HS2 to Merseyside

[po8crg]

In terms of selling HS2 politically, it might be a good idea to commit any unspent contingency to extensions to the network and to kick off route studies, BCRs, etc. now in anticipation.

The schemes I can see making sense to look at are:

* Curzon Street-New Street and electrification of Bristol-Birmingham, so Cross Country services can use HS2 for part of their journey.
* Liverpool Spur
* York-Newcastle
* TransPennine
* Heathrow-Gatwick
* Hull Spur

[I'd expect that the last two wouldn't make an adequate business case, but the others would]

If it was clear that these were being seriously looked at, then a load of MPs would see their constituencies potentially gaining and be more inclined to vote for. Politically, you don't actually get the schemes detailed enough to annoy voters who live along the routes (ie, you don't actually announce routes). Since it's only a commitment of the unspent contingency, you're not spending any new money - just saying that if there's any left in the kitty, this is what you'll do with it rather than returning it to the treasury. That means it won't add many opponents to HS2, but it should add quite a lot of supporters.

It also means that when HS2 ends, there's a bunch of schemes with solid business cases and local political support ready to start building - whether there's actually contingency left or not won't be decisive in the political context of the late 2020s / early 2030s, but don't expect any politician to admit that!

 

[Altnabreac]

In terms of selling HS2 politically, it might be a good idea to commit any unspent contingency to extensions to the network and to kick off route studies, BCRs, etc. now in anticipation.

The schemes I can see making sense to look at are:

* Curzon Street-New Street and electrification of Bristol-Birmingham, so Cross Country services can use HS2 for part of their journey.
* Liverpool Spur
* York-Newcastle
* TransPennine
* Heathrow-Gatwick
* Hull Spur

[I'd expect that the last two wouldn't make an adequate business case, but the others would]

If it was clear that these were being seriously looked at, then a load of MPs would see their constituencies potentially gaining and be more inclined to vote for. Politically, you don't actually get the schemes detailed enough to annoy voters who live along the routes (ie, you don't actually announce routes). Since it's only a commitment of the unspent contingency, you're not spending any new money - just saying that if there's any left in the kitty, this is what you'll do with it rather than returning it to the treasury. That means it won't add many opponents to HS2, but it should add quite a lot of supporters.

It also means that when HS2 ends, there's a bunch of schemes with solid business cases and local political support ready to start building - whether there's actually contingency left or not won't be decisive in the political context of the late 2020s / early 2030s, but don't expect any politician to admit that!

That looks a reasonable list and some sensible suggestions.

I think as a first step HS2 could build more support by investigating more junctions like those planned at Crewe and Lichfield to allow classic compatible trains to join and leave the existing rail network. My suggestions would be:

• A chord near Killamarsh allowing northbound HS trains to head for Doncaster and Hull via the old Rotherham Masbrough line.
• A chord near Crofton, SE of Wakefield, allowing trains from Newcastle and Scotland that have travelled via Leeds and Wakefield (or trains from Hull via Castleford) to join the HS line heading south.
• A third side to the triangle at Woodlesford allowing trains from the new Leeds HS station to head north on a future high speed line to Newcastle.
• Lines connecting the Toton platform lines to the northbound classic network at Ilkeston allowing through running to Chesterfield and Sheffield.
• A chord east of Lichfield to allow access from the HS line to the South Staffs line to Burton and Derby for Cross Country trains to use.
• A chord near Washwood Heath to the westbound Birmingham New Street lines allowing both Wolverhampton/Shrewsbury - London services and direct services from northern England - Bristol via HS2.
• A chord for Liverpool at Culcheth north of Warrington.

None of those would cost more than a £100m or so but between them they could add more than 20 new towns and cities to the HS network increasing the schemes popularity no end.

I'd also like to see investigation of a Birmingham bypass route from Birmingham Interchange following the M42 to just south of Bromsgrove. This could take all the cross country trains off the local West Midlands network and free up lots of capacity for high speed trains.

