SkyscraperCity banner

1 - 20 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,869 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Since we are now looking at combined HS2 and NPR delivery, it is worth having a new thread for these so we can look at them in combination and i've been thinking about how this could be technically achieved, especially in the city centre.

As far as I'm aware, there are no draft plans out there should how NPR could be accommodated at the existing station. Given it is an east-west route, it seems impossible that the station could be simply expanded, even if 4 tracking could be achieved out to the east.

Do we think the 'HS2' station in Leeds could actually be redesigned to serve both routes? Clearly at the minute the line out of Leeds station is proposed to be above-ground on new viaducts, which works fine into industrial Leeds, but would not work for any route heading west to Manchester which would plough through the South Bank and all the new development here.

Could the combined plans result in a tunnelled section, with a separate tunnel running under the land by Sweet Street?



You could then have a half-tunnelled, half-above ground route to Bradford using the new Leeds station entirely separately to the current station and route alignments. This would even allow for through routes for 'HS2' trains to and from Bradford and Manchester; on the other hand it would mean direct east-west trains with Leeds as a through station would be impossible - but I think the point i'm getting at is they'd be impossible anyway.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,498 Posts
I've always felt a completely underground HS2 station would work best on all fronts. Note Manc is pushing for this whilst not a word from Leeds...

Multiple benefits... No loss of valuable city centre land, no "barrier effect" of new rail line into centre, better flow for trains connecting from Hs2 to HS3, future option to continue line north toward Newcastle and Scotland etc etc
 

·
Carl Shutt ruined my life
Joined
·
829 Posts
I've always felt a completely underground HS2 station would work best on all fronts. Note Manc is pushing for this whilst not a word from Leeds...

Multiple benefits... No loss of valuable city centre land, no "barrier effect" of new rail line into centre, better flow for trains connecting from Hs2 to HS3, future option to continue line north toward Newcastle and Scotland etc etc
I can't see a tunneled station at Leeds or Manc happening after yesterday's announcement that Phase 2 is going to be under review to save costs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,224 Posts
I definitely think there is a high likelihood the station will be redesigned, but also important to remember that the review is going to be looking at opportunities to cut costs, not increase them.

For that reason, I think an underground station is reasonably remote, although I would like to see that approach.

What might be more achievable is an entirely new east-west viaduct crossing the HS2 station and alleviating City station for HSN services. Think Berlin Hauptbahnhof (budget version, because #BrexitBritain).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,564 Posts
I've always felt a completely underground HS2 station would work best on all fronts. Note Manc is pushing for this whilst not a word from Leeds...
Yes, once again a familiar situation, no doubt driven by a more effective local media (MEN vs YEP) and higher profile players (Burnham etc). Manchester making their requirements absolutely clear, very little heard publicly on the Leeds side. Endlessly frustrating. Leeds should be pushing hard for a brand new, combined station, and more importantly should be trying to secure a through-station that allows services from further north to pass through, as opposed to either having to turn back or bypass completely. The idea that London and Cotswolds can have endless tunnelling but northern cities can't should cause uproar. HS2 absolutely should have been built from the north downwards, creating a circular route between the north and midlands and a new critical mass on people to help the rest of the country compete with London.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,818 Posts
I've always felt a completely underground HS2 station would work best on all fronts. Note Manc is pushing for this whilst not a word from Leeds...

Multiple benefits... No loss of valuable city centre land, no "barrier effect" of new rail line into centre, better flow for trains connecting from Hs2 to HS3, future option to continue line north toward Newcastle and Scotland etc etc
Have you any idea how long these HS2 train sets will be, particularly when running in 'duplex' mode? 400 metres .... you'd comfortably fit the Empire State Building in on it's side with room to spare, so I'd forget any notion of an underground station in Leeds, or Manchester for that matter. It would add £Billions to the cost of construction .... and we know going forward, costs will be under the microscope.

Birmingham is in a unique situation when comparing Leeds and Manchester, because fortuitously, even though it has been an eyesore for decades, it has an immense parcel of land right next to the city centre, the old Curzon Street Station site, which is big enough to handle these enormously long trains.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,979 Posts
Manchester may get high-speed rail before Leeds, HS2 minister suggests

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/27/manchester-may-get-high-speed-rail-before-leeds-hs2-minister-suggests

No real surprise.

