Jump to content

High Speed 2: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Smeowrend (talk | contribs)
20 edits
No edit summary
Smeowrend (talk | contribs)
20 edits
Added citation
Line 37: Line 37:
The [[Cameron Ministry|Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government]] formed in May 2010 stated in its initial programme for government its commitment to creating a high-speed rail network.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_187876.pdf |title= The Coalition: our programme for government |page= 31 |publisher= HM Government |date= May 2010}}</ref>
The [[Cameron Ministry|Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government]] formed in May 2010 stated in its initial programme for government its commitment to creating a high-speed rail network.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_187876.pdf |title= The Coalition: our programme for government |page= 31 |publisher= HM Government |date= May 2010}}</ref>


On the 10th of January 2012 the coalition government announced it had given the go-ahead for Phase One (see below) of the line to be constructed by 2026, with additional [[tunneling]] also being announced to meet environmental concerns.
On the 10th of January 2012 the coalition government announced it had given the go-ahead for Phase One (see below) of the line to be constructed by 2026, with additional [[tunneling]] also being announced to meet environmental concerns. <ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/press-releases/dft-news-20120110 |title= Go-ahead given to new railway |publisher= Department for Transport ]date = January 2012}}</ref>


==History==
==History==

Revision as of 11:06, 10 January 2012

For other uses, see High Speed 2 (disambiguation).

High Speed 2
High Speed 2, High Speed 1 and Channel Tunnel Rail links
Overview
StatusProposed for 2026 and 2033
LocaleUnited Kingdom
Stage 1: (Greater London, West Midlands)
Stage 2: (Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire)
Termini
Stations4 (initial)
Service
TypeHigh-speed railway
SystemNational Rail
Technical
Track gaugeStandard gauge 1,435 mm (4 ft 8+1⁄2 in)
Operating speedUp to 400 km/h (250 mph)[1]
Route map

High Speed 2 (HS2) is a proposed high-speed railway between London and the Midlands, the North of England, and potentially at a later stage the central belt of Scotland. The project is being developed by High Speed Two Ltd, a company established by the British government. The route would take the form of a "Y", with a trunk from London to Birmingham. The route would then split into two spurs, one to Manchester, and the other to Leeds via the East Midlands. It would be built in stages, with the London to Birmingham section being the first stage. There would be no intermediate calling points between London and the West Midlands.

High-speed rail is supported in principle by the three main UK political parties; there is, however, debate about which cities should be served, and on the environmental performance and impact of high-speed rail.[2]

If the HS2 plan is approved, construction could begin in 2016 with the first trains by 2026 and the final phase completed by 2033.[3] At present, the only high-speed route in Britain is High Speed 1 (the Channel Tunnel Rail Link).

The Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government formed in May 2010 stated in its initial programme for government its commitment to creating a high-speed rail network.[4]

On the 10th of January 2012 the coalition government announced it had given the go-ahead for Phase One (see below) of the line to be constructed by 2026, with additional tunneling also being announced to meet environmental concerns. [5]

History

High-Speed Rail Network in Europe in 2011
The Channel Tunnel Rail Link, Britain's first high-speed line

High-speed rail has been expanding across the European Union since the 1980s, with several member countries – notably France, Spain and Germany – investing heavily in the construction of new high-speed railway lines capable of operating at over 270 kilometres per hour (170 mph). In 2009 there were reportedly 3,480 miles (5,600 km) of high-speed line in operation in Europe; a further 2,160 miles (3,480 km) were under construction and another 5,280 miles (8,500 km) were planned.[6]

High-speed rail first arrived in the United Kingdom with the opening in 2007 of the 67-mile (108 km) Channel Tunnel Rail Link (now known as High Speed 1) between London and the Channel Tunnel. The development of a second high-speed line in Britain was proposed in 2009 by the United Kingdom Government to reduce long-distance journey times and to address issues of capacity on existing railway lines. Most of the rail network in Britain consists of lines constructed during the Victorian era which do not permit operating speeds higher than 125 miles per hour (201 km/h). A document published by the Department for Transport in January 2009 described an increase of 50% in passenger rail traffic (and a 40% increase in rail freight) in the preceding 10 years in the UK and detailed a number of infrastructural problems apparent in Britain's railway system. The report proposed that new high-speed lines should be constructed to address these issues and after assessing various options for new-build high-speed rail,[7] concluded that the most appropriate initial route for a new line was from London to the West Midlands.[8]

High Speed Two Limited

In January 2009, the then Labour government established a company, High Speed Two Limited (HS2 Ltd), chaired by Sir David Rowlands,[9] to examine the case for a new British high-speed line and present a potential route between London and the West Midlands.[10] The government report suggested that ultimately the line could be extended to reach Scotland.[11]

Drawing on consultations carried out for the Department for Transport (DfT) and Network Rail, HS2 Ltd would provide advice on options for a Heathrow International interchange station, access to central London, connectivity with HS1 and the existing rail network, and financing and construction,[12] and report to government on the first stage by the end of 2009.[13]

In August 2009, Network Rail published its own study independently of HS2's work, outlining somewhat different proposals for the expansion of the railway network which included a new high-speed rail line between London and Glasgow/Edinburgh, following a route through the West Midlands and the North-West of England.[14]

For the HS2 report, a route was investigated to an accuracy of 0.5 metres (18 in).[15] In December 2009, HS2 handed its report to the government. The study investigated the possibility of links to Heathrow Airport and connections with Crossrail, the Great Western Main Line, and the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (HS1).

On 11 March 2010, the High Speed 2 report and supporting studies were published, together with the government's command paper on high-speed rail.[16][17]

Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition government review

The Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition, formed in May 2010, has begun a review of HS2 plans inherited from the previous government. The Conservative Party, whilst in Opposition, backed the idea of a high-speed terminus at St Pancras with a direct link to Heathrow Airport[18] and has a policy to connect London, Manchester, Leeds and Birmingham with Heathrow by high-speed rail with construction starting in 2015.[19] In March 2010 Theresa Villiers stated "The idea that some kind of Wormwood Scrubs International station is the best rail solution for Heathrow is just not credible".[20]

The Secretary of State for Transport, Philip Hammond, asked Lord Mawhinney, a former Conservative Transport Secretary, to conduct an urgent review of the proposed route. The coalition government wished the high-speed line to be routed via Heathrow Airport, an idea rejected in the most recent proposal published by HS2 Ltd.[21]

