HS2 in the press

[Busaholic]

Surprised nobody has picked up on Andrew Gilligan article in latest Sunday Telegraph, reporting the seeking of a new chairman of HS2 in an official Cabinet Office newsletter. Sir David's £475,000 P.A. job is listed as a 'forthcoming opportunity' in the April 28 edition of the Cabinet Office's public appointments bulletin, despite his contract being extended in January this year. Gilligan speculates that Sir David Higgins has tendered his resignation: if so, what does it signal for the viability of the project? Or is it just anti-HS2 propaganda from the usual sources?

 

[edwin_m]

Just Googled to find that bulletin, but found instead the Telegraph article which says it was advertised in error.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-year-post-advertised-in-error-by-government/

 

[WatcherZero]

Congratulations to the Daily Mail for LITERALLY printing a Not In My Back Yard article.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

 

[Domh245]

Congratulations to the Daily Mail for LITERALLY printing a Not In My Back Yard article.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

Must be a big back yard then if it is going to wreak havoc from half a mile away (although I guess that is about par for the course round that way)

 

[Harbornite]

The only thing worse than that article is the comment's section.

 

[swt_passenger]

The Times (paywalled unfortunately) ran anti HS2 stories Sunday and today. Sunday was basically a rehash of last weekend's scare stories in the Telegraph about major cuts to phase 2.

Today's story is about Network Rail intending to start preparatory work at Euston soon, i.e. before Royal Assent, which will cause chaos for passengers as Euston shuts down half its platforms...

 

[The Ham]

The only thing worse than that article is the comment's section.

Like this one:

This entire scheme needs to be scrapped, because no one is in a hurry to travel to Birmingham, yet alone get there quick. People from up North are more likely to want to travel down South especially to London, due to our better employment prospects....but we don't want them here!! The money would be better spent building a wall to keep them out of London and the South East.

I would guess that the same user would also like to be able to vote for Trump (given his view about walls/fences keeping others away from the area you are in).

 

[jon0844]

Perhaps that person thinks Brexit is about Brummies no longer remaining part of the UK?

 

[edwin_m]

Sounds like a common or garden (backyard?) troll.

 

[Greybeard33]

The BBC Radio 4 Today Programme, 10-May-16, had an interview with Tony Lloyd (Greater Manchester Police and Crime Commissioner and Interim Mayor), reacting against the Sunday Times story about possible loss of the Manchester Airport station. The package should be available on iPlayer, about 90 minutes into the programme.

 

[miami]

Depends if someone wants to turn around to Stafford and say "sorry you aren't getting anything", pretty safe Tory seat with 9000 majority. Nothing will get decided until after Hybrid Bill anyway.

If it's a safe seat, then it's likely not going to suffer any backlash. It's the marginals that get the benefits

 

[Greybeard33]

From http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/hs2-route-manchester-airport-plan-11311836 - Sunday Times story refuted:

Suggestions Manchester Airport has been axed from the HS2 route are ‘unequivocally untrue’, [Manchester City] council leader Sir Richard Leese has insisted - while the government says its position has not changed.

Sources had told a Sunday newspaper that the airport stop - which was inserted into plans for the line after sustained lobbying from the region - may get pulled.
(snip)
Transport Minister Robert Goodwill said: “This isn’t true. Our position hasn’t changed – the government still supports a station at Manchester Airport.”

Sir Richard said he had spoken to senior transport officials at both the Department for Transport and the Treasury this morning.

“I have had direct assurances from them that they wholly support a station at Manchester airport and it is not subject to a review,” he said.

“The government continues to support a station at Manchester Airport.”

An ongoing review into HS2 by the Cabinet Office does not have the airport stop within its scope, he said, adding that the story was simply ‘wild speculation’.

 

[Harbornite]

Like this one:



I would guess that the same user would also like to be able to vote for Trump (given his view about walls/fences keeping others away from the area you are in).

I do read the Daily mail so I'm guilty there, but the comments section is swarming with thick *******s like him.