Transport department confirms plan to split northern spurs of HS2 into two stages

Manchester may get high-speed rail before Leeds, the new minister for HS2 has suggested.

In his first speech in the job, Andrew Stephenson said the next step for government was to “bring forward legislation to bring high-speed rail into Manchester as soon as practical”. There was no mention of Leeds as he addressed the New Statesman’s northern powerhouse-themed conference in Manchester.

Until now, the two northern spurs of HS2 – from Birmingham up to Manchester and Leeds – had been treated as one project, called phase 2b.

The plan now is to split those two spurs into two stages, with Manchester going first, a transport department press officer confirmed. This is to integrate it with Northern Powerhouse Rail, the new east-west line across the Pennines, which includes 50 miles of HS2 track, including a tunnel from Manchester airport to Manchester Piccadilly.

Stephenson, a Mancunian former insurance broker who has represented Pendle in east Lancashire since 2010, said he was “thrilled” to become the first minister for “HS2, Northern Powerhouse Rail and Transpennine route upgrade”.

But he said he knew much work would need to be done to get the public on side with HS2 in particular, due to spiralling costs and fears about environmental degradation.

A YouGov poll last month found the public was opposed to HS2, by 39% to 34%. London was the only region where a majority supported the project, the poll suggested, with 43% in favour and 34% against.

“HS2 is not simply a project that the north and Midlands benefit from. It is a project for the north and Midlands,” Stephenson said in his speech. “The critics who say that HS2 will only benefit London are simply wrong. They ignore the voices in towns and cities across the north, all the businesses and passengers who are crying out for investment and change. They ignore people in my own constituency of Pendle.”

He insisted there must be a “realistic, pragmatic and hard-nosed management of costs” to to convince people about the scheme, and improved public engagement.

He said: “Too many times I have heard stories of unacceptable treatment of those impacted by this line. There will be disruption. We can’t deny that. But we must manage this work efficiently and effectively while always being sympathetic to those affected.”

He added: “It needs to regain the public’s trust. The entire energy of government must now be behind this project. Together with the secretary of state, I will be holding regular cross-government meetings, as happened with the Olympics. We must get this project right. In terms of the next steps, we will be bringing forward legislation for the high-speed rail into Manchester as soon as is practical.

“But before those designs are finalised, we are going to be presenting one integrated rail plan for the north and Midlands. It will examine how northern powerhouse rail and HS2 can best work together.”

Work is due to start building the London to Birmingham leg of HS2 in April. Earlier this month the government said it would “revive the legislation to deliver phase 2a (connecting Birmingham to Crewe) as soon as possible so that preparation works can move forward”.
 

·
Markovitch
Joined
·
28 Posts
Not when the minister is a f...... Mancunian. It's ridiculous the lack of representation/lobbying from Leeds,not for the first time when it comes to these 'what's in it for me' self interest decisions.You've also got another major politician Andy Burnham, another Manc being far more vocal than our lot. The sooner we get a high profile Leeds City Mayor the better. They'll probaby want to do a feasibility study first though just to drag it out
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Forgive me if this has been suggested before...

What if the Government built the whole thing backwards?

1st - Northern Powerhouse Railway
2nd - HS2 Phase 2a & Phase 2b
3rd - HS2 Phase 1

This would allow the Northen Powerhouse to get going and gather momentum before HS2 Phase 2a & Phase 2b were constructed, which would help the Midlands and Northern Powerhouse to gather pace and finally when HS2 Phase 1 is completed the whole thing will be running at speed and hit the floor running.

Just sayin'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,430 Posts
Manchester may get high-speed rail before Leeds, HS2 minister suggests

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/27/manchester-may-get-high-speed-rail-before-leeds-hs2-minister-suggests

No real surprise.
So lets build the costliest, most complex and longest to build section so it can over run, go over budget and force the Leeds leg to cancelled!

We need our ministers, as well as those from Sheffield, to be kicking up a stink at the mere suggestion of this! The business case for our side is the strongest, logistically it has to be easier, with no tunneling, so the eastern leg should be built first!
 

·
Not Cwite There
Joined
·
7,412 Posts
Building the eastern leg first will only enable Birmingham-Leeds/NE services. There's no capacity on the WCML to run London-Leeds/NE services to make use of the eastern leg without Phase 1.