At the moment HS2 has shied away from a lot of these options as they don't want electrifying the classic network to be added to their business case costs but the more lines get confirmed for electrification before the HS2 opening date the better the business case becomes for these relatively minor enhancements to HS2.

 

[eps200]

A single-track Waterloo tunnel would be a bottleneck too far for an efficient HSR operation. UIC GC gauge is 4650mm tall by 3150mm wide and is almost completely rectangular in cross-section and you would need electrification clearance on top of that, so you would at the very least have to completely rebuild the floor of the tunnel several metres lower. Massive modifications to the long length of Victorian tunnel with Liverpool on top of it is going to be at the very least difficult and most certainly not as economical as you think so. As I said, the cost of TBM works isn't that high in the grand scheme of things and it provides not only a two-track, completely standardised tunnel setup but it would leave the Victoria tunnel for an expanded Merseyrail network.

It's painful to deal with but the rail demand is not projected to exist for the projects you want HS2 Ltd to accommodate right now. Forcing HS2 to accommodate such non-existent journeys right now would make the current solution less optimal and increase costs above what politics can bear. As I seem to have to repeat a lot, the plans for HS2 can change in the meantime even after the hybrid bill is passed as that's what how Stratford International came about. If demand for Liverpool travel increases exponentially, well above the current projections, to the level where a dedicated link makes sense it can be added to the scheme later. When it's added, it won't have to go through years of political deliberation that the concept of HSR as a whole would have then gone through. A Liverpool-Manchester Javelin service serving only captive stations isn't enough to currently, or for the HS2 opening date, shift the balance towards a Liverpool captive spur being built.

The waterloo tunnel reuse isn't really a crux of the case though boring through the sandstone isn't that hard.

HS2 is going to cut capacity in the peaks for Liverpool 2tph CCs as opposed to 2tph 11 car EMUs, the lack of any Birmingham at all service also stings.

HS2 ltd haven't addressed the capacity issues the at lime street, edge hill and the WCML between Crewe and Warrington which is going to choke the port if nothing els.

The potential Liverpool > Warrington > man airport > Manchester service wasn't even considered at all, so no one knows how much it changes things. all that was considered was London capacity and London journey time. In Liverpool's case the Birmingham travel is suppressed by a crap service again never considered.

Suppose it is worth noting all this can theoretically be pulled out of the contingency along with a lot of the other small changes some people have proposed. A cynic might expect to see at least the smallest ones like extra junctions to allow Leeds Bristol as an election give-away as well as those two extra paths currently allotted to Heathrow that can be given out.

 

[NotATrainspott]

The waterloo tunnel reuse isn't really a crux of the case though boring through the sandstone isn't that hard.

HS2 is going to cut capacity in the peaks for Liverpool 2tph CCs as opposed to 2tph 11 car EMUs, the lack of any Birmingham at all service also stings.

HS2 ltd haven't addressed the capacity issues the at lime street, edge hill and the WCML between Crewe and Warrington which is going to choke the port if nothing els.

The potential Liverpool > Warrington > man airport > Manchester service wasn't even considered at all, so no one knows how much it changes things. all that was considered was London capacity and London journey time. In Liverpool's case the Birmingham travel is suppressed by a crap service again never considered.

Suppose it is worth noting all this can theoretically be pulled out of the contingency along with a lot of the other small changes some people have proposed. A cynic might expect to see at least the smallest ones like extra junctions to allow Leeds Bristol as an election give-away as well as those two extra paths currently allotted to Heathrow that can be given out.

In case it were not clear already I do support the concept, and the eventual physical implementation, of a captive spur to Liverpool. However, just as the point has been made many times before, the captive spur to Liverpool is the least necessary of all the new tracks being built. If it had been included in the scheme until now, it is highly possible that it would suffer the danger of being dropped like the Heathrow spur as it simply is not that essential to the scheme and the rail network as a whole compared to every other section. Some of the Sunday newspapers reported that the Higgins report is even considering dropping the HS1-HS2 link (which would be a travesty as it can never be built once Old Oak is finished).