Lord Mawhinney's conclusions contradicted Ms Villiers' view and Conservative policy in opposition, stating that HS2 should not go to Heathrow Airport unless and until it reaches beyond Birmingham. He stated that Heathrow should be served, via a loop, only when the line reaches the northern regions of England. Routeing the line only via Heathrow would add seven minutes to the journey time of all services.[22]

In December 2008 an article in The Economist noted the increasing political popularity of high-speed rail in Britain as a solution to transport congestion, and as an alternative to unpopular schemes such as road-tolls and runway expansion, but concluded that its future would depend on it being commercially viable.[23] In November 2010, Philip Hammond rejected this idea, stating that government support for HS2 did not require it to be financially viable:

If we used financial accounting we would never have any public spending, we would build nothing ... Financial accounting would strike a dagger through the whole case for public sector investment.[24]

Public consultation

On 20 December 2010 the government published a slightly revised line of route to be put out for public consultation,[25][26] based on a Y-shaped route from London to Birmingham with branches to Leeds and Manchester, as originally put forward by Lord Adonis as Secretary of State for Transport under the previous government,[27] with a number of alterations designed to minimise the visual, noise, and other environmental impacts of the line.[25] In a statement to Parliament, the Secretary of State confirmed that the first phase of construction would include a high-speed line from London to Birmingham as well as a connection to High Speed 1. High-speed lines north of the West Midlands would be built in later stages, and a link to Heathrow Airport would be initially provided by means of a connection at Old Oak Common, with a high-speed link to the airport to be added later. The high-speed line would connect to the existing network, allowing through trains from London to northern destinations.[28][29] The consultation documents were published on 11 February 2011 and the consultation period was set to run until July 2011.[30] At the end of the consultation period, Hammond, the then Secretary of State for Transport, advised that a decision about Phase 1 of HS2 would be announced to MPs in December 2011. However, Justine Greening who took over as Transport Secretary on 1 October 2011 announced on 4 December 2011 that she was delaying the announcement until early January 2012 in order to give further careful consideration to the issues raised with her.[31]

Route

Stage 1 – London to the West Midlands

Approximate route of the London-Birmingham section based on the official description[32][33]

As proposed in March 2010, the line would run from London Euston, mainly in tunnel, to an interchange with Crossrail west of London Paddington, then along the New North Main Line (Acton-Northolt Line) past West Ruislip and alongside the Chiltern Main Line with a four-kilometre viaduct over the Grand Union Canal and River Colne, and then from the M25 to Amersham in a new 9.6 kilometres (6.0 mi) tunnel. After emerging from the tunnel, the line would run parallel to the existing A413 road and London to Aylesbury Line corridor, through the 47 kilometres (29 mi) wide Chiltern Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, passing close by Great Missenden to the east, alongside Wendover immediately to the west, then on to Aylesbury. After Aylesbury, the line would run alongside the Aylesbury to Verney Junction line, joining it north of Quainton Road and then striking out to the north-west across open countryside through North Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire, South Northamptonshire, Warwickshire and Staffordshire. A number of alignments have been studied, and in September 2010 HS2 Ltd set out recommendations for altering the course at certain locations.[34]

In December 2010 the Transport Secretary announced several amendments to the line of route aimed at mitigating vibration, noise or visual impact. These changes include, at Primrose Hill, north London, moving the tunnel 100m further north, and in west London reducing the width of the "Northolt Corridor". It is proposed to lower the alignment and create a 900m "green tunnel" in Buckinghamshire at South Heath. At nearby Amersham where two footpaths would also be otherwise severed, at Chipping Warden, Northamptonshire and Burton Green, Warwickshire, "green bridges" would be constructed. Elsewhere, the route alignment would be moved away from the settlements of Brackley, Northamptonshire, Ladbroke and Stoneleigh in Warwickshire and Lichfield in southern Staffordshire, and also from the Grade I listed buildings, Hartwell House and Edgcote House, in Northamptonshire.[35]

Heathrow access

While in opposition, the Conservative Party had stated that, if elected to government, it would go forward with a high-speed line connecting London to Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester, with a long-term aim of linking to Scotland, as well as other English cities.[36][37]

Consultants Arup had previously suggested in Heathrow Hub Arup Submission to HS2 that a 200-acre (81 ha) site at Iver, north-east of the intersection of the M25 and M4, could house a railway station of 12 or more platforms, as well as a coach and bus station and an airport terminal. Under this proposal, the high-speed line would then follow a different route to Birmingham, running parallel to existing motorways and railways as with HS1 in Kent.[38] Arup's proposal was supported by the Conservatives in their 2009 policy paper, which envisaged connections to cities on the Great Western main line (Bristol and Cardiff) as well as high-speed connections both to the new high-speed line to the north and to the Channel Tunnel Rail Link and continental Europe.[36]

According to Lord Mawhinney's report, the Heathrow station should be directly beneath Heathrow Central station (not at Iver, see Heathrow Hub) and the London terminus for HS2 should be at Old Oak Common, not Euston.[39] The "Heathrow Hub" plan was initially supported by the Conservative Party[40] but did not form part of the final consultation plan.[41]

In December 2010 it was announced that a high-speed connection with Heathrow Airport would be built as part of the second phase of the project, and that until then connections would be made at Old Oak Common, where High Speed 2 would have an interchange station with the Heathrow Express and Crossrail.[28][29]

Stage 2 – West Midlands to Manchester and Leeds

The corridor of the "Y" route extension to Manchester and Leeds from Birmingham currently preferred by the government.

In October 2010 Transport Secretary Philip Hammond announced that the route preferred by the government was the so-called "Y" route with separate branches to Manchester and Leeds after Birmingham.[42]

The route to the West Midlands would be the first stage of a line to Scotland,[43] and passengers travelling to or from Scotland would be able to use through trains with a saving of 45 minutes from day one.[44] If approved, construction would begin in 2016, with the first trains running by 2026 and the final phase completed by 2033.[45] It was recommended by a Parliament select committee on HS2 in November 2011 that a statutory clause should be in the bill that would guarantee HS2 being constructed beyond Birmingham so that the economic benefits are spread further.[46]

Connection to other lines

High Speed 1

The government command paper stated:

... the new British high speed rail network should be connected to the wider European high speed rail network via High Speed One and the Channel Tunnel, subject to cost and value for money. This could be achieved through either or both of a dedicated rapid transport system linking Euston and St Pancras and a direct rail link to High Speed One.[47]