I don't like the direction of travel at all. Putting London aside, why should Birmingham - Sheffield/Leeds/NE be any less important than Manchester - Leeds/NE? So far there's been no indication whatsoever that there's a deliverable and fundable NPR option, and that it could open before HS2 Phase 2.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
One of the CU Next Tuesday club. Hows about we build the eastern leg first in order to deliver the Leeds - Sheffield leg of NPR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
What exactly is the justification for splitting phase 2, and why should the Manchester leg be first?
I am concerned that this may be an excuse to downgrade the eastern leg. However, there are some genuine reasons why splitting it could make sense:

1. HS2 is effectively half a dozen large engineering projects rolled into one. Other countries have built their high speed networks as a series of interlinked but separately procured and managed projects. Maybe this approach would be more manageable? HS2's performance hasn't exactly been stellar.

2. The eastern leg has a number of critical interfaces with proposed Midlands Engine and Northern Powerhouse rail networks. Connections to the existing network north and south of Leeds, Sheffield and Nottingham need to be worked out properly rather than tacked on. That said, the design of the HS2/NPR station in Manchester is probably the most critical issue for the North so why delay the eastern leg?

3. Review of HS2's engineering standards is likely to produce greater savings on the eastern leg than Crewe-Manchester.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
Forgive me if this has been suggested before...

What if the Government built the whole thing backwards?

1st - Northern Powerhouse Railway
2nd - HS2 Phase 2a & Phase 2b
3rd - HS2 Phase 1

This would allow the Northen Powerhouse to get going and gather momentum before HS2 Phase 2a & Phase 2b were constructed, which would help the Midlands and Northern Powerhouse to gather pace and finally when HS2 Phase 1 is completed the whole thing will be running at speed and hit the floor running.

Just sayin'
It has been suggested before, quite a number of times.

The basic issue is that Phase 1 is ready to build and some work has already started - the design is done, it's gone through all the legal and parliamentary processes, property has been purchased, the contractors have put in bids for the work, demolitions have happened, enabling works are underway.

Phase 2a is still going through parliament so is probably a year or two behind where Phase 1 is.

Phase 2b design is not yet complete and I guess is about 5 years behind

NPR doesn't even have a route yet. It's where HS2 was 10 years ago.

So even if it was better to build NPR first (and I'm not convinced personally that it is), it's just not ready. We'd be hanging around another 5-10 years before we stuck a spade in the ground.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
From the YP: https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/politics/underground-high-speed-rail-station-manchester-would-cost-ps10bn-says-report-2231075

Underground high speed rail station in Manchester would cost £10bn, says report

A row over whether the North's biggest city should have a multi-billion pound underground station to accommodate high speed rail remains unresolved despite a leading industry expert being called into settle the dispute, The Yorkshire Post has learned.

Richard George was commissioned to carry out an inquiry into whether an underground station costing £6bn or a surface station at a fraction of the cost would be the best option for HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR) trains at Manchester Piccadilly station.

But Mr George, who was recently appointed to lead the public-sector operator in charge of Northern rail services, concluded in a report that both options should be included in the upcoming review of how high speed rail should work in the North.

And he said the city's "existing inadequate railway infrastructure" would eventually struggle to cope with the proposed high speed rail schemes as well as the upgrade of the trans-Pennine route connecting Manchester with Leeds and York.

Strategic body Transport for the North and Greater Manchester metro mayor Andy Burnham have been at odds over the Piccadilly scheme, with the row prompting another northern metro mayor, Ben Houchen of the Tees Valley, to criticise the amount of attention Manchester gets at the expense of other cities.

The confidential report seen by The Yorkshire Post says: "Once the station configuration is finally decided and committed – I believe it is essential that all parties work together to support that decision regardless of their current position. The change in governance arrangements may help to re-set some currently strained relationships."

The dispute over how high speed rail should arrive in Manchester had threatened to delay the legislation for phase 2b of HS2, the controversial scheme connecting London with Yorkshire, being deposited in the Commons.

But it will now be considered as part of the High Speed North review commissioned by the Government after Prime Minister Boris Johnson finally gave HS2 the green light last month.

The Yorkshire Post revealed in August that Mr Burnham had refused to support plans for the £39bn NPR scheme connecting the great cities of the North because it includes a surface extension to Piccadilly station to accommodate high speed rail rather than an underground station.

