From a public meeting on HS2

The following videos were filmed at a public meeting organised by the Stoke Mandeville HS2 action group. They show the speech given by Marcus Rogers, Head of Planning, Environment and Development for Bucks County Council.

Marcus makes it clear that problems that HS2 causes in one area have knock on effects in completely different places: for this reason, we encourage everyone responding to the consultation to highlight local (or not so local) issues about the route.

He also explains what HS2 Ltd’s plans means for the Aylesbury area, including information about some of the roads which will be diverted, and other local impacts.

Of particular interest is that Marcus says that HS2 Ltd are not using the most recent maps about development in the Aylesbury area. Marcus also highlighted the uncertainties HS2 will cause to waste transfer out of London.

They are well worth watching, even if you don’t know the area.

Share Button
30 comments on “From a public meeting on HS2
  1. even with the latest fare rises farepayer contribution is fifty percent across the industry generally.

    i am not sure which stations apart from ebbsfleet on hs1 require people to drive to the station any more then before as the high speed trains stop at existing stations. 7% of passengers were using the train instead of the car in the first year of domestic services.

    passenger usage may not yet be at predicted levels but it is rising. it is a bit early to say hs1 is a failure as domestic services are already 6.5 million in the first year of operation ! eurostar carried 9.5 million and numbers are expected to rise as more destinations are added and flying and driving become more expensive. deutsche bahn services may start next year or if not in 2013. some hs2 trains will also use hs1. a full double connection should be provided for more domestic services in my opinion.

    then there is the small matter of economic generation resulting from hs1 which in fact is in the billions. it is importnat to remember that fares are only part of the wealth created by schemes such as hs1 or hs2. even if numbers of passengers arent as high as expected or fares dont cover total costs it does not follow at all that the scheme is an economic failure. transport and travel is a means to an end and the end is economic activity created in the business tourism and leisure sectors.

  2. Marcus made a good case for this not being the green machine that mythologically people have been lead to believe it is. Its not green, it may well increase carbon emissions, as energy gets more expensive it may get more expensive to run. IIf we are accused of being dishonest NIMBYs what is the department of transport then?

    • no form of transport is green so i guess we had all better stay at home with the power and heat turned off.
      rail is the least polluting of transport modes even at high speed. fuel is also relatively less expensive for trains then for other modes which is why people are travelling less by car and more by train even with the latest fare increases.

      and even if the broadband revolution means more work from home, you have to consider that the population is expanding, that people are switching to rail right now and most importantly that 70% of rail travel is the leisure market. so unless you want to destroy the retail and tourism sector people will still need to travel. not having hs2 isnt going to alter that fact but will mean that when the existing railway is full in a few short years time that people will have to use cars and maybe planes more. remeber hs2 will be connected to the pan-european high speed network.

    • If you have not done soalready, I would strongly recomend a trip to Margate on the domestic HS1 “javelin service, so that you can see for yourself just what is on offer.
      The newly opened seafront art gallery is , I believe, worth a visit on its own, and the beach is among the best in Britain

      • JohnWebber glad you enjoyed your trip but hs1 is running i think it is about half capacity .Folk that live there are having to travel further to stations so the roads are more congested or take the cheaper train because they cant afford hs1 which is now slower than it was due to HS1 .this was written in a letter from someone who experiences it on a daily commute.He does not enjoy it.

  3. And not forgetting its ability to free up existing over used lines:

    “Network Rail has projected that the West Coast Main Line will reach full capacity by 2024 and the first phase of HS2, from London to the West Midlands, would free up space for a significant increase in commuter, regional and freight services.

    MP for Milton Keynes North, Mark Lancaster, said: “This research is fantastic news for the commuters of Milton Keynes, who literally cannot stand having to stand for their journey to work every single day, while paying thousands of pounds for the privilege.

    “It is great to see the figures reinforcing what we have been told about HS2. It’s about time Milton Keynes got a better deal but equally the route itself needs to be the right one for the country.”

