Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:19, 19 November 2010

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "High Speed 2" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (September 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

High Speed 2
Legend
As of October 2023
to Liverpool, Glasgow & Edinburgh Handsacre Junction West Coast Main Line Snow Hill lines Birmingham New Street Birmingham Curzon Street Birmingham Moor Street Birmingham International Birmingham Interchange West Coast Main Line Old Oak Common Euston pedestrian walkway to St Pancras International interchange with National Rail at all stations
Original plan, pre-2021 Northern Powerhouse Rail Manchester Piccadilly Leeds to East Coast Main Line to York & Newcastle West Coast Main Line to Liverpool, Glasgow & Edinburgh Midland Main Line Manchester Airport High Speed Classic-compatible loop Sheffield Crewe Chesterfield Classic-compatible loop East Midlands Hub Handsacre Junction to Nottingham, Derby & Leicester West Coast Main Line   Phase 1 ╲ Phase 2   boundary Snow Hill lines Birmingham New Street Birmingham Curzon Street Birmingham Moor Street Birmingham International Birmingham Interchange West Coast Main Line Old Oak Common Euston pedestrian walkway to St Pancras International interchange with National Rail at all stations
This diagram: view talk edit

High Speed 2 (HS2) is a proposed British high-speed railway serving the Midlands and North West of England with a possible "Y" shaped route from London to Birmingham and then two spurs, one to Manchester and the other to Leeds via the East Midlands. The project is being developed by High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd, a company established by the British government in January 2009. High-speed rail is supported in principle by the three main United Kingdom political parties; there is, however, debate about which cities should be served and on the environmental performance and impact of high-speed rail. If approved, construction would begin in 2017 with the first trains running by 2025. At present, the only high-speed route in Britain is High Speed 1 (the Channel Tunnel Rail Link).

The new Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government formed in May 2010 stated in its initial programme for government that it "will establish a high-speed rail network".

History

The Department for Transport published a document in January 2009 giving details of various options for a new high-speed railway in the UK and concluded that the most appropriate initial route for an entirely new high-speed line in the UK was from London to the West Midlands.

In January 2009, the government established a separate company, High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd chaired by Sir David Rowlands, to develop the project along the successful lines used for other long lead time rail infrastructure projects such as High Speed 1 and Crossrail. The company would provide advice on the cost and benefits of a proposed route with any options as appropriate, options for a Heathrow International interchange station, options for access to central London and other cities on the route, connectivity with HS1 and the existing rail network and proposals for financing and construction.

In August 2009, Network Rail published its own study outlining its proposals for the expansion of the railway network which included a new high-speed rail line between London and Glasgow/Edinburgh, following a route through the West Midlands and the North-West of England.

In December 2009, HS2 handed its report to the British government. Details released to the public showed proposals for a new railway station in London. The study investigated the possibility of links to Heathrow Airport, connections to Crossrail, the Great Western Main Line and the High Speed 1 Channel Tunnel Rail Link. For the report, a route had been decided and investigated to an accuracy of 0.5 metres (18 in).

On 11 March 2010, the High Speed 2 report was published, together with the government command paper setting out government policy on high-speed rail, informed by High Speed 2's report. Also published were a number of detailed supporting studies.

Route

The line would run from London Euston, mainly in tunnel, to an interchange with Crossrail, west of Paddington, thence along the New North Main Line (Acton-Northolt Line) past West Ruislip alongside the Chiltern Main Line with a four-kilometre viaduct over the Grand Union Canal and River Colne, from the M25 to Amersham in a new 9.6 km tunnel. After emerging from the tunnel, the line would run parallel to the existing A413 road and London - Aylesbury line corridor, through the 47km wide Chiltern Hills AONB passing close by Great Missenden to the East, alongside Wendover immediately to the West, then on to Aylesbury. After Aylesbury, the line would run alongside the Aylesbury line, joining north of Quainton Road and then broadly following the direction of the dismantled Great Central Main Line (whose trackbed is still very largely intact and which was built to a continental loading gauge, but whose curvature is too great for high speed trains) as far as Brackley. Beyond Brackley the route strikes out to the north-west on a new alignment through open countryside.

