Publication of Integrated Rail Plan for the North and Midlands

[takno]

Biggest winner today is Leeds. Assuming it is rail-based, a metro system for the Leeds area will be far more beneficial than HS2 could ever be and it won't take 25+ years to build. (Plan says ~23 years for HS2 to East Midlands!)

200m at current prices to build something which is politely being called a tram? The original quote 15-odd years ago for Edinburgh was over 400m (so easily 600m in current prices), and the actual cost was more like 850m for a small single-route network. Leeds is likely to require significantly more very-expensive on-street running.

In essence Leeds has lost a new station, faster trains to Birmingham and London, and a loss of speed and capacity to Manchester and Liverpool. It has gained another expensive feasibility study into a tram system nobody actually feels like building.

 

[Austriantrain]

If you look carefully there is an upgrade south of Brum. I think that refers to the Bordesley curve, enabling trains from the SW to use Moor st. This will mean a very short walk to Curzon St to connect into the high speed services

It might also mean that through trains from the SW to the North will be even less frequent in future: either trains from the SW go to Moor Street to connect with HS2 and have to end there, or they go to New Street and continue from there but don’t connect to HS2. Since the total number of trains coming into Birmingham from the SW will probably not increase by much (both for demand and capacity reasons), there is likely to be less through trains.

The lack of a connection from HS2 to the classic lines towards New Street has always baffled me, since it would be the logical thing to do for „interregional“ HS2 trains. Granted, the lines to the SW are not electrified, but to all intents and purposes they really should be (at least until Plymouth and Cardiff), so that would have been a worthwhile uplifting for the SW and South Wales (electrification and much faster direct trains to the North).

For everything else, from a very external point of view, the decisions seem logical: IMHO HS2 East has alway suffered from the fact that the three major cities on its way were not directly served (Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield) and Leeds alone, while a large city, probably could not provide enough rationale for the full line to be built.

As to Trans-Pennine, a partial new line makes sense as well, if it provides enough capacity and decent journey times; apart from the costs, everything else would have taken much longer to build too. The UK is not France or Spain where the country is largely empty so that HSL can be built (relatively) cheaply without having to deal with a lot of built-up areas. If necessary, the second half of a new line can always be built at a later stage (ok, Bradford will still not be served - sometimes pure geography will favour some places over others, unfortunate as this is.)

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If you look carefully there is an upgrade south of Brum. I think that refers to the Bordesley curve, enabling trains from the SW to use Moor st. This will mean a very short walk to Curzon St to connect into the high speed services

That might work for, say, Worcester/Hereford regional services, but not for long-distance XC services which will have to use New St and the classic route.

 

[Purple Orange]

No it dosent, while better than having to hoof it to New Street, it replaces a through intercity journey with having to get off at one station, walk to another and get on another train.

That is a huge deterrent to travel for many people, especially those with heavy luggage, those who already have a change on their journey, elderly or unaccompanied youngsters and all for want of a chord where the lines run parallel north of Birmingham.

A secondary consideration is that anyone who currently uses such a service and changes at New Street onto the crosscity line or to Wolverhampton etc. has to now hoof it across town.

The fictional young family and OAPs with luggage from the north holidaying in the south west strikes again. This demographic is always heavily overplayed and probably represents a much smaller proportion of service users than people imagine.

There was never going to be a comfortable solution for Birmingham. New Street is too centrally located to expand, but the ‘problem’ for those connecting on to the local services is a problem faced by many people who travel from large cities all over the world. People have often to ‘hoof it’ across Manchester, London, Glasgow, but the issue here is to provide a sensible local solution.

 

[A0]

No it dosent, while better than having to hoof it to New Street, it replaces a through intercity journey with having to get off at one station, walk to another and get on another train.

That is a huge deterrent to travel for many people, especially those with heavy luggage, those who already have a change on their journey, elderly or unaccompanied youngsters and all for want of a chord where the lines run parallel north of Birmingham.

A secondary consideration is that anyone who currently uses such a service and changes at New Street onto the crosscity line or to Wolverhampton etc. has to now hoof it across town.

The interchange was discussed on another thread and was shorter than an end to end walk at some other stations.

The actual number of people which fall into the categories you mention is small going on miniscule - and such changes haven't deterred people travelling by Eurostar for example with the change at St P.

On the Wolverhampton one, again, probably small numbers. Maybe the Midland Metro will serve Curzon St / Moor St in the future?

 

[Austriantrain]

There was never going to be a comfortable solution for Birmingham. New Street is too centrally located to expand, but the ‘problem’ for those connecting on to the local services is a problem faced by many people who travel from large cities all over the world. People have often to ‘hoof it’ across Manchester, London, Glasgow, but the issue here is to provide a sensible local solution.