  4. HS2:
    Euston to Birmingham city centre in 49 mins.
    Birmingham International Station to Euston in 38 mins.
    Manchester to Paris in less than 4 hours.
    Ticket prices based on todays conventional rail fares.
    Trains 200m in length carrying up to 500 people.
    Noise levels lower than current Eurostar and Virgin Pendalinos.

  5. As pointed out: HS2 has not been sold off. It has been leased. Ownership reverts to the Government in 30 years time.
    So much for HS1 it not being successful.
    The franchise was sold for £2bn!
    Why would a business buy the franchise for £2bn? Because it makes business sense!
    Also need to point out, as stated on other websites, the HS1 railway has to be handed back to the Government in the same condition that it was provided.
    HS1 cost around £5.5bn.
    To me that means if will more than pay for itself in less than 75 years – forgetting the funds produced from fares and also all the economic regeneration it provides.
    HS1 sold 135,000 tickets for the Easter weekend alone.

  6. ggrrhiaa i cannot see the pro lobby pursuading us that this mass destruction of all we hold dear, for an expensive scheme that has no real evidence that it will benefit the whole country, but that the whole country will pay for,is in any way worth backing.I trust you are one of the 363 folk that have stated you are for it on their petition.

    • elaine whilst it is true some countryside will suffer it can hardly be said that a 22 metre wide railway is mass destruction.and there is plenty of real evidence of the benefits, you just choose to ignore it. and any national scheme is just that – national and so is funded by everyone in the country, whether they actually benefit or not.

      and if hs2 isnt built you would have to upgrade the other lines which would mean taking more land elsewhere. and if the railway couldnt take the number of passengers then you would need more roads or runways.
      the destruction you cant see is in the air. the roads in the uk are the most congested in europe and cities such as london regularly fail pollution checks.

      • I really must agree with Nick.

        “Mass destruction of all we hold dear.”

        What exactly do you mean, Elaine?

        Is it a threat of strip mining, leaving a featureless desert to the horizon, or a deliberate cull and extermination of all lifeforms within a ten mile radius? Perhaps a mass deportation of the elderly or the establishment of a nuclear test area in the heart of Aylesbury Vale?

        Did the M 40 destroy “all we hold dear”. If not, why not? What’s the difference?

        North of Banbury, between Wroxton and Edge Hill, huge areas were stripped and excavated to extract the ironstone. Eventually, in the face of the Company wanting to expand so as to take in further land the planning authorities decided that enough was enough and extraction eventually ceased, with a brief smaller scale revival near Alkerton.
        Since the cessation of large scale mining, the quarries have been landscaped, the 20 foot cliffs at the edges of the workings smoothed and the areas returned to agriculture.Forty years on it’s hard to see what it was like.

        “In the national interest” huge areas of farmland were acquired, seventy years ago, the land cleared and even local roads stopped up;some remaining closed, to this day.
        If one looks at an ordnance map, all along the intended route of HS2 and within two or three miles of the actual line ; Chipping Warden, Greatworth,Turweston,Silverstone(!),Hinton in the Hedges, Croughton,Gawcott, Finmere, Bicester… airfields and radio stations.Throughout much of the area you can still find at least remains of former RAF stations or other military bases often less than five miles apart.
        That’s before we start listing the brick works at Calvert, or the chalk quarries and cement works at Chinnor , Shipton on Cherwell, or Long Itchington.
        It’s a constantly changing landscape, worked and reworked lived in, used and exploited restored and enjoyed throughout centuries.I
        Take the case of the original High Wycombe Bypass, chopped through the beech woods with bare trunks suddenly exposed to the daylight..raw, stark ..but the trees grow new foliage in response to the light,the banks became green. Nature reclaims and restores- as is happening even now in the infamous Stokenchurch cutting.

        One hundred and twenty five years ago similar protestations were heard, so we read, as the “Met.” advanced through the hamlets of the Chilterns towards Wendover and Aylesbury, the very line that largely created those same communities where now protests are heard the loudest.

        • ….and the ironic thing is that some of our best areas of and for wildlife are as a result of the ‘hand of man’ such as the points that John has raised.

