More Delay for HS2, and how should we proceed?

[Danfilm007]

99% sure it was part of Phase 1, just was always planned to be a few years later.

Thanks! I wasn't entirely mad then!..

 

[snowball]

Euston has always been part of phase 1.

I was under the impression that if you go back far enough it was originally intended to open simultaneously with the route to Curzon Street and Handsacre, and that the idea of it opening later came with one of the subsequent reviews, but I may be wrong on that point.

 

[tomuk]

I think it’s optimistic to expect 24tph to OOC. Let alone ‘+’

So GWR and HEX aren't going to stop at OOC?

 

[JonathanH]

Have they seen the Euston works (which were still ongoing 2 days ago!). It will go to Euston I am nigh on 100% certain.

The site needs to be made safe before tools can be dropped.

 

[tomuk]

For capital projects like HS2, the government borrows on the market for the long term, it doesn't come out of current tax receipts.
It increases interest payments, which do come out of taxation, but there's no equivalence between (eg) paying TOCs to run trains and paying HS2 to build a new railway.
HS2 money is specifically tied to the HS2 project, same as it would be for building an aircraft carrier or motorway.

No it doesn't it just issues government bonds to cover the deficit for the current period, they aren't HS2 Bonds or M6 Bonds or QEC Class Bonds. Some of the Gilits maybe longer dated than others as they maybe at different rates or indexed or not, but these variations are just to provide a portfolio of bonds the market is interested in.

 

[Bald Rick]

So GWR and HEX aren't going to stop at OOC?

I was referring to the EL services.

However I’d expect passengers travelling between OOC and Paddington to be directed to the EL anyway.

 

[tomuk]

Euston has always been part of phase 1.

I was under the impression that if you go back far enough it was originally intended to open simultaneously with the route to Curzon Street and Handsacre, and that the idea of it opening later came with one of the subsequent reviews, but I may be wrong on that point.

Yes you are quite correct it was all due to open at the same time, only as problems at Euston continued did a previous review split Euston off to allow time to resolve the problems. I believe that the additional platforms at OOC that allows this to happen are a combination of a comfortable allowances made for train disruption in the earlier plans and the provision of the HS1 link.

 

[eh_oh]

What's happening to the turnback loop at Paddington?
Is it going to be decomissioned/not used in regular service?

 

[JonathanH]

What's happening to the turnback loop at Paddington?
Is it going to be decomissioned/not used in regular service?

Even if every train usually proceeded to Old Oak Common or beyond, it would still be needed for turnback in times of service perturbation.

Besides, any extension to Old Oak Common isn't for at least six years.

 

[Tezza1978]

The site needs to be made safe before tools can be dropped.

Of course, I'm aware of that, but an enormous amount of work has been done, utilities work / surveys will continue, in addition to the TBM producing the works tunnel. Its clear this pause is for accounting purposes only, Harper has essentially admitted this.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

That assumes they actually go ahead with the build of the tunnels to Euston.

They could just not build the tunnels, saving money without having to admit that Euston build is cancelled.

Then in a few years they will point to the enormously increased cost of the Euston project as an excuse to axe it and sell the land to some gigantic conglomerate for redevelopment.

The "Crichel Down Rules" prevent the later from happening. Euston will be a railway station or it will be sold back to it's original owners (unless they don't want it.)

It is to prevent government land grabs (however they might be disguised) that Crichel Down Rules exist.

 

[Mag_seven]

Just a reminder that posts here should be about delays to HS2.

I moved some posts that were actually discussing the HS2 works at Old Oak Common to this thread:

HS2 Old Oak Common

Yep, file is dated 2012, though as I say, you would imagine it would have been cheaper to connect the centre lines to the outer bores and leave everything else (i.e. the station box) as designed. Given how early the HS1 link was dropped, they may well have chosen to move the portal locations to...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Passing Lichfield on the WCML today, there's major work in progress on the HS2 underpass.
More evidence that the WCML link at Handsacre is not "paused".

 

[Geogregor]

Passing Lichfield on the WCML today, there's major work in progress on the HS2 underpass.
More evidence that the WCML link at Handsacre is not "paused".

Yep, here is video:

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Nice video. And also plenty going on on the final approach to Eusron, though this may be part of the "orderly stop" process.

 

[Dan G]

HS2 | DfT looking to reduce scope of Euston station in third attempt at design | New Civil Engineer

Development of Euston station for HS2 has been put on pause for two years to “rephase” it for delivery in the 2040s. The time will be spent working on a

www.newcivilengineer.com

The Department for Transport (DfT) and HS2 Ltd are looking to reduce the scope and the requirements of the High Speed 2 (HS2) London terminal at Euston as they begin the process of redesigning it for a third time in hopes of reducing the cost.

Development of Euston station for HS2 has been put on pause for two years to “rephase” it for delivery in the 2040s.

Hard to see how a Euston station could cost less than a concrete box with a rebar truss to support any overhead building and a simple "spine" roof prefabbed off-site, but there we go.

Note the confirmation that the current plan is no Euston station until the 2040s, and that current works on the site are only to finish rerouting utilities.

 

[stuu]

It would cost vastly less if it didn't have to cater for over-site development, that is where the issues have been. Either the budget goes up or the structure gets simpler

 

[Nottingham59]

It would cost vastly less if it didn't have to cater for over-site development, that is where the issues have been. Either the budget goes up or the structure gets simpler

How does that work, then? The value of over-site development should reduce the net cost....

And I see that the DfT are saying:

"We’re going to have to look at scope, we’re going to have to look at the extent of our requirements, we’re going to have to look at whether and where it may be appropriate to make some trade-offs in order to get something which is more affordable.” .... “Looking at the totality of the requirements […] we may have to be prepared to make some decisions about the prioritisation of those.”