I don’t think that it’s a coincidence that you write „all over the world“ and then only give examples from the UK. In the rest of Europe, while such situations do exist, no one would think of building it for new. If anything, we do try to consolidate services at central stations whenever the opportunity comes up. Having to use local transport to reach a connecting train almost is like the connection wasn’t there at all, so many potential passengers will be put off.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Sheffield to Leeds is the third highest for commuters out of the commutes between the Northern cities, of which will be experiencing suppressed demand for numerous reasons, the obvious being how easy it is to just use the M1.

How on earth does that not justify some serious investment?

Oh sure, I agree that problem justifies some investment. But I don't think this was it. The Leeds-Clayton line that was reported to be in the plans, but turned out in the end not to be, would have provided a fast route out of Leeds, missing all the other nearby major population centres that need better services, before dumping trains only half-way to Sheffield for them to complete their journey on a slow and (as I understand it) already-at-capacity line. I can't believe that that's the best way to provide a Leeds-Sheffield commuter service. It would also have made Wakefield lose out heavily since fast trains between Leeds and Sheffield using the new line would no longer be able to call there. Note also that a straight line from Leeds to Sheffield passes through both Wakefield and Barnsley - the latter arguably in severe need of better rail services, but neither would be served by the line. Is there really a big enough market to justify a Leeds-Rotherham-Meadowhall-Sheffield service that misses out every other intermediate population centre?

Also consider that, as far as I can make out, for almost every new line that is being proposed as part of the plans, it's very easy to see how each line would easily support - say - a reasonably full train every 10 minutes or so running on it. That's a good use of money to build new lines. But this Leeds spur, lacking any long distance services, would probably justify 2, maybe at a pinch 3, trains an hour. That doesn't seem such a good use of money when the Government does need to watch how much it spends on the whole thing, and money spent on one improvement is money that's not available for another improvement. That's why I think it's a good thing that it's not in the plans, even while acknowledging that something (else?) needs to be done for the Leeds-Sheffield corridor.

 

[Grumpy Git]

It's particularly good for Altrincham, the (marginal) parliamentary constituency of the chairman of the 1922 committee, as the new station at Hale Barns will have a lot of fast trains to many different places.

Hale Barnes has some of the most expensive properties outside the SE of England.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

200m at current prices to build something which is politely being called a tram?

It isn't even £200m - Tracy Brabin has spotted that £100m of it is earmarked for the "come up with a magic solution for how to bring HS2 to Leeds on a shoestring" research. So just £100m for the Metro!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

MML only as far as Sheffield and not Nottingham to Chesterfield but I agree it should reach Leeds (Wakefield Westgate actually) and Doncaster

The text does confirm MML wires initially only to Sheffield, but "developing a route for HS2 trains to reach Leeds" also means wires to close the gap northwards.
The Erewash Valley might not figure initially, but Hope Valley wiring is mentioned in an NPR context so maybe it will all get done in time as a network.

 

[deltic]

The IRP is an aspirational programme of possible investments with no commitments to deliver anything at all as it states itself

In line with the Government's existing approach to rail enhancements, commitments will be made only to progress individual schemes up to the next stage of development, subject to a review of their readiness

The phrase "subject to" appears 41 times, "affordability" 12 times "could" 77 times.

No plan A survives the first contact with the enemy and this will be no different than many other grandiose plans that we have seen for transport covering virtually all modes.

 

[AGH]

Liverpool FF route is going to need a fair bit of work to get it even close to 100mph working past Ditton. Be interested to see where the speeds / new alignment east of Warrington will go. Suspect that it will be Thelwall before any new alignment starts in which case pretty big job getting over the Ship canal as Latchford viaduct is beyond repair. Not a cheap option but see why they have done it. Reversing at the expanded Piccadilly HS2 station is again going to mean a lot of work around there. Presumably when it heads East from there it will go via Guide Bridge way?

Bradford seems to be pushed through to Leeds as an alternative to a direct route. Presumably LNER will use Interchange instead of FS after this is done.

Lots of flesh to be added to the bones announced

 

[Roast Veg]

200m at current prices to build something which is politely being called a tram? The original quote 15-odd years ago for Edinburgh was over 400m (so easily 600m in current prices), and the actual cost was more like 850m for a small single-route network. Leeds is likely to require significantly more very-expensive on-street running.

In essence Leeds has lost a new station, faster trains to Birmingham and London, and a loss of speed and capacity to Manchester and Liverpool. It has gained another expensive feasibility study into a tram system nobody actually feels like building.

