Latest Rail News

Longer Chilterns tunnel amongst final HS2 committee recommendations

The High Speed Rail Committee has today published its final report, amalgamating the views of nearly 1,600 petitions into a series of recommendations to improve HS2 ahead of Parliamentary approval.

The recommendations were built on views provided by individuals and bodies directly affected by the High Speed Rail Bill, giving them the opportunity to object to elements of HS2, but not the project itself.

After 160 days of sitting spread over nearly two years, its main recommendations were for a longer Chilterns bored tunnel, greater noise protection for Wendover, better construction arrangements in Hillingdon, and a re-modelled maintenance depot at Washwood Heath to maximise job opportunities.

The committee, chaired by Conservative MP Robert Syms, also called for amendments to the discretionary compensation schemes in order to promote “greater fairness and a more functional property market” in areas along the proposed route.

Syms said: “With this report on Phase One of the High Speed Rail programme, we have endeavoured to add substantial environmental, social and design benefits to the scheme, in balance with good use of public money and a viable engineering design.”

Proposals for a longer Chilterns bored tunnel, its headline recommendation, started being considered towards the end of July last year. Over the months that followed, many hundreds of petitioners “pressed passionately” the case for a long tunnel, forcing the Commons to provide a spill-over room beyond the 40-capacity limit for several weeks in September and December.

The Bill proposed a 13.4km deep-bored tunnel under the southern section of the Chilterns to be tunnelled northward from the M25, with the line running over ground.

But petitioners proposed four other options, including two tunnels stretching beyond 23km and two shorter extensions: one of 4.1km to Leather Lane, and another preferred option of a 2.6km stretch to South Heath, costing £47m.

Transport minister Robert Goodwill MP said the Department for Transport will “consider carefully” the recommendations made and make an official response shortly.

“We have listened to those affected by the scheme and in many cases we have been able to make the changes they have been calling for,” he added.

“I am happy to say that HS2 remains firmly on schedule, and today’s report marks another significant step towards getting spades in the ground for this transformational project.”

The Bill will now be reported to the Commons and recommitted to a line-by-line scrutiny. If it then passes report stage and third reading at the Commons, it will move onto the Lords.

Euston station proposal ‘construction nightmare’

While the Bill has never formally passed through the Lords before, it already suffered a harsh blow from its Economic Affairs Select Committee last year, when peers said the government had yet to make a “convincing case” for HS2.

Lords said the government had based its justification for the high-speed project on increased rail capacity and rebalancing the UK economy, but argued the committee had not seen evidence for either.

And just today,  Lord Tony Berkeley, who sits on RTM’s editorial board, said his Euston Express team was disappointed that the committee “chose to ignore the inaccurate evidence given by HS2” about their Euston station scheme.

“Euston Express puts all HS2 and West Coast Main Line (WCML) trains onto the WCML tracks from Queens Park inwards and avoids the high cost, massive disruption and demolition to streets to the west of the line and at Euston itself,” he said.

“Euston Express, supported by a number of rail professionals, believes that the existing station can be adapted to accommodate all these trains without taking additional land, except at the south end where the tracks would be extended towards Euston Road, with a passenger deck above all platforms.”

Lord Berkeley said HS2 stated that GC (continental gauge lines) were required all the way into Euston, but then “admitted that this was incorrect”; they also stated the Euston Express scheme was more expensive than HS2’s own scheme, but “then could not, and still cannot, substantiate this with any significant evidence”.

“For Euston Express there is more discussions to be had – with other parts of Network Rail, DfT and TfL since we do believe that a feasible scheme can be built and operated with much less aggravation and costing billions less than the 20 years’ construction nightmare that is the current HS2 proposal,” he said.

“Sadly, I conclude that the committee in many instances failed to give proper time to hearing evidence and challenging the promoter. Let us hope that the Lords select committee behaves better!”

Camden Council has also criticised HS2’s redesign plans for Euston, but managed to agree a major ‘package of assurances’ with the DfT in order to give it more of a say on works.