What happened to the proposed HS1-HS2 link?

[MarkyT]

Or anything below ground: the Crossrail 2 plans have the lines and the station running alongside the north of the Library. The depth of the Crossrail platforms would make it a non-ideal path for walking between the stations, too, though at least it would exist. An enhanced Euston Square station with easy access from Euston itself would do the most to ensure connectivity between the Euston Road stations, I think, with the advantage of the depth of the subsurface lines.

That would be a long way round though. Its only about 500m from the east side of Euston to the west side of St Pancras. A direct path on the surface or just below it could miss the library to the north, and the Euston master plan includes a major east-west access about half way along the existing platforms, although clearly at Phase 1 the new facilties will not stretch all the way across the east side of the station. Here's an idea I sketched up a few years ago: http://www.townend.me/files/kxlink.pdf

 

[Muzer]

Looks like a great idea - so I'm sure it'll never happen!

 

[Bald Rick]

Mark, that's exactly where the CR2 tunnels will be, and there's an awful lot of stuff in the way already. Not least the rather extensive basements of both the Crick and Library.

 

[edwin_m]

Not entirely sure I follow, surely any HS1-HS2 link would be in the Euston/St Pancras area, not the Old Oak Common area. Do you mean the Heathrow link or am I missing something obvious?

I never quite understood why the link tunnel had to go all the way to Old Oak in the first place. Surely an underground junction not far from Euston (as part of the original design rather than being added later) would have done the job?

Interestingly enough, two prominent Brexiteers (Michael Fabricant and Bill Cash) as well as Jeremy Lefroy have tabled an amendment to the HS2 phase 2a bill objecting to it on the grounds of (amongst others) of it failing "to connect via HS2 Phase 1 with HS1, the Channel Tunnel and the European continent, fails to connect directly through HS2 Phase 1 with potential airport hubs for London and the south-east of England,"

As well as the obvious point about Brexit, this is also stupid in that phase 2a goes from Lichfield to Crewe, and any connection would have to be off phase 1 in the London area. Cash, Lefroy and Fabricant representing parts of Staffordshire that won't have HS2 stations makes me think this is more of a "wrecking amendment".

As a feat of extreme crayonism I would also suggest rerouting longer distance GWR services services that currently serve Paddington into Euston, via a new connection from Old Oak Common to near Queens Park, thence using classic tracks into the enlarged terminus. That way ALL of London's longer distance domestic intercity services would be available a fairly short walk from the international terminal delivering outstanding levels of connectivity. Connections via Elizabeth Line would still be available at OOC for GWR customers going to West End, City and Docklands.

I think that's a crayon too far, not least because the classic station at Euston will be half the size so will be pushed to handle the remaining WCML service.

Or anything below ground: the Crossrail 2 plans have the lines and the station running alongside the north of the Library. The depth of the Crossrail platforms would make it a non-ideal path for walking between the stations, too, though at least it would exist. An enhanced Euston Square station with easy access from Euston itself would do the most to ensure connectivity between the Euston Road stations, I think, with the advantage of the depth of the subsurface lines.

How about a moving walkway in a glass tube above Brill Place? This could link to a mid-platform bridge at Euston (which I think is part of HS2 plans though less sure about the classic side) and to the EMT concourse at St Pancras.

 

[MarkyT]

Mark, that's exactly where the CR2 tunnels will be, and there's an awful lot of stuff in the way already. Not least the rather extensive basements of both the Crick and Library.

Yes I know about the basements, which is why I would advocate crossing the new square immediately to the south of the Crick at ground level. Crick is also concerned with noise and vibrations from machinery upsetting their delicate lab experiments so don't want want travolators passing immediately adjacent. So any any mechanised elements of a link would have to begin to the west Ossulston St. I guess that will affect options for the Crossrail 2 entrance at the St Pancras end as well, and construction methods. The Drummond Crescent Met Police garage at the Euston end was demolished in 2016:


And steelwork for the new school was well underway in Streetview dated May 2017:


I still think a significantly improved pedestrian route between the terminals is desirable and may become essential with the area's increasing growth and the potential for easy interchange between so many transport routes. The problem with some suggestions that people should descend to the tube at one station to catch a train for one stop and ascend at the other is that the distance walked to achieve this will be greater than a theoretical direct walk between, and about equal to a walk along the deeply unpleasant urban canyon that is Euston Road with all its road crossings and pollution, and once Crossrail 2 is built, the obvious thing to do will be to go down to platform level and back up at the other end of the station as the shortest covered route via a TfL gate lines, for which a cross London mainline journey would normally include authorisation to use as part of a tube transfer (a fully covered tube transfer without actually using a tube train!). That has potential to lead to extra crowding on the platforms unless some other measures are provided such as a separate tunnel between the platforms all the way from one entrance to the other OR an alternative attractive (at least partially) covered route closer to or on the surface.