          Whereas much of our ‘beautiful contryside’ that many refer to is agricultural industrial land, mono-culture, growing only what it grows very efficiently, but to the detriment of other wildlife. Much of ‘our’ farmland is wildlife poor as yields have been driven upwards, and the food chain destroyed by fungicides, pesticides, insecticides and intense fertilisation.

          Try reading ‘The Killing of the Coutryside’ book if you dont believe me – its only a fiver from Amazon.

        • It is true that since medieval times mankind has been altering the environment in the name of progress and increasing human populations. But we have reached a stage now, with so little left, that endangered species are protected in law.

          There was a piece in our local paper a while ago saying that a colony of rare bats in Finemere Wood could stop HS2.
          It said that Bechstein’s Bats are one of Britain’s rarest mammals and their roosting and maternity sites are protected under EU and UK wildlife laws. They have the highest possible level of statutory wildlife protection in the UK. It is against the law to damage, destroy of obstruct their habitats or roosts.

          Full article here –
          http://www.buckinghamtoday.co.uk/news/bicester-news/bat_hotspot_stands_in_way_of_high_speed_2_1_2757042

          • But how much proof is there for these bats or that the proposals will have an impact???
            HS2 is clearly running along an existing railway line at this location. So why hasn’t that had an impact on them???. Seems like the old technique of great crested newts falling out the pockets of those against a development proposal if you ask me.

  7. A few comments:
    Part 1
    03:13 HS2 has not been sold off. It has been leased. Ownership reverts to the Government in 30 years time.
    04:07 The cost estimate does include the cost of the trains.
    05:41 Nobody is claiming 1100 business travellers on every train, or even that every train would have 1100 seats. In fact most trains would only be half this size, and the business case is based on that assumption. This is a knowing deliberate distortion seeking to ridicule HS2. Stick to the facts, don’t invent them!
    06:28 There is no train running FROM London TO Birmingham in 72 minutes as claimed. There is ONE train per day which does it in the opposite direction in that time. It does this by running non-stop, and by having a second train running behind it making the intermediate stops. HS2 could also do this by omitting stops at Birmingham Inyterchange and Old Oak Common it would save a further 8 – 10 minutes. So the claimed journey time saving of over 30 minutes is a perfectly fair comparison.
    07:00 If Curzon Street Station is not in the city centre of Birmingham, then presumably the same description applies to Moor Street (whose station entrance is on the opposite side of Moor Street Queensway to the HS2 station concourse). Strange then that so many people of the Chilterns use Moor Street when they go to Birmingham.
    07:30 HS1 passenger forecasting cannot reliably be mapped across onto HS2, since they were trying to build up a market from a very low base, whereas the existing passenger flows on the West Coast Main Line are known and growing even faster than HS2 have assumed.
    09:50 As regards flight slots at Heathrow, it is perfectly reasonable for HS2 to claim carbon savings by reducing domestic flights in the UK. If somebody then chooses to use the Heathrow slot for long-distance flights then that would be for them to decide upon account for in their own right. You need to draw the line of accountability somewhere, and HS2 have got it right. That being said, nobody is going to pretend that such a huge civil engineering scheme is going to be free from carbon impacts.
    11:55 “You can identify there is clearly the possibility of two road closures over Wendover bypass.” When I look at the map I can clearly identify that HS2 is planning to build replacement bridges at both locations, so why are you misleading us in this way?
    Part 2
    02:55 The entire section on waste transfer is (ahem) a load of rubbish! The Ruislip waste transfer site is unaffected by HS2, but it looks like the Calvert site would need rebuilding. So no need for the false scare story about putting all London’s waste onto road.
    04:45 – 04:50 So which curches on the route will be “entirely cut off” then, or is this just another attempt at scaring people?
    05:58 “Avoid NIMBY issues.” Following as it does the detailed and occasionally inaccurate exposition of precisely how the route affects the local area, this statement is laughably dishonest. There is nothing wrong with fighting to preserve your local area, but at least be honest about your aims and intentions.
    07:10 Why only publicise the anti-HS2 websites. Surely the best source for solid information on HS2 is the HS2 and DfT websites?
    08:20 “Don’t believe everything you hear.” The man tells the truth at last! I was under the impression that Milton Keynes was in Buckinghamshire, so the good folks of MK might be disappointed to realise that their local Head of Planning Environment and Development takes such a dim view of improving their rail services.
    09:40 “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.” Having flogged numerous myths in the course of this talk, the speaker is in a very good position to verify the truth of this statement. Sincerely heartfelt, but hypocritical too.