The IRP promises only £100m, but more funding had already been allocated from the regional development pot. There's still a gap, but the proposal has government and WYCA support, which must be as rare as hen's teeth.

 

[Ianno87]

Hale Barnes has some of the most expensive properties outside the SE of England.

Sounds like plenty of potential ridership for an HS2 station to me.

Pretty much a side-consequnce of basically the only feasible route to get a new line into Central Manchester.

 

[Class172]

On the Wolverhampton one, again, probably small numbers. Maybe the Midland Metro will serve Curzon St / Moor St in the future?

There will be a metro stop underneath Curzon Street as part of the current Digbeth extension.

 

[Bletchleyite]

When Birmingham and Manchester are seeing a 40%+ reduction in journey time to / from London and a significant capacity increase into the bargain, I'm not sure how anyone can, with a straight face, claim HS2 primarily benefits the south, when most places south of Birmingham won't see any journey time improvements.

Because journey time improvements are not the primary purpose.

 

[Glenn1969]

Sheffield to Leeds is the third highest for commuters out of the commutes between the Northern cities, of which will be experiencing suppressed demand for numerous reasons, the obvious being how easy it is to just use the M1.

How on earth does that not justify some serious investment?

All of the links between Northern cities need investment. Sheffield- Leeds needed it 20 years ago (there is only enough room for one express per hour which takes 40 minutes but is an XC service so good luck trying to get a seat most of the day). Leeds- Bradford- Halifax is a 16 mile journey that takes 40 minutes- pretty sure driving is quicker. Bradford- Sheffield can't be done direct from either route

 

[quantinghome]

Oh sure, I agree that problem justifies some investment. But I don't think this was it. The Leeds-Clayton line that was reported to be in the plans, but turned out in the end not to be, would have provided a fast route out of Leeds, missing all the other nearby major population centres that need better services, before dumping trains only half-way to Sheffield for them to complete their journey on a slow and (as I understand it) already-at-capacity line. I can't believe that that's the best way to provide a Leeds-Sheffield commuter service. It would also have made Wakefield lose out heavily since fast trains between Leeds and Sheffield using the new line would no longer be able to call there. Note also that a straight line from Leeds to Sheffield passes through both Wakefield and Barnsley - the latter arguably in severe need of better rail services, but neither would be served by the line. Is there really a big enough market to justify a Leeds-Rotherham-Meadowhall-Sheffield service that misses out every other intermediate population centre?

Also consider that, as far as I can make out, for almost every new line that is being proposed as part of the plans, it's very easy to see how each line would easily support - say - a reasonably full train every 10 minutes or so running on it. That's a good use of money to build new lines. But this Leeds spur, lacking any long distance services, would probably justify 2, maybe at a pinch 3, trains an hour. That doesn't seem such a good use of money when the Government does need to watch how much it spends on the whole thing, and money spent on one improvement is money that's not available for another improvement. That's why I think it's a good thing that it's not in the plans, even while acknowledging that something (else?) needs to be done for the Leeds-Sheffield corridor.

The idea that such a line would only have been used for a Leeds-Sheffield shuttle is not realistic. It would be inevitable that other services would have used that line - at least the services to Birmingham and Nottingham, possibly London if the capacity could be created on upgraded existing lines (yes, that's tricky and expensive, and one of the many reasons why ditching the eastern leg is a bad idea).

'Missing out other nearby major population centres' is code for Wakefield, yes? Ultimately we need to make up our mind what we want. Wakefield currently gets a decent service to London, but this is at the expense of a proper metro frequency local service to every other station on the lines from Leeds to Doncaster and Sheffield. The major advantage of the HS2 eastern leg (and one that was criminally undersold) would have been to enable such a network, albeit with Wakefield losing direct services to London (but gaining a quicker journey time overall). We are now essentially left with the status quo, with every local station on those lines served by a nominal 1 train per hour. There are other solutions of course - four-tracking several miles of line to create dynamic passing loops, for example. But it's a distinctly second rate solution.

 

[Glenn1969]

The idea that such a line would only have been used for a Leeds-Sheffield shuttle is not realistic. It would be inevitable that other services would have used that line - at least the services to Birmingham and Nottingham, possibly London if the capacity could be created on upgraded existing lines (yes, that's tricky and expensive, and one of the many reasons why ditching the eastern leg is a bad idea).