 

[MarkyT]

I never quite understood why the link tunnel had to go all the way to Old Oak in the first place. Surely an underground junction not far from Euston (as part of the original design rather than being added later) would have done the job?

I think they wanted to avoid excavating constructing major junction caverns in the area. An extra TBM set off from OOC was seen as more easily constructable. As it was proposed to be only a single line all the way capacity would have been severeley limited clearly.

I think that's a crayon too far, not least because the classic station at Euston will be half the size so will be pushed to handle the remaining WCML service.

Maybe so! I don't think it's quite half the size in the end, but I was banking on remaining traffic on WCML having significantly shorter dwells at Euston than typical long distance services today, so platform utilisation might be improved. Also that a number of slow line services might become part of Crossrail via the proposed link from OOC.

How about a moving walkway in a glass tube above Brill Place? This could link to a mid-platform bridge at Euston (which I think is part of HS2 plans though less sure about the classic side) and to the EMT concourse at St Pancras.

A problem with any raised solution in the area is the visual intrusion of the structure itself close to residences as well as the fear of people passing through the raised glass tube being able to see into those residences.

 

[edwin_m]

Yes I know about the basements, which is why I would advocate crossing the new square immediately to the south of the Crick at ground level. Crick is also concerned with noise and vibrations from machinery upsetting their delicate lab experiments so don't want want travolators passing immediately adjacent. So any any mechanised elements of a link would have to begin to the west Ossulston St. I guess that will affect options for the Crossrail 2 entrance at the St Pancras end as well, and construction methods.

They can't be that sensitive, as they already have several sorts of train across the road at St Pancras including the deafening screech as Thameslink trains round the curve at the south end of the platforms. There are also the Thameslink escalators, and presumably they have raised no objection to Crossrail 2 under their northern boundary. If you're planning to do that sort of experiment then central London probably isn't the best place to be...

I still think a significantly improved pedestrian route between the terminals is desirable and may become essential with the areas increasing growth and the potential for easy interchange between so many transport routes. The problem with some suggestions that people should descend to the tube at one station to catch a train for one stop and ascend at the other is that the distance walked to achieve this will be greater than a theoretical direct walk between, and about equal to a walk along the deeply unpleasant urban canyon that is Euston Road with all its road crossings and pollution, and once Crossrail 2 is built, the obvious thing to do will be to go down to platform level and back up at the other end of the station as the shortest covered route via a TfL gate lines, for which a cross London mainline journey would normally include authorisation to use as part of a tube transfer (a fully covered tube transfer without actually using a tube train!). That has potential to lead to extra crowding on the platforms unless some other measures are provided such as a separate tunnel between the platfroms all the way from one entrance to the other OR an alternative attractive (at least partially) covered route closer to or on the surface.

Fully agree with that. At the Crossrail underground stations the escalators/lifts lead down to a concourse tunnel between the two platform tunnels, and if the same was adopted for Crossrail 2 and the two concourse tunnels linked then no need for people to clog the platforms themselves. Going through the barriers and out again is a wheeze I hadn't thought of - I was going to suggest making that central tunnel big enough for a galleried walkway above the paid circulation area but that would entail putting all the barriers at that level or having separate escalators/lifts for unpaid transfers.
https://learninglegacy.crossrail.co...e-tunnel-Structures-in-Farringdon-Station.jpg

 

[Bald Rick]

They can't be that sensitive, as they already have several sorts of train across the road at St Pancras including the deafening screech as Thameslink trains round the curve at the south end of the platforms. There are also the Thameslink escalators, and presumably they have raised no objection to Crossrail 2 under their northern boundary. If you're planning to do that sort of experiment then central London probably isn't the best place to be...
jpg

You'll find their response to the last consultation on page 299 of this link:

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cr..._uploads/crossrail2autumn2015consultation.pdf
You can see it was very much an objection.

Separately, it is quite clear that there will be no unpaid link underground due to space constraints, as can be seen in the first para on page 43 of this link:

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/crossrail2/october2015/user_uploads/rtir.pdf

(My iPad / browser won't let me copy and paste the relevant paras, apologies for flexing forum rules).

Also worth noting that the St Pancras escalators were there around 7 years before the Crick basements were occupied, and electric trains (with very noisy EMC) were there 34 years before. So presumably the design allowed for that. St Pancras low level is also further away than the proposed Crossrail 2 tunnels. The latter are literally a few metres away from the lower level basements, the lowest of which (4 storeys / 20 metres down) contains laboratories, with presumably sensitive equipment.

 

[MarkyT]

Fully agree with that. At the Crossrail underground stations the escalators/lifts lead down to a concourse tunnel between the two platform tunnels, and if the same was adopted for Crossrail 2 and the two concourse tunnels linked then no need for people to clog the platforms themselves.