Less studied are the routes of any possible extensions from Birmingham to Manchester and to Sheffield and Leeds which would allow connections to the North of England and Scotland. Transport Secretary Philip Hammond announced that based on reports by HS2 Ltd, the route preferred by the government is the so-called "Y" route with separate branches to Manchester and Leeds. Also how trains would run from Birmingham to Paris is not covered at time of writing in the proposed route.

The route to the West Midlands would be the first stage of a line to Scotland, and passengers travelling to or from Scotland would be able to use through trains with a saving of 45 minutes from day one. If approved, construction would begin in 2017, with the first trains running by 2025.

It is possible to view the route over Google satellite photography and on an OpenStreetMap map base. Note that the route is not accurate as it has been traced from some very unclear and awkward-to-use PDF maps. The route can also be viewed using the official maps published by the DfT.

Connection to other lines

High Speed 1

Whether and how High Speed 2 should connect to High Speed 1 has not yet been decided or funded. The government command paper says:

"... the new British high speed rail network should be connected to the wider European high speed rail network via High Speed One and the Channel Tunnel, subject to cost and value for money. This could be achieved through either or both of a dedicated rapid transport system linking Euston and St Pancras and a direct rail link to High Speed One."

The route engineering study conducted by Arup for High Speed 2 costed a "classic speed" GC loading gauge direct rail link at £458m (single track) or £812m (double track). The connection would be from Old Oak Common to the High Speed 1 St Pancras portal, via tunnel and the North London Line. A double-track high-speed connection would cost £3.6bn.

The High Speed 2 report recommended that, if a direct rail link is built, it should be the classic-speed, double-track option.

Journey times

The HS2 Ltd report gave journey times for some destinations, allowing a degree of 'before and after' comparison. Because it would only serve a very small subset of destinations, use of existing 'classic' services would be an element of many High Speed 2 journeys.

+ An extension to Scotland is described in the government command paper as a "longer term aspiration."
++ Using HS2 for a Coventry - London rail journey would require changing twice (at Birmingham International and Birmingham Interchange), so the figure given is for the existing line via Milton Keynes. Assumes 'classic' line is not speeded down.
+++ Assumes 14 minutes Birmingham New Street station to Curzon Street (the midrange of walk times from http://www.walkit.com), and 8 minute wait at Curzon Street (southbound)/New Street (northbound), with 4 connections per hour and use of premium rate unrestricted ticket allowing use of any train. The 'prudent' journey time (where a connecting service has just been missed) would be about the same as the present line.

Proposed stations

London Euston

The line would start from an expanded London Euston, which would serve both conventional rail and high-speed rail. A rapid transit link between Euston and London St Pancras may be provided but is not currently funded or committed. The Command Paper also suggests that the connection with Crossrail at Old Oak Common in West London would mitigate the extra burden on Euston.

However, a later review by former Conservative Transport Secretary Lord Mawhinney recommended that High Speed 2 should terminate at Old Oak Common, not Euston.

Old Oak Common

The March 2010 report proposes that all trains would stop at a west London "Crossrail interchange" near Old Oak Common between Paddington and Acton Main Line stations, with connections for Crossrail, Heathrow Express and services on the Great Western Main Line to Heathrow Airport, Reading, South West England and South Wales. The station might also have connections with London Overground and Southern services on the North London and West London Lines and also with London Underground's Central Line.

Lord Mawhinney recommended that High Speed 2 should terminate at Old Oak Common because of its good connections and in order to save the cost of tunnelling to Euston.

Birmingham Interchange

The March 2010 report proposes that a new "Birmingham Interchange" station would be built in rural Solihull, on the other side of the M42 motorway from the National Exhibition Centre, Birmingham International Airport and Birmingham International Station. The interchange would be connected by a people mover to the other sites; the AirRail Link people mover already operates between Birmingham International station and the airport.

