HS2 under review

[Godfrey Glyn]

 

I've agreed with John Tomlinson's comment but then on re-reading  I am not sure that Alexander Johnson is a real Tory, particularly in the sense that Torys don't think that money grows on trees. The evidence from his time as Mayor of London would suggest that he is very happy to spend money on high profile attention grabbing projects in the hope that someone else will come along later to pick up his bill.

 

all the best

 

Godfrey

Edited July 27, 2019 by Godfrey Glyn
System credited the wrong person for the quote, very sorry.

[Mike Storey]

On 24/07/2019 at 18:58, adb968008 said:

i’m pretty confident that come the day, most HS2 services will zap through OC without stopping, as operators will be keen to maintain the promised time savings.

 

it happened at Lille, Calais, Ashford and Stratford with Eurostar.

 

If the connections aren't at OC, the connecting passengers aren't there.

 

It doesn't matter how many blocks of flats, shopping centres and lifts you install. If all the above construction happens, OC will be good for local populace to use Crossrail, but I doubt they will use HS2 to commute to work in Brum, though some may use HS2 to get to central london/city  faster than Crossrail, which maybe not what its intended for.

 

Will commuters travel from Brum to work in a sweet little coffee shop on Old Oak Common lane.. i doubt it.

 

I’m left wondering if OC station is a smokescreen for a London agenda to finance construction and development of residential in the west end and hiding it in the pork barrel of HS2 costs.

 

certainly the posts here divert from HS1 / 2 benefits into localised social residential development benefits, which have no link to HS1 or HS2 other than sharing a postcode, and a budget to pay for it.

 

I’d love to see Outward ticket revenues for journeys originating at Stratford International... given the massive residential development supposedly making use of the benefits of HS1...

 

 

Your predictions are noted, as is your refusal to acknowledge what is intended for that area of West London. Now compare them to the official ones. Whether the eventual HS2 operator chooses to call there, or whether stops will be mandated, remains to be seen. I suspect the latter, at least initially.

 

As for HS1, the case at Stratford for Eurostar has already been explained. The highly successful Ebbesfleet, which you studiously ignore, replaced Ashford as the prime Kent stop, whilst Ashford will shortly have more Eurostar stops, pending the conversion work to allow the new Siemens trains to call there. But all three have greatly benefitted from HS1 as a domestic service which is the primary comparison to HS2, and the housing and commercial development around each of them has been extensive as a result. So I continue to fail to see what point you are making - why do you say the argument is a diversion, when it is actually key to the (your?) counter-argument that a high speed line will not generate development in the North? HS1 demonstrates that such development and associated benefits are highly likely.

 

Stratford International, at 2.6 million domestic journeys last year, must be generating around £40 million pa (using an average £15 per single trip, to allow for shorts from StP and longer distance journeys from across Kent). That is my crude estimate based on work done years ago, and includes the location as a destination, origin and interchange, but commercial confidentiality, makes anything else difficult.

 

Lille is quite adequately served for London and Brussels by Eurostar, and also very frequently by TGV / Thalys for Paris, and many other destinations. Your comment is erroneous.

 

Calais Frethun - I have no idea.

 

 

 

 

[John Tomlinson]

 

36 minutes ago, melmerby said:

I don't think his "new found friends in the north" (e.g. business), will be happy about scrapping HS2 as they are just as vehemently in favour as those in the Midlands.

 

They may not be happy about it, but it depends what they see themselves getting in its place. Hence the great "sell" that seems to have started in Manchester today about all the wonderful things that are planned for the north. I'd expect to be hearing a lot more about "levelling up", "rebalancing" etc. over the coming weeks as he tries to set up a narrative that will help him hold the Brexit party in check come an early election - and they've already pledged a £200bn fund for regeneration outside the southeast, and commited to scrapping HS2.

 

I can't see that HS2 is a major issue to the general populace in the North or Midlands, unless as you say you are in business or in a relevant sector that benefits directly from the contracts and employment it would provide. With the electorate generally, who are surely the target of the various initiatives that we'll be getting in the coming weeks, there may well be a more holistic approach - then again they may just detest someone like Boris so completely that his efforts won't make any difference!

 

We'll see.

 

John.

[melmerby]

2 hours ago, Godfrey Glyn said:

 

I've agreed with Melmerby's comment but then on re-reading I rethought the section I have quoted above. I am not sure that Alexander Johnson is a real Tory, particularly in the sense that Torys don't think that money grows on trees. The evidence from his time as Mayor of London would suggest that he is very happy to spend money on high profile attention grabbing projects in the hope that someone else will come along later to pick up his bill.

 

all the best

 

Godfrey

Please withdraw that passage quoted that I definitely did not make.

Edited July 27, 2019 by melmerby

[Richard E]

26 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Please withdraw that passage quoted that I definitely did not make.