The engineering study conducted by Arup for HS2 Ltd costed a "classic speed" GC loading gauge direct rail link at £458m (single track) or £812m (double track). The connection would be from Old Oak Common to the High Speed 1 St Pancras portal, via tunnel and the North London Line. A double-track high-speed connection would cost £3.6bn.[48]

The High Speed 2 report recommended that, if a direct rail link is built, it should be the classic-speed, double-track option.[49]

In December 2010 it was announced that a connection would be made with High Speed 1 as part of the first phase of construction using a tunnel between Old Oak Common and Chalk Farm on the North London Line, and then using existing lines to connect north of St Pancras.[28][29] The proposed connection would be built to GC loading gauge and would not be suitable for high-speed running.[50]

West Coast Main Line in Staffordshire

HS2 would cross the West Coast Main Line just east of Lichfield Trent Valley station then join the Main Line about 3 kilometres to the north-west of Lichfield.[citation needed]

Journey times

The HS2 Ltd report gave journey times for some destinations, allowing a degree of 'before and after' comparison.[51][52][53][54] Because it would serve only a very small subset of destinations, use of existing 'classic' services would be an element of many High Speed 2 journeys.

London to/from... Current timings on existing lines Proposed (with HS2 completion to Birmingham) Proposed (with HS2 completion to Manchester and Leeds)
Birmingham 1 hour 12 minutes (fastest) 49 minutes
Manchester 2 hours 8 minutes 1 hour 40 minutes 1 hour 20 minutes
Liverpool 2 hours 8 minutes 1 hour 50 minutes 1 hour 36 minutes
Leeds 2 hours 20 minutes 2 hours 20 minutes 1 hour 20 minutes
Newcastle 3 hours 30 minutes 3 hours 30 minutes 2 hours 30 minutes
Edinburgh 4 hours 30 minutes 4 hours 30 minutes 3 hours 30 minutes
Glasgow 4 hours 31 minutes 4 hours 3 hours 30 minutes

Proposed stations

London to Birmingham

Euston Terminus, also showing nearby terminus of High Speed 1 at St Pancras

Central London

Under the March 2010 scheme, HS2 would start from a rebuilt London Euston. The station would be extended to the south and west with significant construction above. 24 platforms would serve High Speed and classic lines to the Midlands as well as the six underground lines (from Euston and Euston Square underground stations which would be combined). The connection with Crossrail at Old Oak Common in West London is designed to mitigate the extra burden on Euston, although Euston too would see its underground station rebuilt and integrated with Euston Square.[30][55] A rapid transit link between Euston and St Pancras might be provided[56] and it is proposed to route the proposed Chelsea–Hackney line via Euston to cope with increased passenger demand.[57][58]

However, the review by former Conservative Transport Secretary Lord Mawhinney recommended that High Speed 2 should terminate at Old Oak Common, not Euston.[22] He questioned the sense of having HS2 terminate at Euston and High Speed 1 at St Pancras, with no direct through running connection between them[22] however there is such a link proposed[30] and a rapid transport link to complement the five London Underground lines running between the stations.[56]

West London

Crossrail Interchange in west London
Main article: Old Oak Common railway station

The March 2010 report proposed that all trains would stop at a west London "Crossrail interchange" near Old Oak Common between Paddington and Acton Main Line stations, with connections for Crossrail, Heathrow Express and services on the Great Western Main Line to Heathrow Airport, Reading, South West England and South Wales. The station might also have connections with London Overground and Southern services on the North London and West London Lines and also with London Underground's Central Line.[59]

Lord Mawhinney recommended that High Speed 2 should terminate at Old Oak Common because of its good connections and in order to save the cost of tunnelling to Euston.[22]

Bickenhill ("Birmingham Interchange")

The proposed 'Birmingham Interchange'

The March 2010 report proposed that a new "Birmingham Interchange" station would be built in rural Solihull, on the other side of the M42 motorway from the National Exhibition Centre, Birmingham International Airport and Birmingham International Station.[60] The interchange would be connected by a people mover to the other sites; the AirRail Link people mover already operates between Birmingham International station and the airport.

According to Birmingham Airport's chief executive Paul Kehoe, HS2 is a key element in increasing the number of flights using the airport, and patronage by inhabitants of London and the South-East, as the high-speed link would reduce travelling times to Birmingham from London to under 40mins.[61]

Birmingham city centre

Proposed layout for Curzon Street Station
Main article: Curzon Street Station

New Street station, the main station serving central Birmingham, has been described as operating at full capacity and being unable to accommodate new high-speed services.[citation needed] A new terminus for High Speed 2, termed "Birmingham Curzon Street" in the government's command paper[62] and as "Birmingham Fazeley Street" in the report produced by High Speed 2 Ltd, would be built on land between Moor Street Queensway and the site of the old Curzon Street Station. It would be reached via a spur line from a triangular junction with the "main" HS2 trunk at Coleshill.[63]

Development plans for the Eastside district and a new campus for Birmingham City University continued to be progressed, though incompatible with HS2, because the government did not inform them of the proposed route.[64][65]

As Curzon Street/Fazeley Street terminus would not receive other services, local or regional rail passengers arriving in Birmingham would need to transfer from New Street, Snow Hill or Moor Street stations. The direct pedestrian access between the HS2 terminal site and New Street, the city's main station, entails traversing the Smallbrook Queensway underpass under the Bull Ring, Birmingham shopping centre or to create a high and low level link between the existing Moor Street station and the new Curzon Street station with a possible loop line between the two levels to allow onward travel to Kidderminster and Worcester.[citation needed]

Beyond Birmingham

East Midlands

A new station in the East Midlands is also proposed at an unidentified site. This station might take the form of a parkway station,[note 1] and not be sited in Nottingham, Leicester or Derby which it would serve.[citation needed][66] Business leaders[who?] in the area supported high-speed rail coming to the East Midlands but were concerned that a parkway station instead of centrally located city stations would result in no overall net benefit in journey times.[66]

Development

Infrastructure

Euston station is planned to be the London terminus of HS2

High Speed 2 Ltd's report uses the specifications of a high-speed line built to a European structure gauge (as was High Speed 1) and conforming to European Union technical standards for interoperability for high-speed rail[67] (EU Directive 96/48/EC). HS2 Ltd's report assumed a GC structure gauge for passenger capacity estimations,[68] with a maximum design speed of 250 miles per hour (400 km/h).[1] Initially, trains would run at a maximum 360 kilometres per hour (224 mph)*.[69]

