• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

HS2 construction updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

si404

Established Member
Joined
28 Dec 2012
Messages
1,267
On Friday I went for a walk around Amersham

There's a linear work along the valley to the south of the town - almost like they are going to tunnel cut-and-cover a couple of hundred metres north of the actual line.
IMG_20200717_163323019.jpg

But those tunnel linings are a little small! :p
IMG_20200717_162902973.jpg

That's because this is a water pipe, not a railway! It's to protect against the risks of tunnelling, with Amersham's pumping station enhanced and Chalfont St Giles' water sent up to Amersham to be treated and then sent back as its pumping station hasn't got room for the upgrade. It's sort of HS2-related, but is rather tangential to the actual scheme (it's almost certainly something that has helped the HS2 budget balloon). However these works are being called HS2 works by locals.
IMG_20200717_165148718.jpg

I wouldn't be surprised if, in a couple of years, a very similar long worksite in a similar place is done for the 'Misbourne Greenway' (part of the HS2 cycle route), but there's not been any joined up thinking.

Anyway, the other HS2 prep-works in the town are around the shaft site - improving a road junction next to it to allow HGVs to access it better. These works having been going on and off (mostly off) for over a year now. Actual works on the shaft began on the 4th (when this road closure was to be over - but they are making hay while the virus keeps traffic down and keeping it closed until the end of September, giving them space to do some more work), but there wasn't any evidence of a start on the shaft.
IMG_20200717_172311953.jpg

And it's nearly done - presumably the lights will only go red when something wants to turn right (onto the main road - only cycles would be allowed to turn off it heading towards the roundabout, even though buses go and do a u-turn at the roundabout).
IMG_20200717_172203517_HDR.jpg

Just this filter lane allowing direct access from the A413 to build (though one existed beforehand!) and this bit of the works is done.
IMG_20200717_172327934.jpg
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,205
There's a linear work along the valley to the south of the town - almost like they are going to tunnel cut-and-cover a couple of hundred metres north of the actual line.

Maybe they are digging a big hole to put the tunnel spoil in :lol:
 

Geezertronic

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2009
Messages
4,091
Location
Birmingham
Does anyone have any more details about the bridge that is going up soon over the M42 by Birmingham Interchange? Can't find much technical detail on it
 

TheDavibob

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2016
Messages
407
They are still hoping to get the Phase 2A Bill though Parliament by the end of 2020. There are only 35 petitions of the Bill for the Lords to consider and some of them have been settled already, withdrawn or not selected. The original Lords programme from March 2020 had them hearing all petitions over a timescale of about two weeks. After that, there's a day or so for Opposition amendments to be considered, a "Special Report" to be written, and the remaining Parliamentary stages of Report, Third Reading and Royal Assent which usually don't take much more than a few days, albeit spread over a few weeks. If I remember correctly, the Lords' Second Reading debate didn't even go to a division (vote) and was thusly passed unanimously, therefore one one expects the remaining Lords votes to be something of a formality.

A newsletter published on the Staffs and Cheshire HS2 "Commonplace" web sites has some commentary on what's upcoming for Phase 2A in the second half of 2020...


I accept continuing on this topic isn't directly related to construction, but I thought I'd add that the Phase 2a Bill has now resumed its Lords committee stage, as of the 20th July [virtually]. There are a few meetings scheduled for next week here. As the quoted post, they seem to be happy to get everything through rapidly now the remote workings have been arranged.
 

SynthD

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2020
Messages
1,165
Location
UK
Is it clear what the current legislation says about the line between Ruislip and Old Oak Common, what state it will be in?
 
Joined
18 Oct 2017
Messages
215
Is it clear what the current legislation says about the line between Ruislip and Old Oak Common, what state it will be in?

Could you elaborate a bit - I am not quite sure what you wish to explore.

For example, the alignments and so forth have been "settled" for years (in tunnel between the two,) Hillingdon Council have approved a "Schedule 17" Planning application for the Ruislip Portal (here for anyone interested https://planning.hillingdon.gov.uk/...rence=75317/APP/2019/4141&from=planningSearch,) enabling works for construction have been ongoing for years, sites are presently mobilising for construction of the ventilation/intervention shafts along the route, etc.
 

SynthD

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2020
Messages
1,165
Location
UK
Could you elaborate a bit - I am not quite sure what you wish to explore.