    • I’m not going to go through your entire comment, but you have made clear errors in it.

      11:55 Map 9 from the HS2 consultation CD shows very clearly there are two possible road closures. They are the ones marked with big crosses, and a label saying “Possible road closures for vehicles”. The new road bridges at the two ends of the Wendover bypass (which incidently is a single carriageway road) would keep access from two different roads.

      02:55: You’re displaying a clear lack of local knowledge on the waste transfer situation (which is why we encourage people to include local knowledge in their consultation responses). The Calvert site gets rubbish from London which is brought to the site by train from Ruislip. If HS2 gets built, it will be on the railway tracks that are currently used to transfer the waste by train. It will simply no longer be possible to transfer it all the way to Calvert by train.

      Like I said in the article “Marcus makes it clear that problems that HS2 causes in one area have knock on effects in completely different places”.

      • …”we have already had meetings with the High Speed 2 team, to ensure that our railway will happily co-exist with a possible HS2 in the Greater London Area.

        …I am sure that the same spirit of co- operation would be there should the same alignment be chosen northwards from Quainton Road for both ourselves and HS2.”

        This is an extract from a letter written by Mr. Adrian Shooter, Chairman of Chiltern Railways, in November last year, in reply to my enquiry as to a possible conflict of interest in possible future use of that section of the old GCR main line, along the lines of what Penny suggests in her reply to ggrrllaa.

        The former twin track main line,now reduced to a single track from north of Aylesbury to Calvert, since the closure to through services and total abandonment from Calvert north, is still connected to what remains of the Oxford- Cambridge line, while the plans for HS2 show it deviating to the west of the old GC alignment before the junction.

        Also the crossing of the “East- West” line would need to be re engineered as the HS2 line is planned to be constructed at a lower level than the old line, so as to reduce the environmental impact. This means that the East – West line would rise over the HS2 line,on a new embankment, although the old GC railway crossed above the Oxford- Cambridge.

        However long it takes to reinstate services to link Aylesbury, Oxford and Milton Keynes, and whether or not HS2 is approved , it would seem that there is no reason to prevent trains from continuing to run to Calvert, either via Aylesbury or via Oxford and Bicester.

        There is also another long term possibility. Chiltern’s original franchise included a “long term aspiration” to extend north to a “Park and Ride” location near the M1/M6 intersection near Lutterworth.

        Perhaps we could see, one day, besides the link at Shepherds Furse, not just two HS tracks, but four tracks through Calvert on a widened formation. Plenty of room for the “Binliners” on the “slow” lines! .

    • You are not completely right on rather a lot of your comments.

      I take it as a typo HS2 should read HS1

      HS2Ltd have said the 17.5bn does not include the cost of trains. They haven’t even decided on which trains eg double or single deckers let alone where to get them from.

      From the offset The Dft, Mr Hammond and HS2LTd said each train would be to take 1100 people. Depending on who you speak to this has wavered but the business case is based on 1100. A U turn?

      According to the DfT and Virgin if and when the WCML improvements ( agreed by the DfT) have been put in place the journey on the WCML would be 11 minutes longer than HS2.

      I think where people from the Chilterns alight depends where in Birmingham they are going. It’s totally irrelevant.
      HS1 figures have proven to have been grossly overestimated. HS2 figures depend on a finger in the air figure of ‘new’ users, 28% I believe and just when people are supposed to be discouraged from travelling. HS1 was based on similar commuters, plus, if not greater, cross Channel traffic basis. Speaking to DfT person actual rail/route passenger figures are notoriously unreliable.