It was John (Tomlinson) that made that comment ab out the money tree, not yourself.

[Mike Storey]

2 hours ago, John Tomlinson said:

 

They may not be happy about it, but it depends what they see themselves getting in its place. Hence the great "sell" that seems to have started in Manchester today about all the wonderful things that are planned for the north. I'd expect to be hearing a lot more about "levelling up", "rebalancing" etc. over the coming weeks as he tries to set up a narrative that will help him hold the Brexit party in check come an early election - and they've already pledged a £200bn fund for regeneration outside the southeast, and commited to scrapping HS2.

 

I can't see that HS2 is a major issue to the general populace in the North or Midlands, unless as you say you are in business or in a relevant sector that benefits directly from the contracts and employment it would provide. With the electorate generally, who are surely the target of the various initiatives that we'll be getting in the coming weeks, there may well be a more holistic approach - then again they may just detest someone like Boris so completely that his efforts won't make any difference!

 

We'll see.

 

John.

 

Nope - there have been several statements made by various business, community and Quango groups, over the last 24 hours, not least by the Mayor of Manchester, that the choice should not be between the two.

 

As for £200 billion, I presume that is a typo? There was a £200 million regeneration fund in the 2017 Manifesto, which was recently increased to £1.5 billion by Mrs May, and Boris ups it by a few hundred million more each time he mentions it.

 

I have not seen any commitment to scrapping HS2 from any official Tory Party source, only a few aside comments from the usual suspects, like Truss, and the new Transport "Advisor" Boris just appointed, whose name, for the moment, escapes me. Boris would not be commissioning a review of HS2 costs and progress, to report in October, if he intended to cancel it right now. Of course, he may use that to try to cancel it in October!

 

I certainly agree with your final comment!

 

 

 

[Clearwater]

If I was being cynical, the review is a two way device.  It allows Johnson to say to the HS2 critics in his party that the project is “too far advanced to cancel; stopping it now will cause massive disruption and loss of jobs in construction;  etc” whilst preserving the actual project satisfying a different group of people.  If I was being extremely cynical, I’d suggest that a delay in reporting on such an issue to late October might allow Johnson space for an October election and avoid cancellation being an issue in that election.  Johnson has form for changing his tack very quickly to suit his own purposes - see this article by an opponent of his in a student election https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/15/oxford-union-president-boris-johnson-neil-sherlock

 

The report may allow a fudge of some description.  Eg Stop the line at Birmingham or just one of the branches allowing the link to the HS3 cross Pennines line.

 

David

  

[John Tomlinson]

46 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Nope - there have been several statements made by various business, community and Quango groups, over the last 24 hours, not least by the Mayor of Manchester, that the choice should not be between the two.

 

As for £200 billion, I presume that is a typo? There was a £200 million regeneration fund in the 2017 Manifesto, which was recently increased to £1.5 billion by Mrs May, and Boris ups it by a few hundred million more each time he mentions it.

 

I have not seen any commitment to scrapping HS2 from any official Tory Party source, only a few aside comments from the usual suspects, like Truss, and the new Transport "Advisor" Boris just appointed, whose name, for the moment, escapes me. Boris would not be commissioning a review of HS2 costs and progress, to report in October, if he intended to cancel it right now. Of course, he may use that to try to cancel it in October!

 

I certainly agree with your final comment!

 

 

 

Sorry Mike, my text isn't clear, it's the Brexit party who've commited to scrapping HS2 and also the £200bn regeneration fund. At least, that was reported a little while ago on the BBC website. If you look on the Brexit party website there's no mention of anything other than a 31st October exit from the EU come what may - and a request for donations! The point I was getting at is that Johnson's main problem in an election may well be Farage's crowd, and so he's going to try to give the impression of being interested in the North and Midlands in the next few weeks to try to garner support in what will be their target areas.

 

You're quite right, various worthy bodies have indeed said that there shouldn't be a choice between the two, and only a week or so ago the CBI issued a letter signed by several parties requesting that both HS2 and the third runway at Heathrow be kept going. Nonetheless, if I were a government intending to pull the plug on HS2, I would be attempting to establish that the problem wasn't infrastructure investment per se, but rather this specific item, and a good way to prepare the ground would be to have already lined up some other spending proposals beforehand as evidence. The BBC reported that the go-ahead for HS3 would be in the autumn, after the report on HS2 is due, which does rather link the two.

 

I do think I'd probably better shut up now, as of course this is all speculation. As I said in my last post - we'll see!

 

John.

[rockershovel]

Frankly, I don’t believe that 15 minutes off the journey time from Birmingham to London is worth a bent ha’penny at the polls, in the present mood of the country. That goes double for the supposed ease of commuting from Lille, or any other such place. 