For example, the alignments and so forth have been "settled" for years (in tunnel between the two,) Hillingdon Council have approved a "Schedule 17" Planning application for the Ruislip Portal (here for anyone interested https://planning.hillingdon.gov.uk/...rence=75317/APP/2019/4141&from=planningSearch,) enabling works for construction have been ongoing for years, sites are presently mobilising for construction of the ventilation/intervention shafts along the route, etc.
Thank you both for the links. They refer to the current "Network Rail Wycombe Single", which is the line I'm interested in. Appears to be a long possession with no mention of doubling it.
 

si404

Established Member
Joined
28 Dec 2012
Messages
1,267
Appears to be a long possession with no mention of doubling it.
The redoubling it and extending it to OOC (I know it reached there before the HS2 works started!) is a different project that's at a much earlier stage of development.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,921
Location
Nottingham
There was certainly still interest in using the Wycombe Single to provide passenger services to OOC when I last heard a few months ago.
 

si404

Established Member
Joined
28 Dec 2012
Messages
1,267
There was certainly still interest in using the Wycombe Single to provide passenger services to OOC when I last heard a few months ago.
Yes, but it's a separate scheme from HS2 that's only really at the embryonic stage. I've not seen detailed plans, or anything beyond a bag-of-fag-pack notion of costs, a few sentences and a couple of diagrams showing potential service patterns.

There's pretty much nothing about the scheme as yet. Though I'd imagine we'll get some stuff in the next couple of years.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,921
Location
Nottingham
There's a closure of the M42 on August 7-9 which looks like it will be putting the new bridge near Birmingham Interchange on its abutments (for a road diverted due to HS2, not HS2 itself).
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
15,961
There's a closure of the M42 on August 7-9 which looks like it will be putting the new bridge near Birmingham Interchange on its abutments (for a road diverted due to HS2, not HS2 itself).
Yes, required as HS2 steams through the middle of the existing A452 roundabout over the M42.
 
Joined
18 Oct 2017
Messages
215
Thank you both for the links. They refer to the current "Network Rail Wycombe Single", which is the line I'm interested in. Appears to be a long possession with no mention of doubling it.

If you refer to the line that branched off the GWML at the western end of OOC heading towards West Ruislip, I believe it only ran a "Parliamentary" train and even that has been terminated.

Plans submitted for the re-alignment of Old Oak Common Lane suggest that the route is to be permanently severed. The location of the bridge abutments in the plans linked below suggests to me there is no imminent plan to reinstate the route, let alone double it.

Planning application for Old Oak Common Lane re-alignement: http://planningregister.opdc.london.gov.uk/oak/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=20/0011/HS2OPDC&backURL=%3Ca%20href%3Dwphappcriteria.display%3FpaSearchKey%3D221967%3ESearch%20Criteria%3C%2Fa%3E > <a href='wphappsearchres.displayResultsURL?ResultID=283068%26StartIndex=1%26SortOrder=APNID%26DispResultsAs=WPHAPPSEARCHRES%26BackURL=%3Ca%20href%3Dwphappcriteria.display%3FpaSearchKey%3D221967%3ESearch%20Criteria%3C%2Fa%3E'>Search Results</a>

This plan shows the area I'm referring to: http://planningregister.opdc.london.gov.uk/oak/MediaTemp/9396-1396789469.pdf

(Planning application 20/0011/HS2OPDC on the OPDC web site if the links go dead.)

At one time, the HS2 scheme had the GMWL "Up Relief" (AKA "Slow" or "Crossrail" line) passing over on a viaduct so that the OOC Crossrail turnback sidings could run underneath (it's in the 2016 plans Si404 linked) which could possibly have been reworked in future to provide a through line, but more recent renders and planning applications for OOC suggest this has been dropped.
 
Joined
18 Oct 2017
Messages
215
There's a closure of the M42 on August 7-9 which looks like it will be putting the new bridge near Birmingham Interchange on its abutments (for a road diverted due to HS2, not HS2 itself).

There's a video published showing what's planned that also includes some drone footage over the site:
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
5,071
If you refer to the line that branched off the GWML at the western end of OOC heading towards West Ruislip, I believe it only ran a "Parliamentary" train and even that has been terminated.

Plans submitted for the re-alignment of Old Oak Common Lane suggest that the route is to be permanently severed. The location of the bridge abutments in the plans linked below suggests to me there is no imminent plan to reinstate the route, let alone double it.

Planning application for Old Oak Common Lane re-alignement: http://planningregister.opdc.london.gov.uk/oak/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=20/0011/HS2OPDC&backURL=%3Ca%20href%3Dwphappcriteria.display%3FpaSearchKey%3D221967%3ESearch%20Criteria%3C%2Fa%3E > <a href='wphappsearchres.displayResultsURL?ResultID=283068%26StartIndex=1%26SortOrder=APNID%26DispResultsAs=WPHAPPSEARCHRES%26BackURL=%3Ca%20href%3Dwphappcriteria.display%3FpaSearchKey%3D221967%3ESearch%20Criteria%3C%2Fa%3E'>Search Results</a>

This plan shows the area I'm referring to: http://planningregister.opdc.london.gov.uk/oak/MediaTemp/9396-1396789469.pdf

(Planning application 20/0011/HS2OPDC on the OPDC web site if the links go dead.)