      Flight slots are very relevant. Hammond used the carbon saving as part of his argument, saying people should fly less. By making more slots he is actively encouraging more flight in and out of the UK. Worse still, to do this he is promoting a transport system that produces 2-3 times the carbon as standard rail. It’s ‘carbon neutral’ not a benefit as he first made out. Just yet another U turn

      If the DfT told the truth the whole truth, and if they and Mr Hammond didn’t spin the few flexi half truths they have told us, we wouldn’t have to have sites like Stop HS2. The Devil is in the detail, ie the information we have prised out of them, and the information on this site. Mr Hammond hasn’t faced opponents to HS2 over a year. He knows he can’t answer the questions honestly and still promote HS2. He obviously finds it easier throw childish insults.

      • I quite agree with you eros.We have been told a lot of supposed facts that they cannot substantiate. hs2 is so far into the future.The amount given for building the first stage at £17 billion made it look as though that was the complete package,but no, now we know that it does not include the trains.How much will that be for one every 4 minutes?.Yet inspite of the fact we have people who oppose hs2 that are engineers etc those that oppose such large scale spending of tax payers money, on a project that will render large areas of the countryside into a bomb site.The insults continue from a man, in a childish way ,are we supposed to put our faith in him with such a project such as this ?
        Why is it that those who write on this site,that are for HS2, believe that what mr hammond says is true, when he opposed a freight train through his constituency?Will these people use the train if it is built? or will they be the ones who find their train numbers rejuced as Coventry will?The whole system needs an over haul then and only then if they still need another track should it be built.

    • Elaine, Eros and Penny,

      Firstly many thanks for taking the time to respond. I do believe that the only way we will get the facts about HS2 (as opposed to the myths promulgated by both sides) is through reasoned exchanges such as this.

      Next an apology from me. My comments about map 9 at Wendover were wrong. Mistakenly I searched online for the HS2 maps instead of using the latest CD version, so I think I must have used an old version in error. I accept the comments made about the roads at Wendover were entirely accurate, so I withdraw my criticism unreservedly.

      As for the Waste Transfer Station, I am very familiar with the way it operates, having worked in the rail freight industry for a number of years. The plans published by HS2 show their route running to the north of the existing lines between South Ruislip and West Ruislip. The HS2 factsheet for the area – available here – http://highspeedrail.dft.gov.uk/sites/highspeedrail.dft.gov.uk/files/ruislip–ickenham.pdf states that the Chiltern Line would be raised to pass over a sunken HS2 line. None of this would impact the waste transfer station, which could continue to operate as now. HS2 already has enough “natural” enemies without bringing our railfreight lobby onto their case too!

      No, HS1 is not a typo. What I was trying to say was that the experience of HS1 and the inaccurate demand forecasting behind that should not be used to damn the work that has been done on HS2. The two cases are entirely different. On HS1 you have a railway built primarily for the Eurostar services, which number 2 or 3 per hour. They were entering an unknown market and trying to build it up. By contrast the West Coast Main Line has about 4 times as many long-distance trains and is a mature and fast-growing market. Already supply is outstripping demand at times. Undoubtedly HS2’s forecasts will be wrong – but I fear they may be underestimates!

      HS2 has included the cost of the rolling stock in their estimates. If you follow this link to the published information on the HS2 website:
      http://www.hs2.org.uk/assets/x/77829
      This gives you a zip file containing the assorted HS2 cost spreadsheets and sensitivity tests. Open the first file called “Central Case MM67b Day 1″ then scroll across to tab “Profile of Costs” (4 from the right-hand end). Scroll down and you will find the breakdown of the £17.8bn capital costs in cells A51 to B64. To be specific, the rolling stock is assumed to cost £2.758bn (cell B53).
      Clearly HS2 had to make some assumptions about the likely cost of the rolling stock – you can’t run a railway with no trains! To the best of my knowledge this information has been in the public domain for some time (and indeed some of the critiquing of HS2 by assorted anti groups has depended upon analysis of these spreadsheets) so I cannot account for where this assertion that the £17.8bn omits the cost of trains comes from. However I am entirely certain it is wrong.