Birmingham Curzon Street

A new station would be built partly on the site of the old Curzon Street Station, as the Birmingham terminus for High Speed 2. It would be reached via a spur line from the main route. The site is termed Birmingham Curzon Street in the government's command paper and as "Birmingham Fazeley Street" in the report produced by High Speed 2 Ltd with reference to a nearby street. The two names do however refer to a station at the same location.

It is thought that the new station could make a significant contribution to the regeneration of the area, although the pre-existing plans would have to be revised, including those of Birmingham City University for a new Eastside campus.

Curzon Street was the main station for Birmingham until the nearby Birmingham New Street railway station was completed in the 1850s. Birmingham New Street is already operating at full capacity and would be unable to accommodate new high-speed services.

East Midlands

A new station in the East Midlands is also proposed at a new site (not the site of the current East Midlands Parkway station). It is not yet known where this station would be sited, as Sir David Rowlands of High Speed Two explained: "Taken individually, Nottingham, Leicester or Derby may not have adequate capacity for a high-speed line. They are not as big as Birmingham or Manchester ... but if you take them together, and have something that can serve all three, that's maybe the best way to go."

Business leaders in the area supported high-speed rail coming to the East Midlands but were concerned that "If a station was connected to a city rather than a parkway it would cut connecting traffic ... The time it would take to get to a parkway would also negate the shorter journey times of the high-speed train itself".

Infrastructure

Like High Speed 1, the new line would be built to the European GC loading gauge.

The line would have a maximum design speed of 250 miles per hour (400 km/h). Initially trains would run at a top speed of 225 miles per hour (362 km/h).

The line would be built to handle freight trains if required, although freight trains would be operated within a limited nightime window of operation due to their relatively low speed. However, the high-speed line would release capacity on the West Coast Main Line and Midland Main Line for freight.

The signalling system will be the European Rail Traffic Management System which uses in-cab signalling to resolve the visibility issues associated with lineside signals at high speed. Most UK railways are limited to 125mph operation due to the limitations of lineside signalling.

Cost

The overall cost for the lines to Edinburgh, Liverpool and Glasgow, including rolling stock, was estimated at £20.5 bn - £34 bn, factoring in a 66% allowance for cost overrun. This does not include a link to HS1.

The return on investment or payback is estimated by Network Rail at 1.6 times over a period of 60 years, without including the cost of capital.

Rolling stock

Two types of trains are planned:

• 'Classic compatible' trains would be built to the British loading gauge and could run off the high speed line onto conventional routes such as the West Coast Main Line.
• Wider and taller trains with suitable lower platforms which could include double-decker trains similar to the TGV Duplex. These would be confined to the high-speed network (High Speed 1, High Speed 2, Channel Tunnel & beyond) or other areas cleared to GC loading gauge).

The operating characteristics of both types of train would be the same, including a maximum speed of at least 225 miles per hour (362 km/h). Each train would be 200 metres (660 ft) long. Two trains could be joined together for a 400 metres (1,300 ft) train, but only stations built for the high-speed line would be able to accommodate such long trains.

Because of their non-standard nature, classic-compatible trains are expected to be more expensive to procure.

Development

High Speed 2 Ltd

High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd was established in January 2009 to study the feasibility and viability of a new line using trains capable of speeds over 150 miles per hour (240 km/h). The company's stated purpose was to "help consider the case for new high-speed services from London to Scotland." As a first stage, initial proposals for a new line would be considered for routes between London and the West Midlands, with the new line extended over time to reach Scotland. The company would report formally to the Government on the initial issues affecting this first stage by the end of 2009.

The company would draw on existing consultation produced for the Department for Transport (DfT) and Network Rail, soliciting new consultation where needed, and would use Department for Transport and Network Rail staff as well as recruiting externally. While the project was launched as an independent initiative, in launching the HS2 company the government acknowledged the contributions both of the consultancy group Arup in suggesting a high-speed link from Heathrow to London, and of HSR advocacy group Greengauge 21 in justifying High Speed rail based on the limitations of the WCML, as having been important.