At one time, the HS2 scheme had the GMWL "Up Relief" (AKA "Slow" or "Crossrail" line) passing over on a viaduct so that the OOC Crossrail turnback sidings could run underneath (it's in the 2016 plans Si404 linked) which could possibly have been reworked in future to provide a through line, but more recent renders and planning applications for OOC suggest this has been dropped.
There was a fair amount of chatter at least until a year ago, some of it coming out of Chiltern, about adding a couple of platforms for it at OOC and making it a second terminus for Chiltern trains. The thinking was that it's a good interchange, while Marylebone is painfully constrained and bad for interchange. No idea about the current status of any plans, and I would have thought the platforms themselves would prevent the main obstacle, but on the face of it the bridge looks like it's being built with plenty of space for the track to be reconnected.
 

mr_jrt

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2011
Messages
1,408
Location
Brighton
Comment on the application then, people. Make sure we're not just assuming there's room - explicitly ask them to ensure there is.
 
Joined
18 Oct 2017
Messages
215
HS2 have issued a press release containing some new images of the Southern Chiltern Portal site. Includes an overhead "montage" composited from drone shots of the site.

 

Brissle Girl

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2018
Messages
2,655
Breaking news - Chris Packham has lost his appeal. Good!

"In giving the decision, Lord Justice Lindblom said the court "rejected both of Mr Packham's substantive grounds of appeal as unarguable". "
 

Chris NS

Member
Joined
19 Apr 2020
Messages
62
Location
Durham

I am at a complete loss as to what Chris Packham was trying to achieve. He so obviously didn't have a leg to stand on: namely, that HS2 breaches zero carbon targets because it might lead to a new airport being built. (If nothing else, surely the correct way to protest against aviation expansion is to legally challenge the aviation expansion itself, as was successfully achieved with Heathrow.) Under normal circumstances I would put this down to the usual misconception that just because you disapprove of something it must be illegal - but he's an intelligent guy who I have a lot of respect for. I cannot understand why he banked on a legal challenge that clearly wasn't going to get anywhere.

The daft thing is that if he's concentrated his efforts on, say, the lower Thames crossing (which appears to cause more damage to woodland that the whole of HS2), he may have got somewhere.

Anyway, we're off-topic already, so woo woo yay trains woo yay.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,431
But the London Borough of Hillingdon have won theirs. Off to the Supreme Court we go, no doubt...
The text of the judgement includes:
“...In the Hillingdon proceedings, the challenge was to a specific decision within the approval process, though not to the principle of the project itself being permitted to proceed, and its success would not prevent the project progressing in accordance with the programme set for it.“
That suggests the Hillingdon case isn’t aimed at stopping the project.
 

mr_jrt

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2011
Messages
1,408
Location
Brighton
Hillingdon details here:
The council had refused to approve an application for HS2 works to be undertaken on a site in the borough of archaeological importance on the basis that HS2 Ltd had submitted insufficient information in support of it.

HS2 Ltd disagreed with the council's refusal decision and challenged it, by appealing to the government, on the basis that it was not required to provide the information which the council required as it could instead rely upon a suite of non-statutory documents, known as Environmental Minimum Requirements, which would provide the council with the necessary assurances that the archaeological integrity of the site would be maintained and that HS2 Ltd would, if necessary, carry out its own future investigations as a means of safeguarding it.
 
Joined
18 Oct 2017
Messages
215
I wouldn't get too excited about it: I live in Hillingdon and this has been rumbling on for years. It concerns a relatively small area of land off the line of route that is to be used for ecological mitigation. It's certainly not going to prevent the build proceeding or avail any kind of de-facto veto. The relevant planning application (73263/APP/2017/3838) can be found linked below.


Hillingdon provide video coverage of it's HS2 Planning Sub-Committee meetings on YouTube. Having watched all of them, the council do seem to blow a bit hot and cold - one application goes through more or less "on the nod" whereas others seem to be used as mechanisms to "object to everything they can think of."

The latest wheeze seem to be to attach constraints on number of vehicles to a Lorry Routes application. However, I'm not sure Schedule 17 avails the powers to do so. It's a "Lorry Routes" application, not a "Lorry Numbers" application - all the council can do is ask for the route to be changed to a different one, and they would need to recommend what that is and not just keep say "no, go think of something else and have another go." Similarly Camden have knocked back a S17 application on architectural grounds without proposing what alternative they would like.

The only real beneficiaries of all these political games is the lawyers and civil servants who get some extra work producing additional bits of paper. Anyone thinking the Schedule 17 mechanism provides a way to torpedo HS2 is going to be sadly mistaken.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top