      As regards the capacity of the trains, HS2 has said that a 400m train could convey “up to” 1100 passengers.
      They state in their factsheet “HS2 trains” available here
      http://highspeedrail.dft.gov.uk/sites/highspeedrail.dft.gov.uk/files/hs2-trains_0.pdf

      “The number of seats per 200-metre train would depend upon the ratio of first and standard class seating and other choices of layout configuration, for example, the number of airline-style seats as opposed to seats at tables and the amount of luggage areas provided. For short duration journeys, only simple refreshment facilities may be required which would free up additional space for seating.”

      So the MAXIMUM number of seats per 200m train is 550, or 1100 per 400m train. By way of comparison, the next generation of Eurostar trains is expected to seat a little over 900 passengers in 400m trains. Going back to the spreadsheet you can see by the size of the proposed HS2 fleet that they are proposing only 200m trains for most Day 1 services. The existing rail network in Manchester, Liverpool and Glasgow cannot accept 400m trains in any case. The business case is in line with this.

      “According to the DfT and Virgin if and when the WCML improvements ( agreed by the DfT) have been put in place the journey on the WCML would be 11 minutes longer than HS2.”

      This bizarre statement arose because Beardy Branson went off-message when speaking to the press, and proclaimed that Virgin could operate from London to Birmingham in 60 minutes if only the track and signalling could be upgraded. The Virgin Trains CEO has since back-tracked on that statement. There are no further WCML improvements in the pipeline, and there is absolutely no way that a Pendolino could get from London Euston to New Street (113.5 miles) in 60 minutes. Sorry, but this is 100% myth, and it needs slaying. Virgin are in the process of re-bidding for the West Coast franchise at the moment. Treat anything they say with extreme scepticism!

      My comment on people alighting at Moor Street was to highlight the fact that Curzon Street station entrance is immediately opposite. The plan of the station is on the HS2 CD. I was critical of the statement that Curzon Street is nowhere near the centre of Birmingham, and I maintain my criticism of that inaccurate statement.

      It seems reasonable to me that HS2 should evaluate the (beneficial) effect that replacing domestic flights by high speed trains would have on the Carbon balance. It is not for HS2 to attempt to second-guess what might or might not happen to those released slots.

      I’m not sure I agree with the assertion that HS rail is 2-3 times worse on Carbon than conventional rail, but I don’t have the facts to hand to confirm, so I’ll leave that question open.

      I am no apologist for Hammond, and I disagree with the tone and content of some of his statements. There is nothing wrong (and a great deal right) with people being concerned to protect their local area. I am also opposed to the “Their lawns or our trains” pro-HS2 campaign. The pro-HS2 lobby needs to win their argument by persuasion, and by a balanced evaluation of the facts. When being critical of Hammond, remember that HS2 was set up and given its initial remit by his Labour predecessor, Lord Adonis.

      I do believe that HS2 is needed, and I welcome the opportunity afforded by this site to probe the facts behind the proposal.

      • Ggrrllaa. It is refreshing to see a well reasoned and polite comment in favour of HS2, without the scorn, sarcasm and offensive tone that frequently accompany such comments on this site. A shining example which I hope other contributors will take note of.

        There are a lot of different figures in circulation regarding what the costs might be. However, on page 53 of the consultation document, paragraph 2.60, it asserts that the construction costs of the full Y network to Manchester and Leeds, including the links to Heathrow and HS1, are estimated to be £32 billion in 2009 prices. It goes on to say that there would be additional capital costs for rolling stock procurement and replacement of £5.3 billion. I would interpret this as meaning that the £17 billion for the first stage does not include the cost of the trains.

        • Hi Finmere,

          Yes, I see what you mean. I believe that refers to the purchase of additional HS rolling stock to operate the “Y” network, although it is inconsistent to apply one method for phase 1 (capital costs including trains) and a second method for phase 2 (separate construction and rolling stock costs).

