Higgins Report

[NotATrainspott]

Stop HS2 have posted a screenshot of a paragraph of the report due tomorrow (17th March 2014):

https://twitter.com/stophs2/status/445286699275255808/photo/1

Equally, I propose the Government should accelerate Phase Two as soon as possible to take the line 43 miles further north than planned in Phase One, to a new transport hub at Crewe which could be completed by 2027, six years earlier planned. It is the right strategic answer, and not just for the area around Crewe: it would also deliver the benefits of HS2 - in terms of better services to the North - much sooner. On the other hand, the current proposed HS1-HS2 link is, I believe, sub-optimal and should be reconsidered.

Effectively all that had been expected. The Phase 2 plans are a few years away from being shovel-ready at the very least so it would never be possible to build the whole of Phase 2 for 2026. Higgins has been reported saying that what should happen is that the station shells for Phase 2 should be constructed before they are needed so that 1. the project becomes impossible to cancel and 2. the development can start around the station sites and across the cities with the assurance that it will actually pay off. At the very least, it prevents the issue where the land around the stations will become paralysed with the knowledge that in only a few years there will be enormous construction disruption, thus depleting land values for an entire decade before rising again.

It is also clear now that the idea of a proper HS2 station at Crewe is now a serious idea. It always had the advantage that it did not interfere massively with the other planned work, and although it until now has not been planned there is no technical reason why a north-facing connection cannot be built north of Crewe as well. There is probably enough space for two or four full HS2 platforms on the Crewe station site if the current station can be comprehensively rebuilt.

 

[liverpolitan]

Phase 1 to Crewe Hub raises some questions:

1. The junction at Lichfield would seem to be dead - it would only be for Stafford's benefit.
2. How can Crewe be incorporated into Phase 1 without delaying it? Issues such as environmental impact assessments come to mind. Perhaps Crewe is Phase 1.1?
3. What now for Phase 2? It will keep the costly elements on the west, but loose the benefits up to Crewe. Manchester would get most of the journey time savings, but without the costly tunnel. It wouldn't deliver the additional city region rail capacity, but this isn't really valued in the BCR calculations - but is economically important.

 

[clc]

Would this reduce phase 1 journey times significantly?

 

[NotATrainspott]

Phase 1 to Crewe Hub raises some questions:

1. The junction at Lichfield would seem to be dead - it would only be for Stafford's benefit.
2. How can Crewe be incorporated into Phase 1 without delaying it? Issues such as environmental impact assessments come to mind. Perhaps Crewe is Phase 1.1?
3. What now for Phase 2? It will keep the costly elements on the west, but loose the benefits up to Crewe. Manchester would get most of the journey time savings, but without the costly tunnel. It wouldn't deliver the additional city region rail capacity, but this isn't really valued in the BCR calculations - but is economically important.

Looking at the route to Crewe, there doesn't seem to be anything overly complicated which would take more than anywhere else along the line to construct. The phases take as long to build as they do because there are individual components which will take the whole length of the phase - the Euston rebuild and the Chiltern tunnel come to mind. Where the route is just cutting, simple viaduct or short manually-bored tunnel, construction would take only a few years at most from start to the end of reinstatement works. As a result it is likely that this section could be constructed as soon as approval is given (which will not take until 2026 to get) and still finish in time for the rest of Phase 1.

The rest of the western leg is as pared-down as it is possible to be, so there is not a vast amount of further cost saving that can be made without losing the benefits to Manchester completely. The bored tunnel and Piccadilly extension are an absolute requirement for HS2 to work, and the rolling stock depot is at the Bamfurlong WCML connection which is only a few simple short kilometres from the Manchester delta anyway. If a Liverpool spur or Preston Bypass/Interchange/Brock WCML connection had been included in the Phase 2 plans then they likely would not have been sped up by the report as they are not essential for the scheme to function as required.

 

[edwin_m]

Phase 1 to Crewe Hub raises some questions:

1. The junction at Lichfield would seem to be dead - it would only be for Stafford's benefit.

It would also allow trains to run off HS2 to Manchester via Stoke. But I agree it may be dead.