 

[MancMetro]

Sadiq Khan expressing doubts about the current Euston plans on an LBC phone-in:
http://www.lbc.co.uk/speak-to-sadiq-live-on-lbc-watch-from-10am-130690 5:25 - 9:50

From his answer it's not clear whether he realises that Old Oak Common is planned to be a permanent HS2 station that all trains will stop at.

 

[The Ham]

Sadiq Khan expressing doubts about the current Euston plans on an LBC phone-in:
http://www.lbc.co.uk/speak-to-sadiq-live-on-lbc-watch-from-10am-130690 5:25 - 9:50

From his answer it's not clear whether he realises that Old Oak Common is planned to be a permanent HS2 station that all trains will stop at.

The Evening Standard has some more details:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...ink-over-hs2-terminus-at-euston-a3252066.html

Sadiq Khan has called for the High Speed 2 redevelopment of Euston station to be put on hold until a less disruptive plan is found.

The Mayor said the works would cause “huge inconvenience” to thousands of residents, with hundreds of homes and businesses destroyed.

He suggested the link, set to open fully in 2033, should terminate temporarily at the Old Oak Common interchange in west London.

Camden council is backing residents who are campaigning against what they claim will be “a decade of disruption” and Mr Khan’s intervention adds weight to the residents’ case that the Government should rethink the proposed Euston terminus.

...

One of the things I’m looking into is whether you should look at Old Oak Common as a temporary station until some of the issues are dealt with. You’d have fast links with Heathrow, fast links to Crossrail and also far less disruption.”

 

[edwin_m]

That pre-supposes that a new and less disruptive plan can be thought up if people have a bit longer to think about it. Seeing as the plans have already been changed several times, I can't imagine that is likely.

The more likely consequence would be adopting a cheaper but longer construction programme, which might slightly reduce the amount of disruption at any given time but would extend the overall disruption over a longer period. That sounds to me like a worse deal - and one that Sadiq Khan might live to regret suggesting if it turns out HS2 need to save a billion or two.

 

[Haydn1971]

That pre-supposes that a new and less disruptive plan can be thought up if people have a bit longer to think about it. Seeing as the plans have already been changed several times, I can't imagine that is likely.

A less disruptive plan would be a distributed London station, I've suggested before that terminating all services at Euston was a recipe for chaos on the distribution network linking Euston to the rest of London.

My solution is to first build an underground station going east-west under the buildings between Euston and St Pancras, providing four platforms and a pair of through tracks onwards to link to the HS1 tunnel to an enlarged Stratford Station. I'd propose also to build the spur to Heathrow.

This would allow HS2 services at the southern end of HS2 to be distributed to;
- West (Old Oak)
- Airside (Heathrow)
- Central (between Euston and St Pancras)
- East (Stratford)

Expensive I accept, but this distributed solution provides a much more balanced feed into London and its key passenger destinations across Greater London.

 

[Deerfold]

A less disruptive plan would be a distributed London station, I've suggested before that terminating all services at Euston was a recipe for chaos on the distribution network linking Euston to the rest of London.

My solution is to first build an underground station going east-west under the buildings between Euston and St Pancras, providing four platforms and a pair of through tracks onwards to link to the HS1 tunnel to an enlarged Stratford Station. I'd propose also to build the spur to Heathrow.

This would allow HS2 services at the southern end of HS2 to be distributed to;
- West (Old Oak)
- Airside (Heathrow)
- Central (between Euston and St Pancras)
- East (Stratford)

Expensive I accept, but this distributed solution provides a much more balanced feed into London and its key passenger destinations across Greater London.

If you're having an East West station (and I've a feeling that's going to have to be a long way down to avoid everything that's already down there like the British Library vaults) presumably you'll have to change the approach route of HS2 which is currently planned to approach from the North.

 

[Haydn1971]

Yes, absolutely... I've had sight of rail/tube routes down there when I was working on a TfL study for the highways around there, but I don't recall that info having the vaults on

 

[edwin_m]

Yes, absolutely... I've had sight of rail/tube routes down there when I was working on a TfL study for the highways around there, but I don't recall that info having the vaults on

The "Euston Cross" proposal did something like this, so is presumably feasible in principle despite the numerous things to be avoided underneath Euston and Kings Cross. This was dismissed as too expensive, but I think if the objective is trying to minimise disruption then putting an underground station of at least four platforms between Euston and St Pancras will do the opposite!

