03.07.15
New runway plan for Heathrow includes improved rail links
The plan to build a third runway at Heathrow recommended by the Airport Commission includes several proposed rail upgrades – but no HS2 spur.
The panel, led by economist Sir Howard Davies, finally handed down its decision earlier this week, after three years of work to finally settle the controversy over where airport expansion in the south east should take place.
Sir Howard insisted that a new runway at Heathrow would deliver the greatest benefits to the UK.
It could generate up to £147bn for the economy over 60 years and 70,000 new jobs by 2050, he said.
However, at a cost of £17.6bn, it is also the most expensive and politically contentious of the three shortlisted options, with prominent government ministers, environmentalists, MPs of all parties and London mayor Boris Johnson all opposing the scheme.
The report says that if the runway were to be built major rail upgrades, costing around £5bn, would be needed in order to cope with the surge in demand.
Some of these projects, such as Crossrail, are already in progress; however a HS2 spur at Old Oak Common was ruled out.
“The work carried out demonstrated that the scheme was likely to attract only a small number of passengers, carry a high capital cost and represent an inefficient use of HS2 capacity,” the report said.
It does, however, support the proposed Western Rail Link. This would provide a new rail link into the site from the west, converting the existing rail spur from the Great Western Main Line into a loop and allowing for direct services to the airport from Reading.
A Southern Rail Access link was also recommended, connecting the airport to Waterloo as well as areas of west London which currently have poor public transport access.
The report states that Network Rail is currently carrying out a review into the case and options for such a link.
A diagram of the surface transport links also suggests that the Piccadilly Line could be upgraded but no details are given in the report.
(Picture by: Warren Rohner)
Tell us what you think – have your say below or email [email protected]