13.08.12
Motorway route proposed for HS2 by HS1 engineer
The route for HS2 should follow the M40 corridor, an expert who worked on the first high speed rail link has said.
Mark Bostock, an engineer who worked on the CTRL, is calling for Government to learn lessons from this first project and states that there is still time to change plans.
His route proposal would safeguard the Chilterns, connect with Heathrow Airport and save the taxpayer billions, Bostock said. HS2 Ltd believes it would cost far more and impact on a greater number of people.
Opponents to HS2 have criticised the project’s business case, as well as the damage it will inflict on areas of outstanding natural beauty. Bostock suggested that a station close to Heathrow Airport and a route that surfaces close to the M25 before running along the M40 would minimise disruption and noise.
An additional station near Bicester, Oxfordshire is also included. His proposal would take up to four minutes longer; but this should not concern passengers he said, accusing the Government of being “obsessed with speed”.
Bostock said: “I do not believe the officials in charge of HS2 have looked at the idea of utilising the M40 corridor; I have seen no evidence that they have even looked at it. And I find that that very surprising.
“There is now a body of opinion out there now saying very strongly that we should pause and think whether the current plan is the right way to proceed. Is this the best way to spend a very substantial amount of money? There has been a presumption that the Government assumption is the best.
“They seem to be obsessed with speed. It is a very old-fashioned view. What we as passengers are looking for is connectivity, certainty, punctuality and comfort. With laptops and iPads, business travellers and other passengers are not so bothered about a few minutes off their journey.”
A spokesperson for HS2 Ltd responded: “An M40 route would cost £3bn more and affects more population centres, including Gerrard’s Cross, Beaconsfield, High Wycombe and Princes Risborough, which have a combined population in excess of 110,000 people.
“This would result in unacceptable impacts on communities through major demolitions, severance and noise impacts that could only be reduced through extensive and expensive tunnelling.”
Tell us what you think – have your say below, or email us directly at [email protected]
Image c. Jody Morris under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic Licence.