Transport for the North, which is submitting the plans to the government, says a six-platform, 400 metre station above ground that can accommodate NPR and the HS2 high speed line from London would deliver the same benefits as an underground site for a fraction of the cost.

Mr George, Director of Transport for the 2012 London Olympics, was called in to carry out an independent review into the best way forward. His report will be discussed at a meeting for Transport for the North's board next week but has been seen by The Yorkshire Post.

The rail consultant wrote that if the idea of an above-ground station at Manchester Piccadilly for HS2 was 'fixed' then a combined surface-level station for the two schemes was "the logical and cost-effective way forward" as it was cheaper than all other options.

The report said a surface station accommodating NPR would cost £2.5bn more than an HS2-only option, including £1.6bn because of the cost of re-routing the line via the village of Diggle, near Oldham. But a four-platform underground station would cost as much as £10bn more, including the re-routing costs.

Mr George said another option worthy of consideration was to have both HS2 and NPR stations underground, a similar conclusion to a separate review prepared by engineering firm Bechtel and commissioned by Manchester city council.

This option, he said, would require a complete overhaul of the funding available for HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail as well as the legislation for the 250mph line connecting London with Leeds and Manchester.

Mr George recommended that High Speed North, the review by the National Infrastructure Commission into how the two flagship rail projects will work together, "include the two principal Piccadilly station options in their review of costs and budget".

And he said the Department for Transport and Treasury "will need to consider all the cost estimates, long term value for money and the overall funding envelope of the High Speed North combined projects".

He wrote: "It appears to me that there are some very different questions to answer. If the question is 'What is the most cost-effective solution for a linked HS2/NPR station in Manchester?' The answer is unquestionably an integrated HS2/NPR surface station.

"But if the question is 'What is the best way forward for the long-term development of the land use and transport Infrastructure of Manchester?' The answer could be very different.

"I agree with Manchester City Council that Manchester must inevitably start moving its transport infrastructure underground.

"It is simply not sustainable over the next 100 years that the city can continue with its existing inadequate railway infrastructure and with the new railway infrastructure required that it can keep building more railways on the surface of Central Manchester.

"Given that there are significant railway infrastructure capacity issues for the existing rail services of Manchester I have serious doubts that the classic railway infrastructure will cope with [trans-Pennine Route Upgrade], HS2 and the NPR and all the additional local passenger distribution capacity that will be required to go with them.

"Solving some of these classic railway capacity issues by going underground looks inevitable – at some stage."

Henri Murison, Director of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership, said: “We welcome the approach taken by Richard George to look at both options on the table – and decide what’s in the best interests of the economic development of Manchester city and communities across the Northern Powerhouse.

"This is not just a stations proposal, it is key to linking up our regions across the UK, and should be considered as such.

“At a time when Treasury is rightly reviewing their cost-benefit analysis to ensure that infrastructure in the UK is delivered efficiently but effectively in long-term, it is important that both proposals for Manchester and key wider decisions like for a Bradford City Centre station are properly costed and evidenced before a decision is made by Whitehall to exclude the preference of northern leaders from further consideration.”

The Greater Manchester mayor's office and Transport for the North declined to comment.

Transport for the North is currently working on an updated business case for the NPR scheme, with the aim of submitting it to government by January. Political leaders say it is vital the scheme does not just go from Leeds to Manchester and reaches other cities across northern England.
The approach to infrastructure constraints in Leeds is to avoid Leeds. Perhaps the same approach could be taken over on the wrong side of the Pennines and not funnel more services through Piccadilly.

Time to level up the North.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,498 Posts
Of course nobody making the case for Leeds to have an underground station despite arguably being more likely to benefit from one... Nothing ever changes we have no leadership.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,058 Posts
Of course nobody making the case for Leeds to have an underground station despite arguably being more likely to benefit from one... Nothing ever changes we have no leadership.
The only surprise is anyone is surprised.

Burnham and his new chum in charge of HS2 will ensure the money is found for the Manchester underground and then the exorbitant costs will cause the anti HS2 clowns to pipe up that BoJo promised phase 2b was always subject to costs on the earlier phases not spiralling.....

Quote me on this in 10 years if you wish....

The fact that Burnham is prepared to block HS3 which has been required for decades just to look after his pet project should be an outrage but as you said Leeds has no one throwing some weight in and telling him to pipe down.
 
1 - 20 of 65 Posts
Top