people with the money to have real political contacts).

My original intent in using that corner of Regents Park was to build a terminal station both for HS2 and to take over the functionality of Euston. Its a location where you could feasibly redirect the incoming lines that currently go to Euston.

Then once Euston station is made vacant you can rebuild it as you wish, a lot faster and more economically.

Then when Euston is re-established the extra platforms in the Regents Park station would give HS2 room to grow.

Now like I said, the original intent was for a terminal station. If it were a through station then it would go deeper but with a fraction of the platforms and with minimal disturbance on the surface (you'd establish a station box and then mine outwards from that).

And also a through station would have a different alignment. Instead of having platforms running more or less north-south, a through station would be more east-west. That would allow an easier path back towards OOC, which would be the actual home station. I wish I could add more but I don't have the path for CrossRail2.

On a similar note, Euston Square Gardens is 200m long. If you were to build a station box there and then run the platforms east-west you could also construct a through station there. It would involve mining under and outwards from the end of the station box but the difficulties in doing so would be manageable.

If you were clever you'd also consider constructing a link between Euston and Kings Cross at the same time (Pedestrian and/or provision for a people mover).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

To be fair the HS2 documents were never very easy to find to start with, and I think some have gone in the move to .gov.uk. However I think the process of optioneering for the London terminus is documented somewhere in the "London to West Midlands and Beyond" report which has now popped up on Railways Archive.

http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/do...hor=all&publisher=all&published=all&submit=Go

Thanks muchly

 

[NotATrainspott]

http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/david-higgins-hs2-cant-be-another-compromise/8686117.article

David Higgins: 'HS2 can't be another compromise'

...
What is before Parliament is a bill to build a station next to Euston, which is just for High Speed 2. People have rightfully said: well, how does that relate to the existing station? So, before the end of the year we will lodge an additional provision on the design of Euston.

This will not solve all of Euston’s problems, nor impose a solution on the community and local authority, but it will build in future flexibility and include all options, such as the future knock-down of Euston, burying it underground, and how it ties into Crossrail 2. It futureproofs the entire site.

What we’re not doing is saying: here is this high rise and here is this tower and this is what will be over the station. As we start to talk to the community we understand what the community wants.

...

This is an extract from an interview between Architects' Journal and David Higgins, and it confirms what we've seen in the past few months of media coverage about what's happening at Euston. In essence, the Hybrid Bill returns back to the Option 8 design, but there's now a clear intention that the classic part of Euston station can be reconstructed in future. That was a big problem with the way the original Option 8 plan was interpreted, as it almost seemed to suggest that they felt the remaining part of Euston would be sticking around for the forseeable future. By keeping the classic part separate, it means there's no worry about Euston delaying the entire project, and the budget for rebuilding the Network Rail part of the station can then be found from NR's coffers rather than it all being piled on HS2 Ltd.

 

[zoomwhoosh]

Because there was plenty of spare land in Central London when it was planned in the late 50s, partly courtesy of the Luftwaffe.

Air rights development is pretty straightforward, and viable in Central London. Look at Cannon St, Charing Cross, City TL (2nd one in 25 years underway now), Victoria, Fenchurch St, and most significantly Liverpool Street.

Bring back the Luftwaffe!

*duck*
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
In all seriousness watching this from the other side of the planet I still wonder whether the best answer to Euston is to simply build a new temporary station and then you're free to do what you like to the old station and it will be a lot, lot easier to engineer.

 

[edwin_m]

build a new temporary station

Where?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Where?

One option might be just short of the present one, using the existing approach and the Royal Mail shed?

 

[NotATrainspott]

One option might be just short of the present one, using the existing approach and the Royal Mail shed?

The station throat is too narrow for this to be at all possible, without demolishing significantly more homes to the sides.

What you're suggesting is more-or-less what's happening in Stuttgart as its terminus is being rebuilt as a through station underground. However, there the station throat is as wide as the terminus, meaning it's possible to simply extend platforms at the country end and shorten them at the city end.

 

[zoomwhoosh]

One option might be just short of the present one, using the existing approach and the Royal Mail shed?

I've already mentioned the southeast corner of Regents Park (and yes I'm well aware of British sensitivities, but it is after all a temporary station).

I assume the shed you're talking about is the one north of Granby Terrace? That would probably be too small to transfer the whole station but it might give you some better chance at staging.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The station throat is too narrow for this to be at all possible, without demolishing significantly more homes to the sides.

What you're suggesting is more-or-less what's happening in Stuttgart as its terminus is being rebuilt as a through station underground. However, there the station throat is as wide as the terminus, meaning it's possible to simply extend platforms at the country end and shorten them at the city end.

I suspect what you are saying about the throat is right, but you could keep the demolition to a relatively small area and quite probably move Hampstead Road over or under in the process.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The other advantage you have with having a temporary station is you're free to dig up the entire throat and double deck it if you wish.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I assume the shed you're talking about is the one north of Granby Terrace? That would probably be too small to transfer the whole station but it might give you some better chance at staging.

Yep.

The other advantage you have with having a temporary station is you're free to dig up the entire throat and double deck it if you wish.

And to consider moving to a German-style layout where every platform can be accessed from every line using a long row of crossovers?

 

[The Planner]

Apart from the disruption of building the temporary station and tieing it in and then removing it after? How do you connect it to the Underground and other transport links? The shed is a no go anyway as HS2 will be building in that area. Euston works very very well now as the throat has an element of grade seperation. Flat crossing to every platform from every line wouldnt improve it.

 

[Bald Rick]

Flat crossing to every platform from every line wouldnt improve it.

Indeed. I spent 4 years of my life getting rid of flat crossings very line to every platform at Euston. Also examined using the down Side shed as a temp station back then; it didn't work in 1999 and it won't work now.