Timeline to opening

High Speed 2 Ltd suggests that following ministerial approval, public consultation, parliamentary approval through a hybrid bill, and detailed engineering design, construction could begin in mid-2018. This is estimated to require 6.5 years, with a further year to finish testing. The reconstruction of Euston Station "would probably take the whole of the construction period and would form the critical path for the whole programme". Opening would be at the end of 2025. Note that this timetable refers to the London-Birmingham section only.

The government command paper suggests that opening to Birmingham should be possible by the end of 2026. The government timetable includes the additional work of preparing the routes to Leeds and Manchester, for approval by Parliament in the hybrid bill. Including the whole of the initial Y-shaped network in one bill would facilitate planning it as a single coherent project and avoid using excessive parliamentary time.

Supporting organisations

A number of organisations support the HS2 project or the development of a High Speed Rail network in the UK more generally. These include Greengauge 21, Railfuture, and HSR:UK; a group of 11 major UK cities – Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham, and Sheffield.

Stated Scottish Government planning policy is to engage "Discussions between Scottish Government with the UK Government on the development of a high speed rail link to reduce journey times between Central Scotland and London to under 3 hours and provide direct services to the Continent. Requirement for identification of route options, environmental assessment, appropriate assessment, and a supporting business case."

Environmental and community impact

Property demolition

HS2's Birmingham stage would result in the demolition of around 600 houses; 250 around Euston station, 20–30 between Old Oak Common and West Ruislip, around 50 in Birmingham, and the remainder in pockets along the route. HS2 Ltd has also stated that 21,300 dwellings would experience a noticeable increase in rail noise and 200 non-residential receptors (community; education; healthcare; and recreational/social facilities) within 300 metres of the preferred route have the potential to experience significant noise impacts..

According to the Banbury Guardian Newspaper (as of the September 30th edition), some houses were slated for demolition in the Banburyshire village of Lower Thorp and it was due to pass "within metres of houses and a primary school" in Chipping Warden.

According to The Bucks Herald Newspaper (as of the October 6th edition), homes will also be demolished in Great Missenden, Buckinghamshire..

In Birmingham, the new Curzon Gate student residence would have to be demolished and Birmingham City University wanted a £30,000,000 refund after the plans were revealed.

The Government proposed a discretionary Exceptional Hardship Scheme (EHS), on which consultation closed on 17 June 2010. It is intended to compensate homeowners who have difficulty selling their home because of the HS2 route announcement; protecting home owners whose property value may be seriously affected by the 'preferred route option' and who urgently need to sell.

The EHS was intended to run from about August 2010, until the route is chosen (originally estimated around the end of 2011). Homeowners can apply to the Secretary of State to buy their home, at its full market value (assuming no HS2), if all of the following criteria are met:

1. Residential owner-occupier.
2. Pressing need to sell. This means a change in employment location; extreme financial pressure; to accommodate enlarged family; move into sheltered accommodation; or medical condition of a family member.
3. On or in 'close vicinity' of the 'preferred route' (that is mainly those who will later on be covered by statutory blight provisions).
4. Have tried to sell – been on the market for at least three months with no offers within 15% of full market value (as if no HS2).
5. Can demonstrate inability to sell is due to HS2.
6. No prior knowledge of HS2 before acquiring the property.

Decisions on individual applications will by made by a panel of 'experts'.

The results of the consultations are not yet known. But Alison Munro, chief executive of HS2 Ltd, has stated that they are also looking at other options, including property bonds. The Statutory blight regime would apply to any route confirmed for a new high speed line following the public consultations, now due to commence in 2011.

HS2 Action Alliance's alternative compensation solution for property blight was presented to DfT/HS2 Ltd and Secretary of State for Transport Philip Hammond, in response to the consultation on the EHS. The Alliance also presented DfT and HS2 Ltd with a pilot study on property blight.

Loss of wildlife habitat and recreation space

There are concerns that the route is likely to damage the 47km wide Chiltern Hills area of outstanding natural beauty, the Colne valley regional park on the outskirts of London, and other areas of green belt.