          HS2’s logic on this defeats me!

          • I agree with Finemere it is refreshing to have sound arguement.
            I confess I haven’t ploughed through all the documents, but have asked very specific questions of the HS2 Ltd experts and have re-iterated their responses.
            This merely highlights what we have been saying. You get a different answer to the same questions and sometimes between HS2 Ltd and the DfT. Answers have changed as time has moved on, according to and in particular where the arguements for HS2 are weak.
            It also highlights another thing we have been saying… they hadn’t done the work. They had not really looked into the project. They picked up on something from Labour that looked good, sounded good, would project UK plc as being the first fastest and most forward in Europe.
            The only alternative solutions that were considered were alternative HS2 routes put forward by Labour. This is what they told us, but as we have pointed out this is huge weakness, HS2 is not the only solution, but I expect that will now be denied.
            They did not look at the real issues of ‘national interest’ although undefined, this wooly phrase is the stand they are putting their hat on.

      • There are two ends to the waste transfer process: where it goes onto trucks at Ruislip, and where it comes off at Calvert, in Buckinghamshire.

        Calvert will also be directly affected by HS2, because the tracks that Calvert-bound freight trains use will be taken over for use by HS2.

        This is a separate issue to what happens in Ruislip: looking at the maps and factsheets relating to Rusilip only gives you part of the story.

        Like I said, this is why we ask people to bring up specific local issues – what happens at Calvert may have a knock on effect many miles away in a completely different area.

        • Surely sending rubbish to a landfill in Bucks is something that isnt desirable anyway? And at the current rates of recycling, the need for landfill is going to be reduced.

          As per usual stopHS2 highlighting a minor issue which can be easily resolved in plenty of time.

          • It isn’t totally irrelevant Gary. The rubbish line is planned to be part of theAylesbury section of the ‘new’ E/W line joining the Oxford Cambridge section at Calvert.
            HS2 plan on using land at Calvert for a construction depot which will later be the maintenance depot. HS2 planned to use the E/W line for getting materials and equipment to the construction/maintenance depot.
            In among it all Bucks CC want to build an incinerator. This is not shown on HS2 maps and HS2Ltd said they knew nothing about it. The whole area has loads of Ancient Woodland SSSIs.
            Looking at individual maps of the E/W line, incinerator and HS2 they are on the same piece of land and seem to be ignoring each other. They are all trying to avoid the SSSIs but there just isn’t any room.

            HS2 have said they would have to move part of the tip but it is very expensive and in due course would have to realign the E/W line and like I say they didn’t know about the incinerator plans which the HS2 line would cut through.

        • Penny. Not true.
          I spoke to someone at the HS2 roadshow about this. HS2 and the freight line (only one track) will run in the same rail corridor. So the freight line will continue to be used.

      • And just to add re. the Curzon Street/Moor Street myths that those who clearly know very little about central Birmingham, yet appear to pass off ‘expert’ judgement.

        I commute into Moor Street every day – that’s the station immediately adjacent to the proposed site of the HS2 Curzon Street Station entrance.

        I then walk to my office that is located adjacent to Birmingham New Street station.

        It takes me a whole 5 minutes to walk at an average pace!!!!

        Maybe 8 if I stop off a grab a coffee on the way through the Bullring.

        Get your facts right please.

      • SO hs1 cost 5.8 bn leased for 30 years for 2.1bn or 70million per year equating to less than a third annual interest on capital.It is not clear if the tax payer will suffer additional costsfor ongoing maintainance during or after lease ends.Leesee given massive ongoing ticket subsidy as inducement and construction of stations as passenger nos less than 50% of demand forcast.Road traffic congestion increased considerably aspeople have to travel further to stations (great for CO2).local trains decommisioned so remainder more overcrowded .So as the planned Hs2 has 2 stations for a much greater distance they have obviously learned nothing.

Comments are closed.

2010-2014 © STOP HS2 – The national campaign against High Speed Rail 2