 

[Haydn1971]

Ah, interesting... I'd not seen this proposal, like it !

 

[swt_passenger]

Ah, interesting... I'd not seen this proposal, like it !

Euston Cross was a popular topic in and around early 2013, but DfT had basically turned it down by November that year. It has been discussed repeatedly in previous threads, but this extract from the report effectively summarises the situation:

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 justi cation 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.

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

 

[HSTEd]

Only real option for a new station in London would be buried in an open box under a Park really.
Anything else would be far too expensive.

 

[shyanthony]

Regents Park would be the closest that I have in mind....

Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk

 

[swt_passenger]

Regents Park would be the closest that I have in mind....

It was Regents Park that was considered and rejected:

Beneath a Royal Park.
In the spirit of looking at possible options, we investigated the potential for developing a station underneath one of the central London Royal Parks. We looked at possible sites in Green Park, Hyde Park and Regent’s Park. We envisaged using a cut and cover methodology so that the park would be reinstated after construction with the only visible structures within the park being a station entrance, associated access provision, emergency exits and the vent shafts that would be necessary to provide ventilation and a means for smoke to escape in case of fire. Construction of this nature in a green-field site poses relatively few engineering issues, mainly associated with aligning the underground box to fit with existing tunnels. Of the Royal Park locations, Regent’s Park offered better connectivity than Green Park or Hyde Park. This option had made it through stage one on the basis that we required further information from a planning and sustainability perspective.

Gaining permission to build in any Royal Park would require a significant shift in the protection afforded to these sites, which have remained largely unchanged for nearly 200 years. We took the view that further consideration of a terminal station in any Royal Park should only be undertaken as a matter of last resort. We recognise that there would be significant opposition to building in these open spaces that have been safeguarded for the enjoyment of Londoners and visitors alike and which are London landmarks. We therefore concluded that no options to build beneath the Royal Parks should be taken forward.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives....ghspeedrail/hs2ltd/hs2report/pdf/chapter3.pdf

 

[snowball]

It was Regents Park that was considered and rejected:

That's a fascinating quote, not least because the pair of letters "fi" is missing from it in several places, though there is no problem with "f" and "i" separately. How could that happen?

Edit: I suppose it could happen by scanning in printed text that had "fi" as a single block of print (a "ligature") which the scanner failed to recognise, but that's not the case here - when you follow the link to the original document it has the individual letters!

 

[NotATrainspott]

That's a fascinating quote, not least because the pair of letters "fi" is missing from it in several places, though there is no problem with "f" and "i" separately. How could that happen?

Edit: I suppose it could happen by scanning in printed text that had "fi" as a single block of print (a "ligature") which the scanner failed to recognise, but that's not the case here - when you follow the link to the original document it has the individual letters!

A lot of PDF typesetters break copy-pasting accidentally. I have to spend a few minutes cleaning up any copy-pasted text from Arup's reports whenever I quote from them.

 

[matacaster]

Knock down ugly National Library - it could be easily rebuilt elsewhere. Build HS2 terminus on what was StPancras goods yard. Easy connection to HS1. Great foot access to StPancras international, Kings Cross, Euston not too far away. Would need some tunnelling (or less likely viaduct widening) to connect to WCML.

 

[snowball]

Knock down ugly National Library - it could be easily rebuilt elsewhere.

As someone with a dim memory of the vast hassle over getting it built in the first place, I find that amusing.

 

[MarkyT]

Knock down ugly National Library - it could be easily rebuilt elsewhere. Build HS2 terminus on what was StPancras goods yard. Easy connection to HS1. Great foot access to StPancras international, Kings Cross, Euston not too far away. Would need some tunnelling (or less likely viaduct widening) to connect to WCML.

To build a HS terminal of sufficient length and width next to St Pancras you'd also have to remove the brand new Francis Crick Institute and some housing north thereof.