 

I’ve just been working in Lincolnshire, watching Dutch contractors with Dutch vessels and Dutch crews, busy making profits building wind farms for German, Danish and French operators, using Italian and French cable. Boston’s population has grown by 30% in recent years. 

 

Boris has put his finger accurately on a widespread feeling that people’s taxes are being spent to the benefit of OTHER people, whose governments take more interest in their electorates, and they don’t like it. That’s the gallery Mr Johnson is playing to, and it’s packed. The lack of detail and frequent inconsistencies in what he actually says, in any given place or time, really aren’t the issue. He has two battles to fight - to settle with the EU in some shape or form, and to retain control of his fractious, divided party and keep it in office. 

 

No, the times we are living through are more akin to James Callaghan’s aphorism about a periodic sea-change in politics, when no one is safe and nothing can be predicted with confidence. 

 

 

[4630]

2 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

 

I have not seen any commitment to scrapping HS2 from any official Tory Party source, only a few aside comments from the usual suspects, like Truss, and the new Transport "Advisor" Boris just appointed, whose name, for the moment, escapes me.

 

 

 

 

The name that's escaped you is Andrew Gilligan.

 

Think ex-BBC reporter best remembered for the 'sexed up' report incident, that eventually led to his resignation following the Hutton enquiry where Lord Hutton questioned the reliability of his evidence.

[Mike Storey]

1 hour ago, 4630 said:

 

The name that's escaped you is Andrew Gilligan.

 

Think ex-BBC reporter best remembered for the 'sexed up' report incident, that eventually led to his resignation following the Hutton enquiry where Lord Hutton questioned the reliability of his evidence.

 

Many thanks - he will fit in well with this administration. 

[4630]

2 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Many thanks - he will fit in well with this administration. 

 

Indeed.  Never one to let the facts get in the way, allegedly.

[Mike Storey]

1 hour ago, rockershovel said:

Frankly, I don’t believe that 15 minutes off the journey time from Birmingham to London is worth a bent ha’penny at the polls, in the present mood of the country. That goes double for the supposed ease of commuting from Lille, or any other such place. 

 

I’ve just been working in Lincolnshire, watching Dutch contractors with Dutch vessels and Dutch crews, busy making profits building wind farms for German, Danish and French operators, using Italian and French cable. Boston’s population has grown by 30% in recent years. 

 

Boris has put his finger accurately on a widespread feeling that people’s taxes are being spent to the benefit of OTHER people, whose governments take more interest in their electorates, and they don’t like it. That’s the gallery Mr Johnson is playing to, and it’s packed. The lack of detail and frequent inconsistencies in what he actually says, in any given place or time, really aren’t the issue. He has two battles to fight - to settle with the EU in some shape or form, and to retain control of his fractious, divided party and keep it in office. 

 

No, the times we are living through are more akin to James Callaghan’s aphorism about a periodic sea-change in politics, when no one is safe and nothing can be predicted with confidence. 

 

 

 

Pretty bang on. I would have posted "agree" but for a few things:

 

The journey time saving to/from Brum is 30 mins, not 15, and between Brum and Leeds, a whole hour. Even if those are reduced a little by cost saving decisions which I think seem inevitable, they are simply not a key issue over the need for HS2, and are anyway not being trumpeted enough for people to see the difference it might make to many people's and businesses' lives - if it is more firmly linked to the success of HS3, that mood may well shift.

 

On the Dutch in Lincolnshire (and East Anglia), those have only been at it since the 16th C. when they drained the Fens and started the market garden industry. Complete sods. We were much happier with webbed feet and marrying our sisters. If only UKIP had been around then!!!

 

[rockershovel]

22 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Pretty bang on. I would have posted "agree" but for a few things:

 

The journey time saving to/from Brum is 30 mins, not 15, and between Brum and Leeds, a whole hour. Even if those are reduced a little by cost saving decisions which I think seem inevitable, they are simply not a key issue over the need for HS2, and are anyway not being trumpeted enough for people to see the difference it might make to many people's and businesses' lives - if it is more firmly linked to the success of HS3, that mood may well shift.

 

On the Dutch in Lincolnshire (and East Anglia), those have only been at it since the 16th C. when they drained the Fens and started the market garden industry. Complete sods. We were much happier with webbed feet and marrying our sisters. If only UKIP had been around then!!!

 

 

..... which last, really has nothing at all to do with my point. The Dutch government have applied themselves to ensuring that they benefit from the expenditure, and that that benefit goes to Dutchmen and no one else. There’s nothing illegal about this, we could have done the same; but our governments thought otherwise. 

 

There are plenty of other examples, I just picked in that because I know it first-hand.