HS2 Ltd are forced to deliver as much benefit as they can from as little money as they can and a Liverpool spur just does not make a good business case at this point in time. Once the contracts are signed and construction work begins, especially if Phase 2 is brought forward as well, the level of risk involved in HS2 drops quite considerably as it wouldn't then be simple just to drop it all as is the danger at the moment. At that point, once the current scheme is secured completely, the calculation of whether a Liverpool captive spur is immediately necessary or worthwhile can be done again. If the number of freight trains into the port is increases enough to warrant the captive link, then it will be added at that point. If passenger numbers continue to increase beyond current predictions, they can look the spur again and add it. At the moment, two 200m classic-compatible units an hour (each of which would be a train with more seats and space onboards than the Pendolinos) is going to be more than enough for current predictions of passenger demand.

 

[HowardGWR]

Some of the Sunday newspapers reported that the Higgins report is even considering dropping the HS1-HS2 link (which would be a travesty as it can never be built once Old Oak is finished).
.

Why is that? Never? (Might need to move thread!)

 

[NotATrainspott]

Why is that? Never? (Might need to move thread!)

If I remember correctly, building the HS1-HS2 link as part of Phase 2 was suggested by Boris Johnson as a compromise for the disruption caused by both the NLL viaduct widening and the reconstruction of Euston. However, I remember someone authoritative saying that once Old Oak Common is complete, the cost and disruption of adding the link later would be very, very high. All but the absolute westernmost end of the OOC box is being covered over up to ground level with the station facilities; the easternmost end will also carry the GWML above it. If the station were designed more like Stratford, where the majority of the box floor is open to the sky, it would be much easier to drop in or recover a TBM between the finished running lines to Euston, but that is not the case. There is then nowhere along the link line tunnel route where a shaft large enough to drop a TBM down later could be constructed other than at the original other tunnel portal. Building the tunnel but not widening the NLL wouldn't save a lot of money but would deliver no benefits in the short term, so it isn't an ideal solution either. If it were a choice between half-building the link and not ever being able to built it at all though, I would definitely choose the former.

 

[po8crg]

Building the tunnel but not widening the NLL wouldn't save a lot of money but would deliver no benefits in the short term, so it isn't an ideal solution either. If it were a choice between half-building the link and not ever being able to built it at all though, I would definitely choose the former.

Isn't a large part of the costs of a tunnel the fit-out (flooring, ballast, rails, OHLE, etc)? If they just did the TBM run and enough reinforcement to make the tunnel not collapse, then that ought to save quite a lot.

I'm inclined to the view that the NLL widening is a daft idea, and prefer a fully-tunnelled solution, so the minimum work necessary to ensure that an HS2-HS1 link can be inserted at a later date makes sense to me.

But this does belong on another thread.

The obvious one is here, but it's closed.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Isn't a large part of the costs of a tunnel the fit-out (flooring, ballast, rails, OHLE, etc)? If they just did the TBM run and enough reinforcement to make the tunnel not collapse, then that ought to save quite a lot.

I'm inclined to the view that the NLL widening is a daft idea, and prefer a fully-tunnelled solution, so the minimum work necessary to ensure that an HS2-HS1 link can be inserted at a later date makes sense to me.

But this does belong on another thread.

The obvious one is here, but it's closed.

Old threads can be reopened if you ask moderators.

Unfortunately the engineers who designed the Olympic park put National Grid cables in tunnels which preclude more tunnel bores heading into the west side of Stratford box. Combined with the Canal tunnels and the wider King's Cross railway lands regeneration, there isn't anywhere for a fully tunnelled link to join HS1 before Barking, so a fully tunnelled solution would be expensive. If it had been possible at lower cost, it would definitely have been preferable to the NLL widening just like how it is now in tunnel under the NNML/Central line from Old Oak to Ruislip rather than on a more expensive and disruptive surface route.