The preferred route for the line would pass through the Chilterns in Buckinghamshire via the Misbourne Valley, then trough a tunnel past Chalfont St Giles and Amersham, then past Wendover and Stoke Manderville.

The proposals also include the further re-alignment of more than 1 kilometre (1,100 yd) of the already re-aligned River Tame, and construction of a 635 metres (694 yd) long viaduct and a cutting through ancient woodland at a nature reserve at Park Hall on the edge of Birmingham. There are a number of protest groups along the proposed route .

Carbon emissions

In 2007, the Department for Transport commissioned a report, "Estimated Carbon Impact of a New North South Line", from Booz Allen Hamilton to investigate the likely carbon impacts associated with the construction and operation of a new rail line to either Manchester or Scotland, and in particular the comparison with emissions from domestic air travel.

The report concluded that there were no carbon benefits in building a new line from London to Manchester over the 60-year appraisal period. The additional carbon emitted by building and operating a new rail route would be larger than the entire quantity of carbon emitted by the air services. It did also note that "Construction emissions are only considered for the new line rail options, no construction emissions are assumed for domestic air".

The "High Speed Rail Command paper" published in March 2010 estimated that the carbon impact of the scheme would be between -25.0 to +26.6 MtCO₂ over a 60-year period and noted that the figures would be very sensitive to the assumptions relating to load factor, the modal shift achieved away from aviation and the carbon intensity of electricity generation. Should no reduction in aviation be achieved and if there was no change to carbon intensity of electricity generation then the scheme would increase emissions by 0.44 million tonnes per year.

The Eddington Report states "Given that domestic aviation accounts for 1.2 per cent of the UK’s carbon emissions, it is unlikely that building a high-cost, energy-intensive, very high-speed train network is going to be a sensible way to reduce UK emissions". A particular environmental concern with high-speed rail is its inherently higher energy use and consequent emissions, when compared with conventional rail. Energy use rises approximately with the square of speed; so trains operating at 300 km/h (1.5 times faster than conventional rail's maximum speed of 200 km/h /125 mph) will have over twice the emissions.

In 2008, Rail minister Tom Harris said that Britain did not need faster trains that would consume more energy but should instead focus on reducing congestion and reliability on the existing network. "The argument that high-speed rail is a green option does not necessarily stand up to close inspection," said Harris, in a letter to Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies. "Increasing the maximum speed from 200km/h to 350km/h leads to a 90% increase in energy consumption. In exchange, it cuts station-to-station journey times by less than 25% and door-to-door journey times by even less."

Protest groups

A number of community-based groups have been formed along the preferred and alternative routes, to challenge the proposals.

To facilitate collaboration between groups, co-ordination of activities, and pooling resources and talent, the HS2 Action Alliance was formed on 7 May 2010. The Alliance's primary aim is to prevent HS2 from happening; secondary aims include evaluating and minimising the impacts of HS2 on individuals, communities and the environment, and communication of facts about HS2, and its compensation scheme.

Rationale

The intention of the HS2 scheme is to relieve congestion on the motorways, rather than replicating an existing route such as the West Coast Main Line, and the selected route was identified as "the single most important and heavily used" strategic national transport corridors in England, for both passenger and freight traffic by road and rail, with the corridor being cited as having twice the size of travel market as London to the North West and six times that of London to Scotland. The DfT cited the significant rail market share (52%) of North East England, "a region well served by efficient and reasonably fast rail services", as showing that the new line could achieve a "modal shift" to rail, from road and air.

In launching the project, the DfT announced that the new High Speed 2 line between London and the West Midlands would follow a different alignment to the existing WCML, because it was considered to be too costly to provide extra capacity by building new rail alongside the existing WCML while the existing track was in use. Furthermore, parts of the existing Victorian-era WCML alignment were not suitable for very high speeds.

The Government stated that the new line would improve rail services from London to "Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow and other destinations in the north of England and Scotland", and an approach route west of London would allow opportunities to "improve surface access by rail to Heathrow Airport." Furthermore, if the new line were connected to the Great Western Main Line (GWML) and Crossrail it would provide links with East and West London, and the Thames Valley.