 

 

[corneliuslundie]

Not related to the topic of the thread, but i agree that our governments, for many years and of all colours, have studiously worked at letting our industry be taken over by foreign companies - railways, steel, etc etc - and I have seen no sign that the Brexiteers have even suggested any change in this. They dress it up as "inward investment" when it is really about selling the crown jewels to the highest bidder on that particular day of the week. Just recently it was reported that the Americans are buying one of our big professional consultancies. 

Jonathan

[adb968008]

19 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Your predictions are noted, as is your refusal to acknowledge what is intended for that area of West London. Now compare them to the official ones. Whether the eventual HS2 operator chooses to call there, or whether stops will be mandated, remains to be seen. I suspect the latter, at least initially.

 

As for HS1, the case at Stratford for Eurostar has already been explained. The highly successful Ebbesfleet, which you studiously ignore, replaced Ashford as the prime Kent stop, whilst Ashford will shortly have more Eurostar stops, pending the conversion work to allow the new Siemens trains to call there. But all three have greatly benefitted from HS1 as a domestic service which is the primary comparison to HS2, and the housing and commercial development around each of them has been extensive as a result. So I continue to fail to see what point you are making - why do you say the argument is a diversion, when it is actually key to the (your?) counter-argument that a high speed line will not generate development in the North? HS1 demonstrates that such development and associated benefits are highly likely.

 

Stratford International, at 2.6 million domestic journeys last year, must be generating around £40 million pa (using an average £15 per single trip, to allow for shorts from StP and longer distance journeys from across Kent). That is my crude estimate based on work done years ago, and includes the location as a destination, origin and interchange, but commercial confidentiality, makes anything else difficult.

 

Lille is quite adequately served for London and Brussels by Eurostar, and also very frequently by TGV / Thalys for Paris, and many other destinations. Your comment is erroneous.

 

Calais Frethun - I have no idea.

 

 

 

 

I’m still missing something.

 

one last attempt... linking socio regeneration of Stratford with HS1...

 

How many people rock up to Stratford Intl and buy a return ticket to somewhere... they start their journey at Stratford Intl... they leave their ex2012 flat wobble on down to Stratford Intl and ask for a day return.... 2.6mn annually  really ? - where are they going ? -St Pancras ? - are you sure those 2.6mn entry / exits arent people coming from Kent and heading to the city / canary wharf, then returning home at night ?

 

A clue might be here in this FOI request on DLR patronage  from 2014..

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/241248/response/597314/attach/html/3/Patronage Oct 13 Oct 14.xls.html

 

Stratford Intl DLR had 1.665mn passengers here, against Network Rails figure of 1.784mn in 2014..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratford_International_station

 

That suggests in 2014 Stratford Intl’s / HS1’s combined socio economic impact could be as low as just 120k annually / 365 /2 is just 165 people a day...and we dont know which direction they are travelling.

 

Lets go back to 2.6mn in 2017... / 2 (assuming a return) / 365 is 3567 passengers a day.. thats not earth shaking, my local stations of Carshalton and Carshalton Beeches almost generate that (2.1mn and we don't even have lifts or loos),  with population 45k... we have 2 lines, both only just make the criteria of slow speed, let alone high speed.

 

Stratford only has population of 51k...yet the GEML mainline station manages 120 million combining DLR, LUL and NR stations!!.. Stratford Intl is a backwater by comparison. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratford_station

Though it would seem Jubilee/DLR to Central connections probably account for much of the number... as LUL / NR figures double up to make 120mn.. its probably 60mn connecting journeys / 2 for returns

 

Now either the 51k good burghers of stratford spend all day rotating the turnstiles at Stratford 120mn times... or its connections.

 

A connection serves limited value to the local populace, unless they work at the station coffee shop, ticket office or cleaners etc. In that sense a connecting station could have been anywhere to serve that purpose, (Think GCR at Verney Junction), not a necessarily new build residential neighbourhood.  if the local populace isnt using HS1 then its failed in making the link between Socio economic development and HS Rail.

 

Now, lets put aside the promises of Europe should we..

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ghost-train-station-that-cost-pound210m-c2wm5dvfz7j

 

Old Oak seems like more of the same, when it comes to HS2, though its purpose for Crossrail would seem to be more clear in your explanation... i cant see where HS2 OC station generates “outbound” revenue at source.. ie not a connection...on a mass scale...

 

To me its just blurring the lines to hide funds.. I’m not really convinced the socio economic benefits of OC would be adversely affected if HS2 decided to give OC a miss, but obviously Crossrail is a different story.

 

spending £1bn to build a HS2 station at OC that gives no more revenue than a country branch line station seems at odds,  when other more “connected” alternatives exist and better meets the connection need, but the OC option comes with just 2 related connections..