That was my thought too. Link the two concourse tunnels and install moving walkways, all on the paid side which shouldn't be a problem for through booked tickets. Might be more difficult if you have booked in two separate legs, quite likely where an International leg is involved. Perhaps all international bookings from St P should include a complimentary gate pass only valid for this transfer. I wonder how Oyster PAYG would resolve such a route. I think it should be allowed without error or charge, as long as completed within a specified short time (say 15 minutes).

 

[Bald Rick]

That was my thought too. Link the two concourse tunnels and install moving walkways, all on the paid side which shouldn't be a problem for through booked tickets. Might be more difficult if you have booked in two separate legs, quite likely where an International leg is involved. Perhaps all international bookings from St P should include a complimentary gate pass only valid for this transfer. I wonder how Oyster PAYG would resolve such a route. I think it should be allowed without error or charge, as long as completed within a specified short time (say 15 minutes).

Given the vertical distance, I think it will be a minimum of two escalators each end. Add in the non direct route and barrier pfaff.... It will be popular in the rain, but otherwise expect people to stay up top. Can't see TfL wanting to let payg through for free as it would contest the station. Of course those on travel cards will still be going through if they want to.

 

[MarkyT]

Separately, it is quite clear that there will be no unpaid link underground due to space constraints

OK, but their argument that any 'improved'* surface routes will be shorter is highly debatable, and of course they will still involve a number of road crossings and will not be covered. Hence I believe using the Crossrail 2 route will become popular with Oyster holders and experienced travellers with through London bookings even if it's not explicitly signposted and especially when it's p*ssing down outside!

* I expect that might extend to a few extra signposts

 

[MarkyT]

Given the vertical distance, I think it will be a minimum of two escalators each end. Add in the non direct route and barrier pfaff.... It will be popular in the rain, but otherwise expect people to stay up top. Can't see TfL wanting to let payg through for free as it would contest the station. Of course those on travel cards will still be going through if they want to.

How indirect is it really (especially once the domestic side of Euston is finished with a mid point bridge across the whole complex) is and what is the vertical difference? People use the Waterloo East to Southwark link to exit from the Waterloo complex onto Blackfriars Rd quite extensively I understand, and gates allow it without a charge for people with 'London Terminal' tickets apparently. Ok they don't go down to platform level but they're passing through the TfL paid area.

 

[Ianno87]

OK, but their argument that any 'improved'* surface routes will be shorter is highly debatable, and of course they will still involve a number of road crossings and will not be covered. Hence I believe using the Crossrail 2 route will become popular with Oyster holders and experienced travellers with through London bookings even if it's not explicitly signposted and especially when it's p*ssing down outside!

* I expect that might extend to a few extra signposts

Would be an interesting use of the cross-London Maltese Cross. Enter the CR2 station, walk the length of the platforms, then exit the other end!

I assume Liverpool Street/Moorgate will have the same quirk later this year...

 

[Bald Rick]

How indirect is it really (especially once the domestic side of Euston is finished with a mid point bridge across the whole complex) is and what is the vertical difference? People use the Waterloo East to Southwark link to exit from the Waterloo complex onto Blackfriars Rd quite extensively I understand, and gates allow it without a charge for people with 'London Terminal' tickets apparently. Ok they don't go down to platform level but they're passing through the TfL paid area.

Well yes, I use that back exit to WAE. But then there's no equivalent route at street level, ie it is much quicker via Southwark tube than going up the ramps, along the elevated walkway, down the never ending stairs, and via Cornwall St and the cut.

With the platform level of CR2 being around 30m below ground level (my guess, it's got to get under the northern lines), that's a lot of extra 'walking' time. Speaking personally, I'll stay up top unless it's raining hard.

Besides, no one knows what the domestic side of Euston will look like yet.

 

[edwin_m]

* I expect that might extend to a few extra signposts

They have already appeared - lime green banners announcing the "Healthy Walking Route to Kings Cross" or some such.

 

[MarkyT]

They have already appeared - lime green banners announcing the "Healthy Walking Route to Kings Cross" or some such.

Along the Euston Road???? (cough, splutter!!!!)

 

[edwin_m]

Along the Euston Road???? (cough, splutter!!!!)

No, Brill Place. There's a notice at the Euston end (probably elsewhere too) to say it is a route to avoid Euston Road.

Something similar was done during the Olympics.

 

[Bald Rick]

No, Brill Place. There's a notice at the Euston end (probably elsewhere too) to say it is a route to avoid Euston Road.

Something similar was done during the Olympics.

The signs have been there a while, and from personal observation more use is being made of it. I'm willing to bet that The Cock pub has seen no increase in custom though, you need to be be Billy big b*llocks to go in there!

