Of course they're "undesirable". But the question is are they more or less "undesirable" than sinking £7Bn at 2023 prices on a station that can only handle 17 trains per hour, all of which will be only half full? White elephant seems a pretty good description to me.
I think some people fear that the Elizabeth Line wouldn't be able to cope on its own, although rather than have a shuttle go to Euston, perhaps upgrading the Overground to Clapham Junction and Willesden Junction would be a better spend.
Following the train of thought (pun intended!) in this thread about airports renaming themselves (to London x,y,z) why not rename HS2's southern terminus as London (Old Oak Common)...?
Agreed, people have very convenient memories. It's less than a year since the Lizzie opened fully having caused years of calls to cheapen it to fit a skimpy budget. Now there are complaints that the line is inadequate for demand it faces.
-It certainly would not be "whatever you want" on top. The local community (constituency MP Sir Keir Starmer!) will definitely have a view as would Camden Council and Sadiq Khan.
It's not as simple as "drive a few piles"! There's a reason that the foundations of a typical project take as long, if not longer than the above-ground structure. The sub-surface work (foundation, location of services, etc.) are completely dependent on the needs of the building above.
Particularly when there are multiple extant underground structures in the vicinity.
Of course, - just like it is in Belgravia or Holland Park. I suspect that the 'planning' aims of the present Government are far different to those of the MP for Holborn & St Pancras and the Mayor of London
Is there anything in the material used in the Euston Station build that is particularly extravagant, - after all, concrete foundations and structures all need to be fit for purpose according to current regulations?
Really? Crossrail cost nearly £20billion. How would reaching Gatwick through Cross London tunnels cost less than going to Euston. Where is there a sensible station site on the south side of London?
Given that the admitted to cost of Euston is now approaching £5bn.......
There is always the yard adjacent to Grosvenor railway bridge.
Indeed, Euston is clearly now unaffordable, but so is every conceivable alternative that involves a station beyond Old Oak Common.
Tunnels are comparatively cheap.
They don't come free though.
Indeed, not. But if Euston is too expensive as a terminus, just keep going with the tunnel to somewhere else cheaper. Euston becomes a simple two platform box station.
Does that solve the problem? Isn't it easier just to put some reversing sidings east of Old Oak Common, possibly in a short length of tunnel, to work like those at Westbourne Park and forget about Euston altogether?
Yes, it does. We still get a central London station, with the connections to the tube, etc. But it requires a lot less construction and, as long as the tunnel is deep enough, it still leaves the option for above-site development at a later date.
A matter of opinion.
Hardly true. It is the proposed position for the first few years in any case, actual period unknown.
Well if you accept a Blackfriars bridge type solution with platforms over the river, you could just dive into a 4% gradient straight from the end of the platform and try to get depth before you run out of width to the north.