Freight trains could use the line only within a limited night-time window, due to their relatively low speed. The new line would also release capacity for freight on the existing West Coast Main Line and Midland Main Line.[70]

Signalling would be a level of the European Rail Traffic Management System[clarification needed] using in-cab signalling, to resolve the visibility issues associated with line-side signals at speeds over 200 kilometres per hour (120 mph)

Platform height will be 760 millimetres (30 in).[71]

Rolling stock

HS2 mentioned two types of train:[69]

The report also considered the possibility of gauge enhancement on non-high-speed lines as an alternative to 'classic compatible' trains, to allow European-gauge trains to run beyond the high-speed network.[69]

Both types would have a maximum speed of at least 360 kilometres per hour (220 mph) and length of at least 200 metres (660 ft). Two units could be joined together for a 400 metres (1,300 ft) train, but only platforms specially built or rebuilt for the high-speed line would be able to accommodate such long trains.[69]

HS2 Ltd stated that, because of their non-standard nature, the classic-compatible trains were expected to be more expensive.[72]

Maintenance depot

In April 2010 ARUP was asked to develop proposals for the location, engineering specification and site layout of the Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD). The general location of the IMD was identified as ideally adjacent to, or within 10k of the intersection of the preferred HS2 route and the East West Rail (EWR) route near Steeple Claydon/Calvert in Buckinghamshire. The feasibility of using the MoD site at Bicester as the IMD was also considered. Six such potential sites were shortlisted and rated against the specification. The preferred site, called 'Thame Road' (at Claydon Junction) and a fall-back site, 'Great Pond' were announced in December 2010.[73] The nearby Calvert Waste Plant has also been identified for heat and power generation.[73]

Cost

The first 120 mile section from London to Birmingham will cost £15.8 to £17.4 billion,[74] while the cost for the entire Y-shaped 335 mile network is £30 billion.[74]

Upgrading existing lines from London to Birmingham instead of building the new HS2 will cost more (£20bn) and will provide only two-thirds the extra capacity of HS2 according to Lord Adonis.[75]

Timeline to opening

High Speed 2 Ltd suggested[76] that, following ministerial approval, public consultation, parliamentary approval through a hybrid bill, and detailed design, construction of the London-Birmingham section could begin in mid-2018. This is estimated to require six-and-a-half years, with a further year to finish testing.[77] Reconstruction of Euston station and preparation of related infrastructure is expected to require the full length of the construction period to complete. Other major construction elements include the Old Oak Common and Birmingham stations (over four years), and the tunnelling work (Old Oak to Euston tunnel, tunnels at Little Missenden, Ufton Wood, Chalfont and Amersham), all estimated to require over four years for construction.[78] Opening would be at the end of 2025.[77]

The command paper suggested that opening to Birmingham should be possible by the end of 2026.[79] The timetable included the additional work of preparing the routes to Leeds and Manchester, for approval by Parliament in the hybrid bill. The initial Y-shaped network was to be presented in one bill in an attempt to simplify planning and minimise the parliamentary time required for the bill.[80]

Perspectives

See also: High-speed rail in the United Kingdom

Government rationale

According to the Department of Transport, the major[citation needed] purpose of HS2 is to provide additional capacity on the rail network from London to the Midlands and North. Despite an upgrade to the WCML completed in 2008 (see West Coast Main Line#Modernisation by Network Rail) and the expected implementation of plans for longer trains and cab signalling on that route,[81] the DfT expected the WCML to have insufficient capacity south of Rugby sometime around 2025 without a substantial increase in capacity.[82] However, a member[who?] of the 'HS2 Action Alliance' has criticised the Department of Transport's demand forecasts as being too high, as well as having other shortcomings in the assessment methodology.[83][84] The WCML Rugby– Euston section was already operating at up to[dubious – discuss] 80% of capacity in the 2009 morning peak.[85] Additionally, railway passenger numbers have been growing significantly in recent years.[86]

The Government's transport strategy identified fourteen strategic national transport corridors in England, of which the London– West Midlands– North West England route is the "single most important and heavily used, presenting both the greatest challenges in terms of future capacity and the greatest opportunities to promote a shift of passenger and freight traffic from road to rail".[87] In launching the project, the DfT announced that the new High Speed 2 line between London and the West Midlands would follow a different alignment from that of the existing WCML, rejecting the option of further upgrading or building new tracks alongside the existing WCML as being too costly and disruptive, and because the existing Victorian-era WCML alignment was not suitable for very high speeds.[88]

The new line "would improve rail services from London to cities in the North of England and Scotland,[89] and the suggested approach route west of London improves passenger transport links to Heathrow Airport".[90] Additionally, if the new line were connected to the Great Western Main Line (GWML) and Crossrail it would provide links with East and West London, and the Thames Valley.[91]

The Government expects that over the next 30 years, HS2 will cost £32 billion to build, generate £27 billion in fares and provide £43.7 billion of economic benefits.[92]


Support

Organisations that support the HS2 project include Greengauge 21 (a research[citation needed] company). The Scottish Government's policy is to discuss with the UK Government the development of a Scottish high-speed rail link connecting to London and continental Europe, aiming to reduced journey times to London from Scotland to under 3 hours.[93] Other supportive campaigns include The Campaign for HSR, led by Professor David Begg, which aims to canvas support from businesses across the UK to promote the case for the proposed high-speed rail link. The campaign currently has support from over 400 UK businesses. Go-HS2[94] is a group comprising Centro, Birmingham City Council, Birmingham Chamber of Commerce, Birmingham Airport, and the NEC Group. Its objective is to promote the benefits that its members believe HS2 will bring to Birmingham and the West Midlands. It is also supported by the wider Passenger Transport Executives Group (PTEG) along with many urban councils in the north of England.

Opposition

The HS2 Action Alliance was formed in May 2010,[95] as an umbrella group for over sixty local groups that oppose HS2[96] including ad hoc entities, residents' associations, and parish councils.[97] The Alliance's primary aim is to prevent HS2 from happening; secondary aims include evaluating and minimising the impacts of HS2 on individuals, communities and the environment, and communication of facts about HS2, and its compensation scheme.[95]

The HS2 proposals have been opposed by a number of local authorities along or adjacent to the route. Eighteen of these have joined together in a national campaign to actively challenge the HS2 scheme. The alliance is called '51m' as the local authorities contend that HS2 will cost each Parliamentary Constituency £51 million.[98] Constituent members of 51m are Buckinghamshire County Council,[99] Aylesbury Vale District Council, Chiltern District Council, South Bucks District Council, Wycombe District Council, London Borough of Hillingdon,[100] Cherwell District Council, Lichfield District Council, South Northants District Council, Warwick District Council, North Warwickshire Borough Council, Warwickshire County Council,[101] Stratford-on-Avon District Council, Leicestershire County Council,[102] Harborough District Council, Three Rivers District Council, Oxfordshire County Council,[103] and Coventry City Council.[104] The other councils that have declared their opposition are Camden Borough Council,[105] Northamptonshire[106] and Staffordshire[107] County Councils.