 

I dont understand how they can plan for 100 million capacity* at OC station serving just GWML/XR, no tube, no bus, no local north, no local south, limited road options ....same argument applies too at Stratford Intl...(though obviously this was in the 2012 Olympics Pork Barrel and 50% abandoned since). Now Euston only manages 40mn, Paddington 36mn... HEX itself only 6mn**.

Assuming today 100% of those passengers connect to Tube (5 lines at each station), are we really assuming those stations will lose 50% of their annual business to a single GWR / HS2 to XR connection at OC ?

 

Stratford Mainline makes sense and justifies its 120mn easily..... it has North bound local, South bound local, Central, Jubilee, DLR, Liverpool St .. it benefits from the fastest direct links to the two largest employment areas of London... The City and Canary Wharf as well as a very successful City Airport and the busiest exhibition centre in London at Excel... i’d wager it also generates 2% of its number from Stratford Intl connections, and 2% from the local populace (based on the 51k and the comparative journey numbers of my village)

 

Regardless your claims of new lines, aside of the line from Stratford Intl via DLR, all this existed since year 2000 when the Jubilee line opened, 1900 when the Central opened the rest of it was there since the 19th century. (Wasnt the DLR route itself originally the L&BR line of 1840 ?).

 

your clearly more informed on this, and ive shown my unsuperior research... please give me the explanation you’d give a 7 year old as i’m obviously thick and missing it..

 

My question...

Why will OC HS2 station be :

 

- 98% better  than Stratford Intl,

- on par with Stratford GEML ( 4 major points of London and 7 major connections), 

- 3x more busier than Clapham Junction entry/exits

- used by more than Euston and Paddington combined

- and what really is the socio economic benefits to a local populace of HS2 ?

 

 

*https://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2019/02/05-world-class-old-oak-common.html

**https://www.heathrowexpress.com/about-heathrow-express/facts-figures

Edited July 28, 2019 by adb968008

[rockershovel]

10 hours ago, corneliuslundie said:

Not related to the topic of the thread, but i agree that our governments, for many years and of all colours, have studiously worked at letting our industry be taken over by foreign companies - railways, steel, etc etc - and I have seen no sign that the Brexiteers have even suggested any change in this. They dress it up as "inward investment" when it is really about selling the crown jewels to the highest bidder on that particular day of the week. Just recently it was reported that the Americans are buying one of our big professional consultancies. 

Jonathan

 

Agreed. Boris Johnson is definitely a Tory in the sense of having no actual wealth creation skills; everything has a price, but nothing has any value. “Inward investment” in the political sense, tends to mean “asset price speculation by third parties” - Mrs May certainly used the phrase in that sense. 

 

Hence my previous comment. In my working lifetime I’ve seen Statoil grow from a nonentity, to a world class operation. The Dutch and Italians have world class marine engineering fleets; what about the nation of Drake and Raleigh, Nelson and Anson? Come to think of it, Drake was a pirate and Raleigh was ultimately executed to appease the Spanish, while Nelson is remembered for his fondness for another man’s wife...

 

one thing I’ve found about working with, and for Americans is that they certainly understand the relationship between wealth and assets. They still believe their country was made, and still look up to figures like Getty and Weyerhaeuser, Ford and Edison. Nothing wrong with being “trade” over there. 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 28, 2019 by rockershovel

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, adb968008 said:

 

That suggests in 2014 Stratford Intl’s / HS1’s combined socio economic impact could be as low as just 120k annually / 365 /2 is just 165 people a day...and we dont know which direction they are travelling.

 

Lets go back to 2.6mn in 2017... / 2 (assuming a return) / 365 is 3567 passengers a day.. thats not earth shaking, my local stations of Carshalton and Carshalton Beeches almost generate that (2.1mn and we don't even have lifts or loos),  with population 45k... we have 2 lines, both only just make the criteria of slow speed, let alone high speed.

 

 

As a matter of possible interest Stratford International is served by just over 160 trains per day (on an average weekday using the SNCF method of counting a base timetable).  Basically amounting to c.80 in each direction.

 

Obviously passenger loading will not be evenly spread over the whole of the operating day which commences not long before 06.00 and continues until just after midnight.  Breaking the totals down into the flow in one direction or the other is difficult except for season ticket holders where I think it reasonable to assume that they will both arrive and depart so the figure of 626,784 would actually mean 313,392 passengers per annum and as they are seasons that figure is likely to be pretty accurate if based on ticket sales.  But if it is based on every ticket issued some people will inevitably have been counted twice, or even several times over, having renewed their ticket more than once in the year - it's not clear from the methodology if the effect of renewals is taken into account.  But for simplicity we'll take 313, 392 and give them 4 weeks holiday a year and only have them travelling on weekdays which means they all travel on an average of  240 days per annum which results in just over 1,300 season ticket holding passengers daily on an average weekday.  Even if we assume they each purchase 3 tickets over the course of the year we would still get in excess of 400 travelling each average weekday.