If the Higgins report suggests building but not fitting out the HS1-HS2 link tunnel, and then not doing the NLL widening, then it would still allow the connection to take place in the future once political will allows. As a compromise, that would be disappointing but still acceptable. Without that small, relatively infrastructurally insignificant link, the HS2 scheme goes from an extension of the European high-speed rail network to being nothing more than another disconnected line to London.

 

[HowardGWR]

Mods, could you rename "HS1 question" thread as "HS1 to HS2 link" or please reopen the closed thread (or both) please?

 

[joeykins82]

HS2 is going to cut capacity in the peaks for Liverpool 2tph CCs as opposed to 2tph 11 car EMUs, the lack of any Birmingham at all service also stings.

Post HS2 phase 2 Liverpool gets 2tph CC via HS2 services and 1tph regional express via MKC in the off-peak. There may well be additional peak services either via or avoiding HS2.

Also, the CCs will be 200m compared to the 253m 11 car 390s but also the 207m 9 car 390s which often appear on the Liverpool route. This is hardly a major loss of capacity.

 

[po8crg]

Post HS2 phase 2 Liverpool gets 2tph CC via HS2 services and 1tph regional express via MKC in the off-peak. There may well be additional peak services either via or avoiding HS2.

Also, the CCs will be 200m compared to the 253m 11 car 390s but also the 207m 9 car 390s which often appear on the Liverpool route. This is hardly a major loss of capacity.

Especially as the CCs are going to be non-tilt and therefore a bit wider than the 390s - ie they can carry quite a few more pax per carriage.

Aside: would it be possible to run coupled CCs, decouple them on the way into Lime Street and then bring them into two different platforms?

 

[Wavertreelad]

Having only recently read the 20 Miles More report (2MMR) after seeing the link on the Edge Hill Spur thread, I must admit my views on HS2 to Liverpool have changed and I now do think a captive stock service to Liverpool is possible as well as desirable. However, the only way the scheme is going to succeed is by developing the project as a long term project built in stages for freight and passenger rail in the Greater Liverpool Region, or Merseyside if you wish. On this basis, the scheme needs to also consider in the longer term, ie up to and beyond completion of any HS2 line. On this basis I would propose the following.

a) Rebuild the Edge Hill Flyover to the west of Wavertree Tech Park Station, which would allow trains on the City Line to cross the current busy "London" lines to the east of Edge Hill Station.
b) Connect the Wapping Tunnel to the south of Central Station and the Victoria/Waterloo Tunnel to the north of Moorfields allowing trains from the City Line to operate in either direction through both stations.
c) Build HS2 captive station on the site of the old Exchange Station with the platforms on the east side of the station as suggested by the 2MMR with a bridge over Leeds Street.
d) Restore a connection to the north of Leeds Street from the Northern Line to the new Exchange Station site, with platforms to the west and parallel to the HS2 captive platforms. This would allow trains from either the City Line running via the Victoria/Waterloo tunnel to terminate at Exchange as well as trains from north on the Northern Line as an alternative to Central. A subway, lifts and perhaps a mooring walkway would provide connection to Moorfields and the Wirral Lines.
e) Build a captive HS2 line running alongside the Northern Line to Bank Hall then picking up the outer-Liverpool Loop Route from where it could follow either the Chat Moss Route, or probably the route through Daresbury proposed in the 2MMR.
f) Electrify the Merseyrail network with 25Kv OHLE as well as extensions to Wigan or Skelmersdale via Kirkby, Preston via Ormskirk, Wrexham via Bidston.
g) Reopen the Midland Railway Alexandra and Langton Dock Branch with a link to the North Liverpool Extension at a point near the "new" Asda store in Marsh Lane Bootle.