Alan Francis, Green Party transport speaker, outlined the party's support for high-speed rail in principle in terms of benefits to capacity, reduced journey times and potential for reduced carbon emissions, but recommended a line restricted to 300 kilometres per hour (190 mph) to 320 kilometres per hour (200 mph) which would enable it to use existing transport corridors to a greater extent and increase efficiency;[108] the Green Party voted to oppose the proposed HS2 plans at their Spring 2011 conference, on environmental and economic grounds;[109] the anti-taxation pressure group Taxpayers Alliance have also opposed HS2 on similar grounds, describing the project as a white elephant.[110][111]

The New Economics Foundation (A think tank promoting environmentalism, localism and anti-capitalism) published a formal response to the public consultation on 5 August 2011 Response to the HS2 Consultation which concludes that 'As it stands, the Government’s case for a high speed rail link between London and northern cities (HS2) is incomplete and therefore cannot be used as a reliable basis for a decision on the project. Too much has been omitted from the analysis for it to be robust and persuasive... The limitations of the HS2 appraisal are as follows: 1. Important material impacts of HS2 are excluded from the analysis 2. By separating rhetoric on objectives from the appraisal, it is not possible to test the claims that are being made for HS2 which has implications for accountability 3. Appraisal is not rooted in stakeholder engagement 4. Evaluation of potential alternatives is incomplete 5. Time savings are over-valued and over-emphasised 6. There are significant inconsistencies with existing rail capacity and future demand figures 7. The economic case is dependent on potentially optimistic economic growth 8. The opportunity cost of HS2 investment is poorly evaluated 9. Sensitivity testing is incomplete 10. The carbon case for HS2 has not been made. We call on the Government to postpone a decision on HS2, and to commission a full-scale independent and impartial analysis of the proposal before proceeding further.'[112]

Other

Organisations with noncommittal, ambiguous or dissatisfied positions include the Campaign to Protect Rural England,[113] the National Trust,[114] Friends of the Earth,[115] and the Campaign for Better Transport.[116] The CPRE stated that HS2 should not run at 'ultra high speeds', claiming that lower speeds would increase journey times only slightly, while allowing the line to run along existing motorway and railway corridors, reducing intrusion.[113] The railway campaigning organisation Railfuture, which supports high speed rail in principle, indicated in its submission to the Transport Select Committee Inquiry into HS2 that it sees no benefit in trains running at up to 400 kilometres per hour (250 mph) and therefore is not in favour of the current proposal and route, and advises alternatives are investigated.[117]

Arup, who did the engineering work to identify routes for HS2 Ltd., have opposed the chosen route for HS2 (route 3) calling it "deeply flawed"[118] They have stated the route should link to Heathrow and then follow the M40 motorway and Chiltern railway line, improving the business case, lowering construction costs and creating less impact on the countryside.[119]

The Wildlife Trusts have criticised the proposals, stating that the former Government's policy on High Speed Rail (March 2010) underestimated the effect on wildlife habitats (with 4 SSSIs and over 50 of other types of nature site affected), as well as noting that the proposals had not comprehensively shown any significant effect on transport carbon emissions and questioning the economic benefits of a line. The trusts called for additional research to be done on the effects of a high-speed line.[120]

The Federation of Small Businesses expressed scepticism over the need for high-speed rail, stating that roads expenditure was more useful for its members,[121] and Coventry and Warwickshire Chamber of Commerce opined that HS2 offered no benefit to its area.[122]

On 8 November 2011 the independent Commons Transport Committee which had been hearing evidence from supporters and opponents released its findings, reporting 'A good case' and 'a new era of inter-urban travel in Britain'.[123] The Committee's endorsement came with some caveats, principally that HSR beyond Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds should be firmly committed too, that investment in rail elsewhere should not suffer and that the public debate had failed to address the facts and resorted to name calling and accusations of nimbyism.[124] While questioning some data it found a good economic case for the project bringing more benefits than a conventional rail line, that the noise impact would be less than feared and that while it would not reduce carbon dioxide emissions they would be smaller than under further motorway or air traffic expansion and that the business case for diverting via Heathrow had not been made. The reports findings were welcomed by the Association of Train Operating Companies, Campaign for Better Transport, Countryside Alliance and Campaign to Protect Rural England. Action Groups Against High Speed Two (AGHAST) condemned the authors as a 'partisan committee' though they welcomed some of the findings saying it poked holes in the Governments arguments.

Environmental and community impact

Visual impact

The visual impact of HS2 has received particular attention in the Chilterns which is designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.[125] The Government announced in January 2011 that £2m would be spent planting trees along sections of the route to mitigate the visual impact of HS2.[126]

Property demolition and land take

HS2's Birmingham stage would result in the demolition of more than 400 houses; 250 around Euston station, 20–30 between Old Oak Common and West Ruislip, a number of demolitions at Ealing, around 50 in Birmingham, and the remainder in pockets along the route.[127] This includes nine Grade II listed buildings and possibly a Grade II* listed farmhouse at Hampton in Arden.[citation needed]

In Birmingham, the new Curzon Gate student residence would have to be demolished[128] and Birmingham City University wanted a £30 million refund after the plans were revealed.[64]

Loss of wildlife habitat, and recreation space

David Lidington, MP for Aylesbury, raised concerns that the route could damage the 47 kilometres (29 mi)-wide Chiltern Hills area of outstanding natural beauty, the Colne valley regional park on the outskirts of London, and other areas of green belt.[129]

HS2's preferred route would pass through the Chilterns in Buckinghamshire via the Misbourne Valley. Initially through a tunnel beneath Chalfont St Giles emerging just after Amersham, then past Wendover and Stoke Mandeville.[130] Its proposals also include another re-alignment of more than 1 kilometre (1,100 yd) of the River Tame, and construction of a 635 metres (694 yd)-long viaduct and a cutting[131] through ancient woodland at a nature reserve at Park Hall on the edge of Birmingham.[132]