 

In other words arriving at the average number of travellers per day is not a simple matter and when you start trying to see how they spread over those 160+ trains it becomes well nigh impossible to arrive at any sort of realistic figure short of standing there and counting them. (Which we know is the methodology used on TfL where numbers are based on real head counts and person-to-person passenger surveys).  But one important point remains - 160 trains per day is a pretty attractive service which is likely to encourage use especially if a station has good transport links.

[Mike Storey]

15 hours ago, adb968008 said:

I’m still missing something.

 

one last attempt... linking socio regeneration of Stratford with HS1...

 

How many people rock up to Stratford Intl and buy a return ticket to somewhere... they start their journey at Stratford Intl... they leave their ex2012 flat wobble on down to Stratford Intl and ask for a day return.... 2.6mn annually  really ? - where are they going ? -St Pancras ? - are you sure those 2.6mn entry / exits arent people coming from Kent and heading to the city / canary wharf, then returning home at night ?

 

A clue might be here in this FOI request on DLR patronage  from 2014..

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/241248/response/597314/attach/html/3/Patronage Oct 13 Oct 14.xls.html

 

Stratford Intl DLR had 1.665mn passengers here, against Network Rails figure of 1.784mn in 2014..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratford_International_station

 

That suggests in 2014 Stratford Intl’s / HS1’s combined socio economic impact could be as low as just 120k annually / 365 /2 is just 165 people a day...and we dont know which direction they are travelling.

 

Lets go back to 2.6mn in 2017... / 2 (assuming a return) / 365 is 3567 passengers a day.. thats not earth shaking, my local stations of Carshalton and Carshalton Beeches almost generate that (2.1mn and we don't even have lifts or loos),  with population 45k... we have 2 lines, both only just make the criteria of slow speed, let alone high speed.

 

Stratford only has population of 51k...yet the GEML mainline station manages 120 million combining DLR, LUL and NR stations!!.. Stratford Intl is a backwater by comparison. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratford_station

Though it would seem Jubilee/DLR to Central connections probably account for much of the number... as LUL / NR figures double up to make 120mn.. its probably 60mn connecting journeys / 2 for returns

 

Now either the 51k good burghers of stratford spend all day rotating the turnstiles at Stratford 120mn times... or its connections.

 

A connection serves limited value to the local populace, unless they work at the station coffee shop, ticket office or cleaners etc. In that sense a connecting station could have been anywhere to serve that purpose, (Think GCR at Verney Junction), not a necessarily new build residential neighbourhood.  if the local populace isnt using HS1 then its failed in making the link between Socio economic development and HS Rail.

 

Now, lets put aside the promises of Europe should we..

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ghost-train-station-that-cost-pound210m-c2wm5dvfz7j

 

Old Oak seems like more of the same, when it comes to HS2, though its purpose for Crossrail would seem to be more clear in your explanation... i cant see where HS2 OC station generates “outbound” revenue at source.. ie not a connection...on a mass scale...

 

To me its just blurring the lines to hide funds.. I’m not really convinced the socio economic benefits of OC would be adversely affected if HS2 decided to give OC a miss, but obviously Crossrail is a different story.

 

spending £1bn to build a HS2 station at OC that gives no more revenue than a country branch line station seems at odds,  when other more “connected” alternatives exist and better meets the connection need, but the OC option comes with just 2 related connections..

 

I dont understand how they can plan for 100 million capacity* at OC station serving just GWML/XR, no tube, no bus, no local north, no local south, limited road options ....same argument applies too at Stratford Intl...(though obviously this was in the 2012 Olympics Pork Barrel and 50% abandoned since). Now Euston only manages 40mn, Paddington 36mn... HEX itself only 6mn**.

Assuming today 100% of those passengers connect to Tube (5 lines at each station), are we really assuming those stations will lose 50% of their annual business to a single GWR / HS2 to XR connection at OC ?

 

Stratford Mainline makes sense and justifies its 120mn easily..... it has North bound local, South bound local, Central, Jubilee, DLR, Liverpool St .. it benefits from the fastest direct links to the two largest employment areas of London... The City and Canary Wharf as well as a very successful City Airport and the busiest exhibition centre in London at Excel... i’d wager it also generates 2% of its number from Stratford Intl connections, and 2% from the local populace (based on the 51k and the comparative journey numbers of my village)

 

Regardless your claims of new lines, aside of the line from Stratford Intl via DLR, all this existed since year 2000 when the Jubilee line opened, 1900 when the Central opened the rest of it was there since the 19th century. (Wasnt the DLR route itself originally the L&BR line of 1840 ?).