 

[Manchester77]

BBC breakfast reporting to Birmingham by 2026, Crewe 2027 and then Northern destinations by 2030.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Higgins Report - HS2 Plus

Higgins Report - HS2 Plus - Supporting Slides

Department for Transport response to the Higgins Report

In essence:

• DfT to ask Network Rail and HS2 Ltd to create plans for interchange at Crewe to be completed by 2027.
• Network Rail to make recommendations for CP6 improvements which will work hand-in-hand with the HS2 plans.
• HS1-HS2 link cancelled completely and struck from Hybrid Bill - safeguarding is to be removed and no passive provision. Other options for connection are to be looked at for implementation once the initial stages of HS2 are complete. (note initial stages - I imagine London Orbital or EC/GW HSR with HS1 link comes after Scotland and Newcastle)
• NR and HS2 Ltd will be asked to create new proposals for Euston redevelopment to serve Camden better.

 

[Altnabreac]

Those supporting slides are interesting regarding the status of the Lichfield / Handsacre junction connection.

The revised delivery of Phase 1 slide explicitly still includes a line saying HS Route to WCML connection for delivery in 2026 implying that Lichfield is not completely off the table yet.

Maybe that is only an interim plan until a decision is made on Crewe being accelerated?

I guess the other calculation is the marginal cost of building Handsacre junction compared to the lost benefits by not running any HS trains north of Birmingham for a year between 2026 and 2027?

 

[NotATrainspott]

Oh, and:

This work should include proposals for the Euston arch which should never have been knocked down and which I would like to see rebuilt.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I have to say, not only does the Higgins report sound very sensible, but that's also a very positive response from Patrick McLoughlin. It's very rare for me to give praise to *Conservative* politicians, but this looks like a nice case of a Government minister seeking outside professional advice and then broadly accepting the advice without adding significant political interference. A very good example!

 

[Simon11]

My only thought is, can we speed up the process to get stage 1 built? They have looked to speed up Stage 2, but ignored stage 1.

There are still three whole years before we even get to see any actual construction work!

 

[All Line Rover]

I support the decision to remove the HS2-HS1 link. It was far too controversial, the benefits were far too uncertain (*cough* Regional Eurostar *cough*) and, given its intended purpose, it wasn't sufficient ambitious.

All I hope is that Labour don't try to score political points by throwing their toys out of the pram and delaying the project immensely in the process.

 

[clc]

So, if the Scottish Govt builds it's planned HSR line, come 2026 London-Glasgow would be around 3h 45m?

 

[YorkshireBear]

My only thought is, can we speed up the process to get stage 1 built? They have looked to speed up Stage 2, but ignored stage 1.

There are still three whole years before we even get to see any actual construction work!

Remember previous comments regarding funding streams for HS2. It is the same as Crossrail therefore the two cannot be in full progress at the same time.

 

[po8crg]

I guess the other calculation is the marginal cost of building Handsacre junction compared to the lost benefits by not running any HS trains north of Birmingham for a year between 2026 and 2027?

Actually, that might be a really good idea, as it would give them a year to run-in the service without trying to force too many trains along it, and would also allow them to delay the classic-compatible train order by a year, as the line would be captive-only until Crewe opens.

They might be able to do Lichfield-Crewe on a TWAO, rather than a hybrid bill, which would save a fortune in planning, consultations, petitions, etc.

 

[Haydn1971]

...and since when was Crewe in "the north" ?

Also, exactly what benefits does that bring to the Eat Midlands, Yorkshire, Humberside, North East ?

Edit - just seen the 3rd Slide ! Bring it on
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
A further thought.... The part about an integrated rail plan for the north is a tad vague, but the report loosely suggests linking Liverpool and Hull via Manchester and Leeds. This raises the question, could you improve connection times on existing routes, or would old routes need re opening or are we talking potentially brand new lines at a more achievable line speed of say 100-140mph between the four M62 corridor city's, but then how are excluded large conurbations going to react to that, specifically Manchester-Sheffield-Meadowhall, Huddersfield/Dewsbury and Bradford, not to mention all the medium sized places dotted around.

 

[pablo]

They'll have to join them all up, just like one of those picture puzzles

 

[NotATrainspott]

...and since when was Crewe in "the north" ?

Also, exactly what benefits does that bring to the Eat Midlands, Yorkshire, Humberside, North East ?

Edit - just seen the 3rd Slide ! Bring it on
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
A further thought.... The part about an integrated rail plan for the north is a tad vague, but the report loosely suggests linking Liverpool and Hull via Manchester and Leeds. This raises the question, could you improve connection times on existing routes, or would old routes need re opening or are we talking potentially brand new lines at a more achievable line speed of say 100-140mph between the four M62 corridor city's, but then how are excluded large conurbations going to react to that, specifically Manchester-Sheffield-Meadowhall, Huddersfield/Dewsbury and Bradford, not to mention all the medium sized places dotted around.