 

[MarkyT]

No, Brill Place. There's a notice at the Euston end (probably elsewhere too) to say it is a route to avoid Euston Road.

Something similar was done during the Olympics.

This looks like one:

 

[Muzer]

This looks like one:
[Attachment snipped to save space]

Wow; I'd probably ignore that since it looks like an advertising banner...

 

[dissident]

I never quite understood why the link tunnel had to go all the way to Old Oak in the first place. Surely an underground junction not far from Euston (as part of the original design rather than being added later) would have done the job?

As well as the obvious point about Brexit, this is also stupid in that phase 2a goes from Lichfield to Crewe, and any connection would have to be off phase 1 in the London area. Cash, Lefroy and Fabricant representing parts of Staffordshire that won't have HS2 stations makes me think this is more of a "wrecking amendment".

I think that's a crayon too far, not least because the classic station at Euston will be half the size so will be pushed to handle the remaining WCML service.
How about a moving walkway in a glass tube above Brill Place? This could link to a mid-platform bridge at Euston (which I think is part of HS2 plans though less sure about the classic side) and to the EMT concourse at St Pancras.

I think that unless, when the HS2 is finally brought into London (Euston) there is not some sort of provision for (some) HS2 trains to transform themselves into HS1 trains and continue to Paris/ Brussels; and equally provision for (some) HS1 trains to transform themselves into HS2 trains; then the whole HS project will have made itself look, worse, actually be, ridiculous.

Yes I am arguing for a hard HS2/HS1 link. Continental UK linked to continental Europe using HS. Not fighting your way down a corridor between Euston and St Pancras with family, luggage, tickets and passports flying in all directions. Come on Rail Industry. There is and old saying that John Betejeman would have known: "Playing fair with the customers". If you can fix London Bridge (eventually) and if you can fix Birmingham Central (eventually) then you can fix an HS2/HS1 link.

Do you want a member of the public (me) to hold your hand while you complete a slightly difficult design task? Surely not !

 

[Domh245]

Do you want a member of the public (me) to hold your hand while you complete a slightly difficult design task? Surely not !

AIUI, the design task would be relatively easy. Funding it (or at least making it worth the massive cost) on the other hand...

 

[edwin_m]

In theory couldn't a classic compatible access HS1 by reversing at Euston, somewhere north of Camden and St Pancras?

 

[Ianno87]

In theory couldn't a classic compatible access HS1 by reversing at Euston, somewhere north of Camden and St Pancras?

There will be no physical connection between HS2 and WCML in the Euston area. Completely different levels etc. The southermmost physical connection between HS2 and anything else is likely to be the engineering connection onto East West Rail at Calvert.

 

[dissident]

Look at the success story at West Hampstead. Three rail lines, three stations, all with the name West Hampstead
all requiring that the customer get out of the train, get out of the station, walk on the public highway from one of
the three West Hampstead to another of the the three West Hampstead stations, get back into the station and get
back into the train. If you had a family with you, did not speak English, or were in a hurry, you would be sunk.
This situation there since at least before war, that is 80 years. Is that going to be your lasting monument at
Euston/St Pancras because the government of the day is not going to fund an HS2/HS1 link? Could that happen
in Germany or France or Switzerland or Italy? Of course you could always pretend it is not happening as TfL do
every single day of the year.

 

[edwin_m]

There will be no physical connection between HS2 and WCML in the Euston area. Completely different levels etc. The southermmost physical connection between HS2 and anything else is likely to be the engineering connection onto East West Rail at Calvert.

One of the earlier versions of the Euston plans had "dual use platforms" but I presume these no longer exist in the current version.

 

[Bald Rick]

Could that happen in Germany or France or Switzerland or Italy? .

What like, say, trying to get from Gare du Nord to Gare de L'est?

 

[dissident]

No ! Like Basle in Switzerland where they have 100 trains every hour arriving from
N, S, W, E, Europe and departing that same hour in the opposite direction. see
Michael Portillo's visit to the Basle Station signal box.

 

[edwin_m]

I think Bald Rick's point is that it does sometimes happen in other countries that you have to change stations to make an onward journey. It doesn't happen everywhere, then again it doesn't in the UK either.

 

[MarkyT]

I think Bald Rick's point is that it does sometimes happen in other countries that you have to change stations to make an onward journey. It doesn't happen everywhere, then again it doesn't in the UK either.

In the particular case of Gare de l'Est and Gare du Nord these are both very significant international and domestic stations with a spacing similar to Euston and St Pancras. Authorities claim 26,000 daily interconnections between the two main line terminals on foot, and there is a proposal to connect the two stations more effectively by the early 2020s, with options including better surface walkways and underground passageways, incorporating Magenta station on RER line E. There was a public consultation held last year and it seems the proposal received very high levels of support:
http://www.nouvelle-liaison-gare-nord-est.fr/