Do we know what the DfT "requirements" are which are costing so much, and might get prioritised away?

 

[Roast Veg]

How does that work, then? The value of over-site development should reduce the net cost....

Over three life of the asset, yes. The DfT have a problem balancing their accounts for the next 5 years, which won't be solved in time by over site development.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Over three life of the asset, yes. The DfT have a problem balancing their accounts for the next 5 years, which won't be solved in time by over site development.

That would seem to advocate for the idea of building something simple and cheap now, e.g. 8-10 platforms with a plastic tent over the top, but with passive provision for oversite development and platforms 9-11. Or are the piles the most expensive bit?

 

[hwl]

It would cost vastly less if it didn't have to cater for over-site development, that is where the issues have been. Either the budget goes up or the structure gets simpler

That was one of DfT points in the committee hearing which is what NCE is reporting.
They are looking at options involving oversite and non-oversite (i.e. back to original thinking) to see if oversite adds value and if so how that value is captured, because it looks like oversite is a bit nebulous in terms of precise build therefore valued incredibly conservatively.
Cutting the volume of social housing build element is another area for cost reduction as is the level/quality of integration with the existing NR and LU stations.

Ultimately Treasury requires options to help assess value. All it may potentially uncover / discover naivety in original costing and inflation assumptions.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Apr 2023 ==

Over three life of the asset, yes. The DfT have a problem balancing their accounts for the next 5 years, which won't be solved in time by over site development.

Agreed and cash flow after that as well hence the very slow build profile overall.

 

[zwk500]

How does that work, then? The value of over-site development should reduce the net cost....

The sale of the over-site development repays the cost, but the cash to build it still needs to be available.

That would seem to advocate for the idea of building something simple and cheap now, e.g. 8-10 platforms with a plastic tent over the top, but with passive provision for oversite development and platforms 9-11. Or are the piles the most expensive bit?

The foundations will be an expensive part as they need to be insulated from vibration and strong enough to take the later building. Oversite development also drives important aspects of the station design such as the location of plant and the PA layout due to residential building requirements for different noise and vibration levels at different frequencies and peaks/average loadings etc. Euston will be easier than Crossrail OSD as they won't have to contend with the Tunnel ventilation requirements directly, but the structure for the building will need to be known in advance so that the foundations can be built around the track layout.

 

[SynthD]

I’m not usually a cynic but I’m beginning to wonder if there’s a personal and profitable link between the customer and agency, ie DfT and the contractor tasked with rewriting plans.

 

[Xavi]

Note the confirmation that the current plan is no Euston station until the 2040s, and that current works on the site are only to finish rerouting utilities.

Not true. The 2040s headlines are all media speculation and sensationalism. As Thurston has said, Euston Station build will recommence in 18 months time. OOC can only handle a Birmingham shuttle as a terminus. No good once Handsacre Jnc (being built now) is completed as part of phase 1.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Apr 2023 ==

Not true. The 2040s headlines are all media speculation and sensationalism. As Thurston has said, Euston Station build will recommence in 18 months time. OOC can only handle a Birmingham shuttle as a terminus. No good once Handsacre Jnc (being built now) is completed as part of phase 1.

Now it could be true! ALL CHANGE!

DfT has belatedly realised OOC can’t handle more than 6 tph as a terminal. Its solution is to pause sub lots 7 and 8 on phase one - the link to WCML - so all existing WCML services from north of Birmingham will have to use existing Euston for longer.

If they had any clue what they were doing (and weren’t at the call of HMT), this would have been part of the previous ph 2a pause announcement.

 

[Nottingham59]

DfT has belatedly realised OOC can’t handle more than 6 tph as a terminal. Its solution is to pause sub lots 7 and 8 on phase one - the link to WCML - so all existing WCML services from north of Birmingham will have to use existing Euston for longer.

Where has that been reported, please?

 

[Xavi]

Where has that been reported, please?

nowhere yet

 

[tomuk]

nowhere yet

How does that equate with the 'slightly North of Birmingham' line used by Ministers recently and the assurances given to a certain hirsute Lichfield MP.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

Nice video. And also plenty going on on the final approach to Euston, though this may be part of the "orderly stop" process.

I have been musing about that - IIRC the "Euston Approaches" and "Euston Station" are separate contracts, so would/could the approaches work continue (notwithstanding speculation about when the bored tunnels from OOC will be built..?) As best I can tell the "approaches" lot is up to and including Hamstead Road bridge and the "station" lot is everything south of there (unless anyone knows better.)

Incidentally, has anyone spotted any of the "usual suspects" playing the "we told you so" card...?

 

[snowball]

How does that equate with the 'slightly North of Birmingham' line used by Ministers recently and the assurances given to a certain hirsute Lichfield MP.

The assurances were not very ironclad. The minister said that as far as he was concerned the work on the north end of phase 1 was continuing, suggesting he feared he might be overruled by the SoS for Transport or the Treasury. He said he would get back to the MP.

 

[Dan G]

That was one of DfT points in the committee hearing which is what NCE is reporting.
They are looking at options involving oversite and non-oversite (i.e. back to original thinking) to see if oversite adds value and if so how that value is captured, because it looks like oversite is a bit nebulous in terms of precise build therefore valued incredibly conservatively.
Cutting the volume of social housing build element is another area for cost reduction as is the level/quality of integration with the existing NR and LU stations.

Ultimately Treasury requires options to help assess value. All it may potentially uncover / discover naivety in original costing and inflation assumptions.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Apr 2023 ==


Agreed and cash flow after that as well hence the very slow build profile overall.

The mad thing is that this options appraisal hasn't been done already! Though I'm not sure that tops letting contracts for Euston before determining the construction cost...

HS2/DfT seem to have made an absolute pig's ear of this one.