Carbon emissions

In 2007, the Department for Transport commissioned a report, Estimated Carbon Impact of a New North South Line, from Booz Allen Hamilton to investigate the likely overall carbon impacts associated with the construction and operation of a new rail line to either Manchester or Scotland including any expected modal transport shifts, and the comparison with the case in which no new high-speed lines were built.[133] The report concluded that there were no carbon benefits in building a new line from London to Manchester. The additional carbon from a new rail route would be larger than the case in which no new line was built.[134]

The High Speed Rail Command paper published in March 2010 stated that in the worse case with no shift from aviation to rail and no reduction in carbon intensity of electricity generation, the scheme would result in an increase of emissions by 440,000 tonnes per year. (~0.3% of domestics greenhouse transport emissions in 2008).[135]

The Eddington Report cautioned against the common argument of modal shift from air to train as a carbon emissions benefit to high-speed rail – since only 1.2% of UK carbon emissions are due to domestic commercial aviation, and that rail transportation energy efficiency is reduced as speed increases.[136]

The Government White Paper Delivering a Sustainable Railway states trains that travel at a speed of 350 kilometres per hour (220 mph) uses 90% more energy than at 200 kilometres per hour (120 mph); which results in carbon emissions for a London to Edinburgh journey of 14 kg per passenger for high speed rail compared to 7 kg per passenger for conventional rail. Air travel uses 26 kg per passenger for the same journey. The paper questioned the value for money of high speed rail as a method of reducing carbon emissions, but noted that with a switch to carbon free or neutral energy production the case becomes much more favourable.[137]

Noise

HS2 Ltd stated that 21,300 dwellings could experience a noticeable increase in rail noise and 200 non-residential receptors (community; education; healthcare; and recreational/social facilities) within 300 metres of the preferred route have the potential to experience significant noise impacts.[127] The Government has announced that trees planted to create a visual barrier will also reduce noise pollution along the route.[126]

Geology and water supply

Research presented by Dr Haydon Bailey, geological adviser to the Chiltern Society, showed that HS2 tunnelling could cause long term damage to the chalk aquifer system responsible for water supply for the North Western Home Counties and North London.[138]

Compensation

The only compensation scheme for which details are available is the government's discretionary Exceptional Hardship Scheme (EHS), on which consultation closed on 17 June 2010. It is intended to compensate homeowners who have difficulty selling their home because of the HS2 route announcement, to protecting those whose property value may be seriously affected by the 'preferred route option' and who urgently need to sell.

The EHS was intended to run from about August 2010, until the route is chosen (originally estimated around the end of 2011). Homeowners may apply to the Secretary of State to buy their home, at its full market value (assuming no HS2), if all of the following criteria are met:

  1. Residential owner-occupier.
  2. Pressing need to sell. This means a change in employment location; extreme financial pressure; to accommodate enlarged family; move into sheltered accommodation; or medical condition of a family member.
  3. On or in 'close vicinity' of the 'preferred route' (that is mainly those who will later on be covered by statutory blight provisions).
  4. Have tried to sell – been on the market for at least three months with no offers within 15% of full market value (as if no HS2).
  5. Can demonstrate inability to sell is due to HS2.
  6. No prior knowledge of HS2 before acquiring the property.

Decisions on individual applications will by made by a panel of experts.[139]

The results of the consultations are not yet known. But Alison Munro, Chief Executive of HS2 Ltd, has stated that they are also looking at other options, including property bonds.[140] The statutory blight regime would apply to any route confirmed for a new high-speed line following the public consultations, now due to commence in 2011.[141]

HS2 Action Alliance's alternative compensation solution for property blight was presented to DfT/HS2 Ltd and then Secretary of State for Transport Philip Hammond, in response to the consultation on the EHS. The Alliance also presented DfT and HS2 Ltd with a pilot study on property blight.[142]