 

your clearly more informed on this, and ive shown my unsuperior research... please give me the explanation you’d give a 7 year old as i’m obviously thick and missing it..

 

My question...

Why will OC HS2 station be :

 

- 98% better  than Stratford Intl,

- on par with Stratford GEML ( 4 major points of London and 7 major connections), 

- 3x more busier than Clapham Junction entry/exits

- used by more than Euston and Paddington combined

- and what really is the socio economic benefits to a local populace of HS2 ?

 

 

*https://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2019/02/05-world-class-old-oak-common.html

**https://www.heathrowexpress.com/about-heathrow-express/facts-figures

 

I will not debate further your continuing obsession with socio-economic benefits accruing only from "local residents". That is not a planning assumption used by any professional. It is the combination of benefits accruing to the nation and its inhabitants that count (in this sort of evaluation). Where frustrated travel demand clearly exists, it is a transport planner's job to supply solutions from a range of options. Stratford international would have played a bigger part, as in servicing Eurostar, if the inter-regional link had not been cancelled. But Stratford as a whole continues to be a major success in its new redeveloped guise, and is now truly a major interchange hub as well as a destination. Your assertion that little has changed since 2000, whilst usage has nearly tripled since then, is understood only as pedantic piffle.

 

If you (and perhaps others on here) are seriously interested in the raison d'etre for the whole scheme, and OOC in particular (section 6.13 onwards), then read this:

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/228887/7827.pdf

 

That was the origin of the original parliamentary progress towards the various bills, but some of the contents, and all the numbers, are as at 2009 and several things have changed since then. But there is already an assumption that about One Third of all HS2 users will utilise OOC, from the modelling done by HS2 Ltd at the time. I have no idea whether that is a good assumption - ask them.

 

But to contrast with the perception that just Heathrow, GW and Crossrail are the only connections in town, try reading this

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Oak_Common_railway_station

 

I am loath to use Wiki as a source usually, but this is actually the best summary of the additional potential links to OOC being explored by TfL that I have seen, and allows further exploration of those schemes at their source, should you be so inclined.

 

[adb968008]

On 23/07/2019 at 23:16, Mike Storey said:

 

That legacy had to include improved links that had been planned years before, for progressive employment opportunities for depressed areas of London. Hence the NLL upgrades, which had a primarily social business case,

...

 

Stratford Hub was as much social engineering for North and East London, as it was a transport business case for increased business.. It had the advantage of Canary Wharf (and others latterly) private contributions, and then of course 2012 funding. 

 

Old Oak will similarly be a piece of social engineering, with as much private developer contributions as can be obtained. But it will take much longer than Stratford, that is certain.

 

 

 

27 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

 

I will not debate further your continuing obsession with socio-economic benefits accruing only from "local residents". That is not a planning assumption used by any professional. It is the combination of benefits accruing to the nation and its inhabitants that count (in this sort of evaluation).

 

I was actually quoting yourself, this was actually your discussion point, which Ive been seeking clarification, see above, but after 4 tries it’s apparent the comments were justification fluff, which when challenged doesn’t bare scrutiny.

 

i don’t buy socio economic benefits of HS1 to Stratford, any more than I buy them for OC for HS2.

Whilst recognising OC redevelopment as a New West End, it’s case for Crossrail makes sense, but I don’t buy the connection potential for OC HS2 at all.

I still see OC HS2 as a white elephant.

 

Ive read the wiki.. The connection options I believe are poor, the outlook is poor.

 

I will read the pdf you sent, thanks for this, maybe this may give clarity, but i’m not sure this debate will.

[Mike Storey]

3 hours ago, adb968008 said:

 

 

 

 

I was actually quoting yourself, this was actually your discussion point, which Ive been seeking clarification, see above, but after 4 tries it’s apparent the comments were justification fluff, which when challenged doesn’t bare scrutiny.

 

i don’t buy socio economic benefits of HS1 to Stratford, any more than I buy them for OC for HS2.

Whilst recognising OC redevelopment as a New West End, it’s case for Crossrail makes sense, but I don’t buy the connection potential for OC HS2 at all.

I still see OC HS2 as a white elephant.

 

Ive read the wiki.. The connection options I believe are poor, the outlook is poor.

 

I will read the pdf you sent, thanks for this, maybe this may give clarity, but i’m not sure this debate will.

 

Which bit of "for North and East London" did you fail to understand, as regards the improved NLL and other links. There are huge amounts of documented evidence about the success of that, At what point did I try to claim that was just about Stratford International? At what point have I claimed it is just about HS2 at OOC - I have actually tried to explain what the wider plans are, but you clearly have chosen not to read anything about that yet.

 

What you don't "buy" is neither here nor there to me - why the fcuk do I have to justify anything to you?? - I have just been trying, in vain, to explain how the planners and politicos got to where we are.