And of particular notice is the fact that construction of the stations will begin more-or-less as soon as Parliamentary approval is given. Even without services starting for a few years, property development can begin in earnest along with the wider regeneration so that as soon as services begin, the cities can hit the ground running. The classic services into Toton and the improvements to come to Meadowhall can bed down for a few years before the HS2 passengers come. If more drastic local transport improvements come, like a Picc-Vic tunnel or somesuch, then it can be constructed as soon as possible and alongside the HS2 works in order to minimise disruption and maximise the possible connectivity between them.

 

[Leylandlad]

Good news this updated report, I think :roll:

Opening to Crewe earlier than planned (2027) will bring greater benefits further north earlier.

Is it really worth opening to Birmingham in 2026 then Crewe the next year? A year in 13 years doesn't seem much, can't Crewe be accelerated...or failing that open the lot in 2027?

My big fear from today's announcement, is the rest of HS2 gets scrapped. It'll be Euston-Birmingham-Crewe and nothing else. To be honest if I'd been asked 5 years ago I would never have seen them build to Manchester, or the East Mids section.

I wouldn't trust Ed BallsUP not to scrap the rest next year, IF he were in power. The saving grace maybe that Ed Millibrain represents Doncaster so has a vested interest in getting the East Mids section built.

Never trust the politicians of any party when it comes to the railways :roll:

 

[NotATrainspott]

Good news this updated report, I think :roll:

Opening to Crewe earlier than planned (2027) will bring greater benefits further north earlier.

Is it really worth opening to Birmingham in 2026 then Crewe the next year? A year in 13 years doesn't seem much, can't Crewe be accelerated...or failing that open the lot in 2027?

My big fear from today's announcement, is the rest of HS2 gets scrapped. It'll be Euston-Birmingham-Crewe and nothing else. To be honest if I'd been asked 5 years ago I would never have seen them build to Manchester, or the East Mids section.

I wouldn't trust Ed BallsUP not to scrap the rest next year, IF he were in power. The saving grace maybe that Ed Millibrain represents Doncaster so has a vested interest in getting the East Mids section built.

Never trust the politicians of any party when it comes to the railways :roll:

One of the major justifications for the amended plans is to prevent the possibility of cancelling the sections north of Lichfield/Crewe. As soon as Parliamentary approval is given the construction of the stations will begin even if they are then going to be mostly finished years before train services will start so that development around them can happen sooner (in fact, exactly the same situation as with Canary Wharf Crossrail which is effectively finished now with escalators installed and everything to allow the retail space above to be put into service). The threat of cancellation will very likely become impossible soon enough regardless due to the continued increases in passenger numbers even before Phase 1 opens.

 

[YorkshireBear]

He intends on getting the construction of HS stations done early so that it cannot be cancelled.

 

[po8crg]

He intends on getting the construction of HS stations done early so that it cannot be cancelled.

Wonder if they could get TWAOs for the stations as soon as the Phase One Hybrid Bill passes and get them built even quicker - and also commit to Phase Two even earlier; it's not like the station locations are going to change in the consultation or Hybrid Bill process.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

The report makes for very inserting reading. Glad to see the government have accepted its recommendations on extension to Crewe with an interchange station there and the full redevelopment of Euston station. What about the linking Crossrail to the WCML at Old Oak Common to remove services from Euston, any news from the government on that yet?

 

[Wavertreelad]

Quite interesting reaction to the report on BBC Local News tonight, in the North West the reaction in Crewe was as you might expect very enthusiastic, but just a pity that reaction was not shown from Liverpool and Manchester although this may have been purely a time issue. However, on BBC London News the reaction to the rebuilding of Euston from the Labour councillor interviewed was quite the opposite despite the "scrapping" of the link between HS2 and HS1. In fact on this point Baroness Kramer appeared to indicate that in fact the link was only delayed and could be added later as a tunnelled option.