See also

References, sources and notes

References

  1. ^ a b DfT (2010a), page 127
  2. ^ Millward, David (4 November 2010). "Country campaigners call for high speed rail rethink". The Daily Telegraph. London.
  3. ^ "HS2: High-speed rail link 'to be approved'". BBC News Online. London. 7 January 2012.
  4. ^ "The Coalition: our programme for government" (PDF). HM Government. May 2010. p. 31.
  5. ^ "Go-ahead given to new railway". Department for Transport ]date = January 2012.
  6. ^ DfT (2009a) page 4 paragraph 5
  7. ^ Atkins (2009)
  8. ^ DfT (2009a) page 11 paragraph 29
  9. ^ DfT (2009a), page 5 paragraph 8.
  10. ^ DfT (2009a), page 5 paragraph 9.
  11. ^ DfT (2009a), page 17 paragraph 40.
  12. ^ DfT (2009a), page 24 paragraph 63
  13. ^ DfT (2009a), page 24 paragraph 65.
  14. ^ "The case for new lines" (PDF). Meeting the capacity challenge. Network Rail.
  15. ^ "High-speed rail plans to be submitted to government". BBC News Online. 27 December 2009. Retrieved 28 December 2009.
  16. ^ "High-speed rail plans announced by government". BBC News Online. 11 March 2010. Retrieved 11 March 2010.
  17. ^ "High Speed Rail". Department for Transport. Retrieved 12 March 2010.
  18. ^ "Tories would scrap Heathrow plan". BBC News Online. London. 29 September 2008.
  19. ^ "Where we stand: Transport". Conservative Party website. Retrieved 10 January 2012.
  20. ^ "Tories say high-speed rail plans for Birmingham are flawed". Birmingham Post. 11 March 2010.
  21. ^ "Ministers order re-think of high-speed rail route". TransportXtra.com. London. 28 May 2010.
  22. ^ a b c d Harris, Nigel (28 July 2010). "'No business case' to divert HS2 via Heathrow, says Mawhinney'". RAIL. No. 649. Peterborough. pp. 6–7.
  23. ^ "A surprising conversion". The Economist. London. 30 December 2008.
  24. ^ "Transport secretary unveils HS2 compensation plan". Railnews. Stevenage. 29 November 2010.
  25. ^ a b "London-to-Birmingham high speed train route announced". BBC News Online. 20 December 2010.
  26. ^ "'Redrawn' high speed rail plan unveiled". Channel 4 News. 20 December 2010.
  27. ^ "High Speed Rail - Oral Answers to Questions — Education - House of Commons debates". 20 December 2010. question to the Minister by Maria Eagle, shadow secretary for Transport, 1st para.
  28. ^ a b c "High Speed Rail: Oral statement by: The Rt Hon Philip Hammond MP". Department for Transport. 20 December 2010.
  29. ^ a b c "New High Speed Rail Proposals Unveiled" (Press release). Department for Transport. 20 December 2010.
  30. ^ a b c High Speed Rail: Investing in Britain’s Future Consultation, Department for Transport February 2011
  31. ^ Update on DfT Business Plan Department of Transport, Released 04-12-11, Accessed, 06-12-11
  32. ^ DfT High Speed Rail summary
  33. ^ KML
  34. ^ "High Speed Rail London to the West Midlands and Beyond, Supplementary Report, September 2010: Refining the Alignment of HS2's Recommended Route" (PDF). Department for Transport.
  35. ^ "Changes to the HS2 proposed line of route" (Press release). HS2 Limited. 20 December 2010.
  36. ^ a b "Conservative rail review: Getting the best for passengers" (PDF). Conservative Party. Long Term Strategy, section 5.1 High Speed Rail, pp.10-11.
  37. ^ "Getting the best for rail passengers" (Press release). Conservative Party. 11 February 2009.
  38. ^ Arup (15 April 2010). "A submission to Lord Mawhinney's Review" (PDF).[full citation needed]
  39. ^ "High speed rail access to Heathrow: a report by Lord Mawhinney". Department for Transport. 21 July 2010.[full citation needed]
  40. ^ "Shadow Secretary confirms support for Heathrow Hub Plan". ARUP. 26 February 2009.
  41. ^ "Government drops Heathrow Hub option for spur on High Speed 2 route". New Civil Engineer. London. 20 December 2010.
  42. ^ "Proposed high speed rail network North of Birmingham confirmed" (Press release). Department for Transport. 4 October 2010. Retrieved 7 October 2010.
  43. ^ DfT (2009a), page 16 paragraph 37
  44. ^ Savage, Michael (2 February 2010). "Adonis in all-party talks on high-speed rail link". The Independent. London. Retrieved 4 January 2010.
  45. ^ "HS2: High-speed rail link 'to be approved'". BBC News Online. London. 7 January 2012.
  46. ^ "Conclusions and recommendations - conclusions and the way ahead". publications.parliament.uk. 1 November 2011. Retrieved 6 January 2012.
  47. ^ DfT (2010a), page 9
  48. ^ Arup. "Route Engineering Study Final Report: A Report for HS2, chapter 9" (PDF). Retrieved 17 March 2010.
  49. ^ "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 3, p. 134" (PDF). Retrieved 17 March 2010.
  50. ^ Arup (20 December 2010). "Review of HS1 to HS2 Connection Final Report" (PDF). Department for Transport. Section 2.1 "Structural modifications" , p.4.
  51. ^ DfT (2010a), p. 67 F4.2
  52. ^ "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 3 p. 147" (PDF). Retrieved 17 March 2010.
  53. ^ "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 6 p. 226" (PDF). Retrieved 17 March 2010.
  54. ^ "Virgin Trains timetable" (PDF). Retrieved 9 April 2010.
  55. ^ Subject: Proposal for Examining the Potential Effect of High Speed 2 on London’s Transport Network, Greater London Authority 17 May 2011
  56. ^ a b High Speed 2 automated people mover (APM) Euston Station to St Pancras International further investigation final report Department for Transport Archives
  57. ^ Transport Select Committee, 28 June 2011, House of Commons
  58. ^ HS2 fuels Crossrail 2 business case
  59. ^ DfT (2010a), page 107
  60. ^ DfT(2010a), page 118.
  61. ^ Nielsen, Beverley (29 October 2010). "Up, Up and Away - Birmingham Airport spreads its wings as powerful driver of growth and jobs". Birmingham Post Business Blog.
  62. ^ DfT(2010a), page 112
  63. ^ "3". High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited (PDF). p. 117. Retrieved 12 March 2010.
  64. ^ a b Walker, Jonathan (16 March 2010). "Birmingham City University wants £30m refund after high speed rail hits campus plan". Birmingham Post. Retrieved 17 March 2010.
  65. ^ Department for Transport (2010a), page 115
  66. ^ a b "New 'parkway' station could be built in East Midlands". Nottingham Evening Post. 3 December 2009. Retrieved 4 January 2010.
  67. ^ DfT(2010a), page 127, section 8.4
  68. ^ HS2(2010a), Chapter 2, section 2.3.11, pp.40-41
  69. ^ a b c d DfT(2010a), page 129
  70. ^ DfT(2010a), page 130
  71. ^ "About High Speed Rail". www.hs2.org.uk. High Speed 2 Ltd. Table 3. Retrieved 9 February 2011.
  72. ^ HS2(2010a), para 4.1.23
  73. ^ a b Infrastructure Maintenance Depot Released December 2010
  74. ^ a b "High-speed rail plans announced". BBC News. 11 March 2010.
  75. ^ http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/5bca50e0-4397-11e0-b117-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1ddsTAl6X
  76. ^ HS2(2010a), Chapter 5.2
  77. ^ a b HS2(2010a), p213
  78. ^ HS2(2010a), p212, Chapter 6 section 5.2.29
  79. ^ DfT(2010a), page 140
  80. ^ DfT(2010a), page 138-9
  81. ^ DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 34