'Missing out other nearby major population centres' is code for Wakefield, yes? Ultimately we need to make up our mind what we want. Wakefield currently gets a decent service to London, but this is at the expense of a proper metro frequency local service to every other station on the lines from Leeds to Doncaster and Sheffield. The major advantage of the HS2 eastern leg (and one that was criminally undersold) would have been to enable such a network, albeit with Wakefield losing direct services to London (but gaining a quicker journey time overall). We are now essentially left with the status quo, with every local station on those lines served by a nominal 1 train per hour. There are other solutions of course - four-tracking several miles of line to create dynamic passing loops, for example. But it's a distinctly second rate solution.

Wakefield, Barnsley and Rotherham presumably. And the magnet that is the Meadowhall complex

 

[stephen rp]

During prime ministers question time yesterday Boris said it was about giving the North local commuter networks similar to London and the South East. Other than possibly removing some expresses from local lines, how does this do any of this?

Er, he was lying.

 

[quantinghome]

It's interesting that it is called a "Plan" but isn't even a "Strategy".

Completely agree. It's real mish-mash. It's evident that some optioneering has happened on some bits of it, particularly NPR. But this is not a high level command paper that draws everything together.

 

[Ianno87]

Because journey time improvements are not the primary purpose.

But benefits are derived from them regardless as a side-effect, even if they're not the core intent of doing the scheme in the first place.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But benefits are derived from them regardless as a side-effect, even if they're not the core intent of doing the scheme in the first place.

Absolutely. I'm just countering @A0wen's point. The main reason for HS2 is to relieve the south WCML by effectively 6-tracking it. Everything else is an incremental added benefit (and allows relief of other routes e.g. Trent Valley, south Manchester commuter routes etc). If you're building a 125mph route you might as well build it faster than that, the added cost is in the scheme of a major new railway very low.

 

[quantinghome]

During prime ministers question time yesterday Boris said it was about giving the North local commuter networks similar to London and the South East. Other than possibly removing some expresses from local lines, how does this do any of this?

Manchester and Birmingham excepted, it doesn't. As you suggest, you can't create a metro frequency local network unless you remove fast trains from the local lines. So even where the IRP provides significant benefits such as Nottingham and Derby getting a fast direct link to Birmingham and London, the use of existing lines means local services inevitably will be sacrificed.

 

[Glenn1969]

Absolutely. I'm just countering @A0wen's point. The main reason for HS2 is to relieve the south WCML by effectively 6-tracking it. Everything else is an incremental added benefit (and allows relief of other routes e.g. Trent Valley, south Manchester commuter routes etc). If you're building a 125mph route you might as well build it faster than that, the added cost is in the scheme of a major new railway very low.

My problem with the IRP is the new NPR line doesn't reach Yorkshire. How can extra services be added to a two track railway that already has pinchpoints especially at Leeds and Sheffield stations? They talk of 8tph Leeds- Manchester but how is there room for them in Leeds especially ?

 

[quantinghome]

The IRP promises only £100m, but more funding had already been allocated from the regional development pot. There's still a gap, but the proposal has government and WYCA support, which must be as rare as hen's teeth.

To be fair the IRP goes on to say that the initial phase of the WY network will cost at least £2bn. Needless to say it doesn't commit funding, but does lay down an expectation that local taxpayers will be footing some of the bill. I'd actually be in favour of city regions being able to raise taxes locally to fund their own mass transit, if only to put Westminster out of the loop so we can get on with it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My problem with the IRP is the new NPR line doesn't reach Yorkshire. How can extra services be added to a two track railway that already has pinchpoints especially at Leeds and Sheffield stations? They talk of 8tph Leeds- Manchester but how is there room for them in Leeds especially ?

Sounds unlikely. I think 8 is grossly excessive, and would still go with 4, just do the infrastructure work to allow them to be 10-car 80x.

 

[quantinghome]

My problem with the IRP is the new NPR line doesn't reach Yorkshire. How can extra services be added to a two track railway that already has pinchpoints especially at Leeds and Sheffield stations? They talk of 8tph Leeds- Manchester but how is there room for them in Leeds especially ?

That would be an ecumenical matter.

 

[Howardh]

What happens next politically? Is this now a done deal, or do the proposals now have to go through the House and could be voted down/significantly altered, or could a general election (ie a different government - or same but with different MP's there on a HS2 "ticket") lead to HS2 north-eastbound being re-instated?

 

[Roast Veg]

My problem with the IRP is the new NPR line doesn't reach Yorkshire. How can extra services be added to a two track railway that already has pinchpoints especially at Leeds and Sheffield stations? They talk of 8tph Leeds- Manchester but how is there room for them in Leeds especially ?

Capacity improvements to both stations will be a requirement. For Leeds, it will be driven by NPR. For Sheffield, it will be driven by overall MML capacity imrpovements.