The effect of this construction would be,
a) Provide a Captive HS2 station for Liverpool with the minimum of expensive underground tunnelling in a central location with good connections to other networks.
b) Relieve pressure on Lime Street allowing it to develop longer distance services.
c) Allow classic compatible trains to operate into Liverpool Lime Street or even Exchange to serve Scotland, or east west services.
d) Relieves capacity on the Chat Moss and Runcorn routes.
e) Provides extra capacity of routes for freight traffic to and from the Port of Liverpool.

 

[HowardGWR]

@Wavertreelad 14:01
Looks pretty good and you have the local knowledge. I note that most of this can be developed in parallel with HS2 as now envisaged.

 

[eps200]

I more or less agree with Wavertreelad but favour the lime street HS2 station and greater focus on central remembering that it needs a rebuild in the long run whatever happens.

 

[Wavertreelad]

I more or less agree with Wavertreelad but favour the lime street HS2 station and greater focus on central remembering that it needs a rebuild in the long run whatever happens.

The problem with a HS2 Lime Street Station is not only the cost of additional platforms and associated works, but the additional cost and difficulty of clearing a route from any new HS2 route to the outskirts of Liverpool capable of carrying captive stock. Furthermore, if either of the tunnels were used for HS2 it would prevent their use to link the City Line with the Northern and Wirral lines. The Exchange option avoids much of the disruption to existing services as well as freeing up additional capacity at Lime Street to allow services to new destinations to be served. Tunnelling in the city centre is also minimised to the building the connections either side of Central and Moorfields, although any rebuilding of Central will obviously create additional tunnelling and disruption to train services. The location of Central in a largely pedestrian area should avoid major street disruption . The Exchange site is in the business or commercial district of Liverpool which currently benefits from a growing number of hotels in the area and is much nearer the Liverpool Cruise Terminal which could be a big attraction of HS2 travellers. Liverpool One and the main shop area is within five or ten minutes walk.

The majority of the route from Exchange to a short distance east of Broadgreen Station where any new HS2 line to the main HS2 line could be built is largely on existing or old trackbeds further reducing disruption to existing services and reducing the cost of land acquisition, demolition and thus reducing the cost. The additional journey time by the large detour is minimal and still should be better than current proposals even including an additional stop at Warrington/Winnick or Daresbury. A junction to the east of Broadgreen could allow the HS2 route to be used by a Javelin style service "limited stop" from Lime Street to Manchester Airport and perhaps locations beyond, freeing up capacity on the Chat Moss route for passenger and freight services. The junction at this point would allow classic compatible stock to use the Chat Moss route into and out of Lime Street thus allowing services to use part of the HS2 south or perhaps even to the north (ie HS3 to Scotland?) before branching off to none HS2 destinations (ie Bristol, Southampton or Cardiff using the electric spine that should be constructed by then.

Freight could also benefit of the electrification of the Bootle Branch, Kirkby to Skelmersdale or better still Wigan, or Ormskirk to Preston, with the minimum of disruption by and HS2 construction scheme at the same time allowing Merseyrail to expand it's network considerably. Adding a couple of extra platforms at Edge Hill to serve the tunnel lines would be relatively easy with the advantage that there is currently of spare land available to improve access to the large number of houses to the south east of the station and/or allow for park and ride schemes and access to be improved to Picton Road which is already a major commuter route Circular bus routes could connect Edge Hill to the New Royal Liverpool Hospital, University and Womens Hospital which are all within five minutes of the station (20 mins by foot) reducing congestion in the city centre.

 

[eps200]

The classic line improvements are separate, needed yes but separate. i work at the port the rail access is rather lacklustre. The Bootle branch being electrified and some sort of solution for the junctions allowing trains to run on to Preston and Wigan would be nice for flexibility.

Lime street will need a rebuild anyway if growth keeps up so will central there is no way around it, and getting out of the city is an issue for both options.

