Ey up, where are the reports?

Beleben, on his website, reminds us of a few of the missing reports about HS2:

According to the Daily Telegraph, the EY consultancy produced a report on the claimed ‘hub impacts’ of HS2 which was “released to government” in October 2014. However, at the time of writing, the government doesn’t seem to have made it public.

The list of HS2-related reports yet to see sunlight also includes the ‘Tring Crossrail feasibility’, ‘HS2 options for Scotland‘, and of course, the assessment of the Major Projects Authority.

No related content found.

Share Button
Share this...
Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone
One comment on “Ey up, where are the reports?
  1. An alternative railway proposition to the HS2 Route 3 Phase 1 with 7 connections to the WCML, Chiltern Line, Midland Mainline and East West route could pass by Tring. Such a route can include up to 7 stations also if the route has 4 large loading gauge tracks. The 4 track requires several more metres width than HS2 one track each way at 22m.

    London to Rugby / Coventry as a 4 track route could create both a regional link and allow faster than the WCML direct services to the same cities as HS2. With demands for road and rail HS2 provides a very narrow rail transport addition to the Network Rail routes. Too little for far too much capital cost.

    HS2 does not ease the M1 traffic as it is located too far from the expanding Middle England towns with people demanding shares of the London economic and commercial activities.

    A four track new route following the broad corridor of the M1 and WCML in some sections is possible. The 4 track route could have under town tunnels to reduce the surface impacts. The quadruple track route enable several surface stations to be located to enable commuters to also contribute to the demand and fare boxes.

    If restricted investment dominates the project to a two track configuration one station can be located near Bletchley to enable some transfers between the WCML and the new route and the East West rail route.

    Connection with the WCML at 4 locations is possible to provide more resilience to the WCML than HS2 Route 3.

    Such a route has shorter tunnels and less costly sections near Leighton Buzzard shorter than the longer Chiltern tunnels.

    The House of Lords Economic Affairs inquiry has heard evidence from 51M who advocated the WCML optimised alternative and the two options of a 2 or 4 track route shown in yellow furthers the capacities of the route to 2 floor vehicle and also the possible movement of stopping commuter trains and some large loading gauge freight trains.

    Such a route provides more opportunities for regeneration from the larger population towns compared to HS2.

    Such a route increases the capacity and speed of the route proposed by HS2(UK) which considered the M1/WCML corridor.

    HS2 Route 3 was a poor plan. Others are possible if required.

Comments are closed.

2010-2017 © STOP HS2 – The national campaign against High Speed Rail 2