  82. ^ DfT (2009a), page 5 paragraph 6
  83. ^ "Transport and the economy, Memorandum from Wharf Weston (TE 30)". UK Parliament. November 2010.
  84. ^ "Memorandum from Bluespace Thinking Ltd (TE 07)" (PDF). UK Parliament. September 2010. 7. Problems with the current forecasting and analysis methodology.
  85. ^ DfT (2009a) Figure 5: Loading levels in the 3-hour morning peak period, 2008/09, p.14.
  86. ^ "Train mileage for passenger operators (millions)". Office of Rail Regulation. 1 November 2011.
  87. ^ DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 31.
  88. ^ DfT (2009a), page 16 paragraph 36
  89. ^ DfT (2009a), page 4 paragraph 5
  90. ^ DfT (2009a), page 17 paragraph 41
  91. ^ DfT (2009a), page 18 paragraph 43
  92. ^ http://news.uk.msn.com/features/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=157028201
  93. ^ "NPF2 Action Programme – Action 3: Develop High Speed Rail Link to London". The Scottish Government. Retrieved 29 November 2010.
  94. ^ Go-HS2
  95. ^ a b "About us". Amersham: HS2 Action Alliance. 2010. Retrieved 18 May 2010.
  96. ^ Woodman, Peter (19 December 2010). "High-speed rail route to be announced". The Independent. London.
  97. ^ "HS2 action groups (and other HS2 active organisations)". HS2 Action Alliance. 2010. Retrieved 18 May 2010.
  98. ^ 51m membership Retrieved 03-06-2011
  99. ^ Poole, Lawrence (8 December 2010). "We don't want it here, we don't want high speed rail anywhere". Buckinghamshire Examiner. Uxbridge.
  100. ^ "Council to 'robustly resist' high speed rail". Uxbridge Gazette. 6 December 2010.
  101. ^ "County council opposes HS2" (Press release). Warwickshire County Council. 15 December 2010.
  102. ^ "Leicestershire is in - another local authority confirms it's challenging HS2" 51m website, Accessed 03-06-2011
  103. ^ Three Rivers DC and Oxfordshire CC join 51m, Accessed 2011-08-29
  104. ^ Bates, Matthew (15 December 2010). "City council unites in opposition to HS2". Coventry Observer.
  105. ^ Camden Borough Council HS2 , Retrieved 2011-07-28
  106. ^ "Northamptonshire Arc". Northamptonshire County Council. High Speed Two (HS2). the County Council objects strongly to the current published routes and insists that HS2 should only go ahead if a route can be found through consultation which minimises the potential adverse effect on local amenity, landscape and the environment
  107. ^ "High Speed 2:Staffordshire County Council set to oppose plans" (PDF) (Press release). Staffordshire County Council. 18 November 2010.
  108. ^ "Updated Green Party proposals on HS2 route". Green Party. 22 March 2010.
  109. ^ "Greens oppose HS2: "it wouldn't do what it says on the tin"". www.greenparty.org.uk. The Green Party. 26 February 2011. Retrieved 26 February 2011.
  110. ^ Cole, Rob (4 February 2011). "High Speed Rail Link A 'White Elephant'". Sky News Online.
  111. ^ Chris Stokes (4 February 2011). "Research Note 82 : High Speed Rail" (PDF). www.taxpayersalliance.com. Taxpayers' Alliance.
  112. ^ http://www.neweconomics.org/sites/neweconomics.org/files/Response_to_the_HS2_Consultation.pdf
  113. ^ a b "Is High Speed 2 on the Wrong Track?" (Press release). Campaign to Protect Rural England. 4 November 2010.
  114. ^ Howie, Michael (7 November 2010). "National Trust anger over High Speed 2 railway". Sunday Telegraph. London.
  115. ^ "High Speed Rail: Friends of the Earth's views" (PDF). Friends of the Earth. October 2010.
  116. ^ "Briefing on White Paper on High Speed Rail, White Paper Response". Campaign for Better Transport.
  117. ^ Written evidence from Railfuture to the Transport Select Committee - May 2011, Accessed 07-07-2011
  118. ^ The Sunday Times (London), 30 January 2011.
  119. ^ http://thamesandchilterns.county-homesearch.co.uk/2011/02/01/secret-rival-to-high-speed-rail-route/
  120. ^ "The Wildlife Trust's position statement on High Speed Rail 2 (HS2)" (PDF). Warwickshire Wildlife Trust. October 2010.
  121. ^ "Business call for high speed rail cash to be spent on roads". Birmingham Post. 3 December 2010.
  122. ^ "HS2 route will only benefit Birmingham, says Coventry business boss". Coventry Evening Telegraph. 24 November 2010.
  123. ^ "HS2: Good case for high-speed rail link, say MPs". BBC News. 8 November 2011.
  124. ^ http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmtran/1185/118502.htm
  125. ^ Walker, Peter (11 March 2010). "Beauty of Chilterns may be put at risk by fast rail link, say critics". The Guardian. London.
  126. ^ a b Milmo, Dan (7 January 2011). "High-speed rail route to get 2m trees for shelter". The Guardian. London.
  127. ^ a b "Appraisal of Sustainability: A Report for HS2 Non Technical Summary" (PDF). Department for Transport. December 2009.
  128. ^ High Speed 2(2010), page 118
  129. ^ http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmhansrd/cm091208/halltext/91208h0006.htm. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). United Kingdom: House of Commons. 8 December 2009. col. 31WH—continued. Retrieved 4 January 2010. {{cite book}}: |chapter-url= missing title (help)
  130. ^ "High Speed 2". Chilterns Conservation Board.
  131. ^ "West Midlands Map 4" (PDF). High Speed 2. Department for Transport. Retrieved 15 April 2010.
  132. ^ "Park Hall". Wildlife Trust for Birmingham and the Black Country. Retrieved 18 March 2010.
  133. ^ Booz Allen Hamilton (2007)
  134. ^ Booz Allen Hamilton (2007), section 1.20 , p.6
  135. ^ DfT(2010a), Section 2.57, page 53
  136. ^ "The Eddington Transport Study, The case for action: Sir Rod Eddington's advice to Government" (PDF). Figure 15: The case for new very High Speed Lines (HSLs) p.49 (also p.33).
  137. ^ "Delivering a Sustainable Railway" (PDF). Department for Transport. July 2007. Section 6.14 – 6.17 , pp.62-3.
  138. ^ "Concerns arising from the Geology and Hydrology of the ground underlying the High Speed (HS2) routes through the Chilterns". The Chiltern Society.
  139. ^ "HS2 Exceptional Hardship Scheme consultation document" (PDF). Department for Transport.
  140. ^ "Alison Munro spoke at a public meeting hosted by Civic Voice in Aylesbury on 24 June".
  141. ^ Philip Hammond, Secretary of State for Transport (28 June 2010). http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm100628/text/100628w0003.htm. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). United Kingdom: House of Commons. col. 364W. {{cite book}}: |chapter-url= missing title (help)
  142. ^ "Alternative Compensation Solution and final response to EHS". HS2 Action Alliance.

Sources

Notes

  1. ^ In British usage, a parkway is station with car parking, remote from the location it is intended to serve
  2. ^ The British Rail Class 373 trains used by Eurostar are an existing example of a high-speed train that is compatible with French/Belgian high-speed lines as well as with the loading gauge of the East- and West Coast Main Lines.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to High Speed 2.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=High_Speed_2&oldid=470594278"