 

[Wavertreelad]

The classic line improvements are separate, needed yes but separate. i work at the port the rail access is rather lacklustre. The Bootle branch being electrified and some sort of solution for the junctions allowing trains to run on to Preston and Wigan would be nice for flexibility.

Lime street will need a rebuild anyway if growth keeps up so will central there is no way around it, and getting out of the city is an issue for both options.

I agree the classic lines are separate, but apart from perhaps the Canada Dock link being reopened, any further expansion of port access I suspect will be reliant on a number of developments in the next few years.

One of the first will be a proposal by the government to form a greater Merseyside Authority which will include Liverpool, Sefton, Knowsley, St Helens, Halton and Wirral which will be responsible for transport in the area amongst other things, although Halton would retain control of some local functions including tolling the Runcorn bridges. An informal group already exists but lacks powers and any meaningful budget or formal decision making policy. This would all change and the authority could gain financially and be able to fund more infrastructure programmes which otherwise would be funded by central government. This may in part explain the delay in the announcement by Merseyrail of it's plans to replace the 507/508s which are due to phased out by 2020.

Given the Merseyrail order will shape the future of local passenger train services up to the mid part of the century, I suspect it will be for dual voltage stock to allow the existing system to be converted to OHLE over the lifetime of the stock as well as expansion of the network. Such expansion would inevitably have to take into consideration links to the port as it would clearly be a non starter to try and build an entirely new freight line to the WCML. It is therefore no surprise that Merseytravel and Peel amongst others are already in discussion in various meetings on maters of mutual interest.

The opening of Liverpool2 towards the end of next year should see an increase in the number and size of containerships calling at the Port and it is anticipated the number of HGVs on Dunningsbridge Road travelling to the M57/M58 will increase from about 300 to about 800 an hour once the terminal is fully operational. Whilst Peel plan to move some containers by ship to up the Manchester Ship Canal to Port Salford the vast majority of the terminals initial capacity of 500000 containers will have to move by other means so rail will become increasingly important, even though at the moment there are no services from Seaforth carrying containers. Bulk cargoes also form an important part of Port activities and again as these grow there will be a demand to move some of this volume by alternative means of transport to road. So yes demand for rail services will grow and it is difficult to see how this could be accommodated using only the Bootle branch and the Chat Moss route. An alternative route to the WCML avoiding this route would seem to be necessary at some point in future and sharing this with Merseyrail could be a economical and practical solution to benefit all parties.

Any expansion of the existing Merseyrail system will inevitably increase the need to expand Central especially if the schemes to use the Edge Hill tunnels to route City Line trains into the station are progressed. However, if HS2 is advanced by even a few years, it might be more difficult to complete a rebuild of Central and Lime Street at about the same time without massive disruption. Siting the HS2 station at Exchange avoids this problem and spreads the pressure over two stations, ie Central and Moorfields instead of a single location.

Should the government decide to build HS2 phase 1 to Crewe instead and accept the need for a further East/West high speed link between Hull/Leeds and Liverpool there would need to be a reappraisal of the current Phase 2 classic compatible plans to Liverpool via Runcorn in the long term. If such plans were accepted redeveloping Lime Street to cater for both north/south and east/west services and potentially in the long term HS services to Scotland would be very costly if not almost impossible without massive redevelopment in the area. A rebuilt Exchange Station avoids many of the problems and creates additional capacity at the same time without causing major disruption to rail services during the construction process.

 

[eps200]

The lime street HS station would be going to the south of lime street with the exception of the in cutting bridge where is the disruption above and beyond the already needed rebuild?

Exchange needs more miles of track and a lot more tunnel and would be more fragmentation, how would the people who currently go city line > lime street > London use it?

Central will horrific how ever they go about it, best idea I've heard is do what can be done on reopening parliament street before the shut down then close central and rush the new station to completion reinstating a service from there to hunts cross. and moorfeilds northward. The Wirral line platform should be able to largely stay open during the works as-well

 

[Wavertreelad]

The lime street HS station would be going to the south of lime street with the exception of the in cutting bridge where is the disruption above and beyond the already needed rebuild?