Personally I like the idea of delivering a Crewe hub early as it does open up a whole host of options for the North of England and North Wales which the previous scheme failed to offer especially as the delivery could be so much earlier. Interestingly the report appears to favour the grand idea put forward in the BBC2 programme Mind the Gap

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03y3y8k

This is that the UK should create a second city running from Liverpool to Leeds along the existing M62 corridor to rival the pull of London. This program also appears to recommend, amongst other things, high speed rail link(s) between either side of the Pennines although perhaps not running at full HS2 high speed. Whether more rail links into Manchester would solve the city's growing congestion problem remains to be seen as would the attitude to owner of the farm that sits between the carriageways on the M62 near to the summit if he was suddenly joined by fellow dwellers!

Assuming Crewe hub is given the go ahead, could a huge advantage be that limited compatible services to many parts of the North of England, North Wales and even Scotland could be introduced also much earlier assuming schemes to electrify some parts of the network were suitably upgraded?

For example
a) Upgrading the Liverpool/Manchester CLC route to include a connection to the WCML near Warrington also allowing the introduction of higher speed trains on the route between Lime Street and Manchester/Manchester Airport, the first part of a Trans Pennine route?

b) Crewe to Chester and potentially Holyhead?

The range of options also means a larger appeal making it more difficult for successive governments to cancel the scheme, although I accept it could delay some aspects. The net effect would be like building a new M6, as the completed railway network would automatically attract more custom, in the same that drivers would be attracted to a new M6 etc.

 

[liverpolitan]

Would this reduce phase 1 journey times significantly?

Liverpool will get it's Phase 2 journey time in Phase 1 so from 110mins to 96mins (14 mins) I think. Liverpool stands to get nothing out of Phase 2 in HS2 Plus.

 

[liverpolitan]

It would also allow trains to run off HS2 to Manchester via Stoke. But I agree it may be dead.

I was told it was dead by a director of HS2 Ltd today (he may be wrong).

 

[pablo]

I don't think Hebden Bridge will quite cut it!

Good interim report if a little lightweight in the circumstances. I'm glad to see he listened to me and took up a couple of my suggestions....

The Euston/St P, walk or one-stop-on-the tube palliative gets peddalled again. I can tell you from four year's experience. It's tosh. Quarter hour brisk walk through Somerstown between HS services? And, KX VL tube station is beyond KX.

The concept of a nation-wide HS network is beginning to come through, but only faintly. Easy platform to platform interchange between classic and HS lines without interaction between the two, which would spoil the service, is required. Otherwise the time savings are dissipated in waiting or walking at nodes. And, many more cities and towns in the north need positive connection.

So, it's time to designate and include the spurs for future connections to those destinations, now. Otherwise, politicians being what they are, we'll end up with another half-baked and incomplete system thirty years down the line. Just like the motorway system we have now which is said to be complete but lacks significant sections (and dodges all over the place)..

Previous poster said Lon, Brum and Crewe will be the extent of it. Could be a very prescient prediction.

 

[MarkyT]

The Euston/St P, walk or one-stop-on-the tube palliative gets peddalled again. I can tell you from four year's experience. It's tosh. Quarter hour brisk walk through Somerstown between HS services? And, KX VL tube station is beyond KX.

It is a difficult twisty poorly signposted walk even though quite short, certainly not good 'space syntax' as the architects would refer to. Any route via Underground takes just as long with long underground passageways, escalators etc to reach platforms but at least you don't get wet if its raining. What's really needed is a significantly improved covered pedestrian route equipped with travelators. The distance isn't any greater than many inter-terminal or terminal to gate links in airports. See my suggested design here -

http://www.townend.me/files/kxlink.pdf

 

[YorkshireBear]

It is a difficult twisty poorly signposted walk even though quite short, certainly not good 'space syntax' as the architects would refer to. Any route via Underground takes just as long with long underground passageways, escalators etc to reach platforms but at least you don't get wet if its raining. What's really needed is a significantly improved covered pedestrian route equipped with travelators. The distance isn't any greater than many inter-terminal or terminal to gate links in airports. See my suggested design here -

http://www.townend.me/files/kxlink.pdf

I like your design, without looking at the details thoroughly the concept is something that i think we will need once HS2 arrives. It will also provide a link to Thameslink.

 

[pablo]

MarkyT. I like your concept. it's certainly an economic solution to the immediate need.

It would take the eye off the longer-term objective which must be through domestic and international services HS1/HS2.

As presently conceived, HS2 is a shuttle Lon/Brum with a sop to the N-W, Scotland and the N-E. Where is the overall nation-wide vision?