 

You carry on with your opinions. Frankly, my dear......

 

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

Something that hasn't been mentioned in this argument about the  justifications for the OOC station and it's link with Crossrail,.....

 

We were told early on, that as a result of the extra capacity provided by HS2 and the extra capacity released to the classic lines,  the Underground network at Euston Station, would not be able to absorb such a large increase in passengers.

Even with Euston Square being integrated into the the Euston Underground Station complex.

Apparently, the modelling showed that it would overload this part of the underground system.

Crossrail 2 is supposed to be part of the long term solution to this issue.

 

IIRC, from what was published from the early plans, a key part of OOC's job is to dissipate a fair proportion of the HS2 passenger flow onto Crossrail...and any future rail links that may be created at that station.  

 

.

[Mike Storey]

26 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

Something that hasn't been mentioned in this argument about the  justifications for the OOC station and it's link with Crossrail,.....

 

We were told early on, that as a result of the extra capacity provided by HS2 and the extra capacity released to the classic lines,  the Underground network at Euston Station, would not be able to absorb such a large increase in passengers.

Even with Euston Square being integrated into the the Euston Underground Station complex.

Apparently, the modelling showed that it would overload this part of the underground system.

Crossrail 2 is supposed to be part of the long term solution to this issue.

 

IIRC, from what was published from the early plans, a key part of OOC's job is to dissipate a fair proportion of the HS2 passenger flow onto Crossrail...and any future rail links that may be created at that station.  

 

.

 

Absolutely.

 

Indeed, the Command Paper of 2010 (PDF, I attached a link above) includes all this, but it would appear few people have bothered to read that or anything else that has been produced since, at great length, great effort and great expense, to explain why the planners came to the conclusions they did, and why changes since then have been made.

 

 

 

 

[rockershovel]

I’m most intrigued to see the subject of “socio-economic Engineering” mentioned. 

 

The great land empires of Europe, from Rome to Budapest, have always depended upon rapid transit. Offend Caesar, and the legions appeared. Later Caesars embraced, not always willingly, population movements from the East. The Soviets presided over the movements of whole populations for ideological reasons. 

 

France built railways linking Algeria and Tunisia to Paris. The Germans built roads, some of which are still in regular use, and pioneered electrification of the railways. The Italians produced a leader who famously “made the trains run on time”. 

 

Looking further abroad, British and French empire building was underpinned by railways. The Ottomans tried it, although it didn’t help them. The nascent United States was willing to try anything to build a transcontinental railroad, and today around 5% of Americans move annually to another state, for one reason or another. Australia and Canada were bound together by them. 

 

Ive long believed that the HS rail links are directly linked to EU political and ideological ambition - to be able to  move rapidly and directly between regional centres, whether populations, or anything else.  

 

Perhaps if we knew more about the “socio-economic Engineering” the whole vast project might appear in a different light? 

 

[Mike Storey]

8 hours ago, rockershovel said:

I’m most intrigued to see the subject of “socio-economic Engineering” mentioned. 

 

The great land empires of Europe, from Rome to Budapest, have always depended upon rapid transit. Offend Caesar, and the legions appeared. Later Caesars embraced, not always willingly, population movements from the East. The Soviets presided over the movements of whole populations for ideological reasons. 

 

France built railways linking Algeria and Tunisia to Paris. The Germans built roads, some of which are still in regular use, and pioneered electrification of the railways. The Italians produced a leader who famously “made the trains run on time”. 

 

Looking further abroad, British and French empire building was underpinned by railways. The Ottomans tried it, although it didn’t help them. The nascent United States was willing to try anything to build a transcontinental railroad, and today around 5% of Americans move annually to another state, for one reason or another. Australia and Canada were bound together by them. 

 

Ive long believed that the HS rail links are directly linked to EU political and ideological ambition - to be able to  move rapidly and directly between regional centres, whether populations, or anything else.  

 

Perhaps if we knew more about the “socio-economic Engineering” the whole vast project might appear in a different light? 

 

 

Why? It is just short-hand for enabling people and businesses to be "closer" to where they want to be/operate/manufacture/sell/develop, by making that access much easier (capacity or direct services) or by making them "nearer" (journey time or re-location). As the South East is seriously running out of room, and is anyway crazily expensive, the logical thing is allow such developments to have a better chance of success in the Midlands, North and Scotland, by improving connections with the South, and, just as importantly, with each other, which HS2 does between the Midlands and the North West / Yorkshire and the NE *(and perhaps Scotland but not so much) and HS3 does it between the North West, Yorkshire and the NE (hopefully).

 

That is a key part of the basis for any recent rail scheme, and HS2 and HS3 are no different. 

 

If it was anything to do with some imagined EU ambition, I doubt the HS1/HS2 link would ever have been scrapped.