Exchange needs more miles of track and a lot more tunnel and would be more fragmentation, how would the people who currently go city line > lime street > London use it?

Central will horrific how ever they go about it, best idea I've heard is do what can be done on reopening parliament street before the shut down then close central and rush the new station to completion reinstating a service from there to hunts cross. and moorfeilds northward. The Wirral line platform should be able to largely stay open during the works as-well

The Liverpool Echo carried an item earlier in the week about the poor state of the buildings in Lime Street which lie to the south of the existing station. According to Mayor Anderson a decision on their redevelopment cannot be made until a decision on HS2 is made. The strange thing about this is the plan I saw seemed to indicate the HS2 platforms would be on the north side of Skelhorne Street and extend onto the recently created open space in front of the station concourse. The other curious point is that behind those buildings to the south of Skelhorne Street is a recently built student accommodation building and the old Royal Mail sorting office that has just been given approval to be redeveloped I seem to remember to recall for the University. Even if it is possible to construct HS2 platforms at Lime Street, there is still the minor issue of either building a HS2 route to the station especially if you wanted to run full HS2 stock which appears to the aim of the present policy. If you build to cater for a compatible service you still have the problem of capacity for conventional trains whereas building HS2 at Exchange avoids this. The extra mileage is all mainly above ground along existing trackbed and the only tunnel that might be required would be in the Broadgreen area dependant on the route followed.

Using both Edge Hill tunnels to link the City Line to the Northern Line in a loop passing through an expanded Central /Lime Street underground would allow City Line passengers wishing to use HS2 to London or elsewhere to transfer at an extended Moorfields/Exchange Station. I would envisage most "local" services on the City Line would be diverted to the loop avoiding trains dwelling in Lime Street.

 

[eps200]

There would have to be tunnel almost immediately out of exchange diving straight down as the northern line rises until it reaches the outer loop where it can emerge, then it would need new tunnels around broad green.
Lime street would need a tunnel almost immediately then once it passes edge hill not so much.

 

[Wavertreelad]

There would have to be tunnel almost immediately out of exchange diving straight down as the northern line rises until it reaches the outer loop where it can emerge, then it would need new tunnels around broad green.
Lime street would need a tunnel almost immediately then once it passes edge hill not so much.

I suspect you may be referring to the 20 Miles More Report first option for a HS2 Exchange Station, on page 70 of he report.

http://www.20milesmore.com/report/

This option routes the line back to Edge Hill using part of the Waterloo Tunnel.

However, on page 78 the report discusses the options for using the now lifted Outer Loop and under this proposal the HS2 line would leave Exchange and follow the existing Northern Line alignment to Sandhills before the dropping down to ground level and entering the disused Walton Hill tunnels, which would require some tunnelling work. The line would then follow the disused outer loop line which mainly remains intact although there are a number of obstructions, but probably nothing major, including the Sainsbury store at East Prescott Road that partly blocks he route.

The report offers a number of alternative routes from the outer loop line to HS2, and my personal option would be a combination of the route shown under section 8 on page 80 and the Daresbury route shown on page 83. However, the report predates the Higgins report which proposes an interchange at Crewe. This could result in a rethink on the line north to Wigan and beyond, so my suggestion (totally untested) would be use the Daresbury route north ie west of Warrington to cross the Mersey and MSC with a junction to the east of Widnes to Liverpool. A further branch to the south of the Mersey and MSC would link to the Manchester Airport link would form the first part of the east/west HS link suggested by Higgins as well as allowing trains to and from Manchester to travel north. A station built on a north/south section between the branches would replace Warrington on both lines with direct link to motorway network. This would reduce hopefully spread the pressure on the city centre stations in the urban areas in terms of footfall as well as traffic congestion in the surrounding areas.