Despite a recently completed upgrade, and the expected implementation of plans for longer trains and cab signalling, the DfT expected the West Coast Main Line (WCML) - the principal existing railway linking London, the West Midlands, and the North West - to be "overloaded south of Rugby by about 2025". This meant the DfT was predicting strong growth, since its report showed the WCML Rugby - Euston section as operating at only 61% and 80% of capacity in the 2008/2009 morning peak with Rugby - Birmingham being in the 41-60% band. The Great Western Chiltern route between Birmingham and London was also shown as being used as 41 to 60% of capacity, with the Leamington - Aynho section being in the 'below 41%' category. The same document's forecast for 2024-2025 was for continued unused capacity on the Great Western Chiltern route.

Accurately forecasting transport demand to 2026 presents sizeable problems, with predictions over much shorter periods proving disastrously incorrect. For example, optimistic projections for the East Coast Main Line led National Express to default on its 2007-2015 East Coast franchise in 2009, and British Rail, SNCF, London and Continental Railways, and Booz Allen Hamilton overestimated demand for high speed rail between London, Paris, and Brussels. A large study of transport projects found that in nine out of ten rail schemes, passenger forecasts were overestimated, with the mean overestimation being 106%.

The DfT asserted that no further WCML significant capacity enhancements were possible without "major disruption to passengers and freight services". It was proposed that released capacity on the existing WCML due to construction of HS2 would then be used to enhance services for the Northampton, Milton Keynes and South Midlands area, identified as the "largest growth area in the UK" with a population of 1.6-million people.

Arup Heathrow Hub route

The Arup solution involves a "Heathrow Hub" at Iver. The report, Heathrow Hub Arup Submission to HS2, states that a 200-acre (0.81 km) site north-east of the intersection of the M25 and M4 could house a railway station of 12 or more platforms, as well as a coach and bus station and an airport terminal. The high-speed Line would then follow a different route to Birmingham.

Conservative - Liberal Democrat coalition government

The new Conservative - Liberal Democrat coalition government, formed in May 2010, is expected to review the existing plans for HS2 as detailed above. The Conservative Party, in the past, has backed the idea of a high-speed terminus at London St Pancras with a direct link to Heathrow Airport and has a stated policy to connect London, Manchester, Leeds and Birmingham with Heathrow by high-speed rail with construction starting in 2015. This has been made increasingly likely by the scrapping of the proposed third Heathrow runway as one of the first acts of the incoming government. How the Liberal Democrats' commitment to reopening disused rail lines as well as constructing a new high-speed rail, as outlined in their 2010 election manifesto, will affect any eventual government decision, is yet to be clarified.

The new Secretary of State for Transport, Philip Hammond, has asked Lord Mawhinney to conduct an urgent review of the proposed route. The coalition government wishes the high-speed line to be routed via Heathrow Airport, an idea rejected in the most recent proposal published by HS2L.

Lord Mawhinney, a former Conservative Transport Secretary, has concluded that High Speed 2 (HS2) should not go to Heathrow Airport unless it goes further than Birmingham and also that Heathrow should be served, via a loop, only when the line reaches the northern regions of England. He states: "Once HS2 reaches Manchester and Leeds, then a direct high-speed link to Heathrow becomes viable - but not before". Along with this, Lord Mawhinney said that the Heathrow station should be directly beneath Heathrow Central station (not at Iver, see Heathrow Hub) and that the London terminus for HS2 should at Old Oak Common and not at London Euston. These statements go against the Conservatives' initial idea that Old Oak Common should not even be built. This is because of tunnelling cost along with fast turnaround times and good connections at Old Oak Common. Also Lord Mawhinney says: "Does it make sense to have HS2 terminate at Euston and High Speed 1 separately at St Pancras, with no connection between the two?". He also implies that a direct link from Edinburgh to Paris is not an idea dead in the water. The report also stated that routeing the line only via Heathrow would add seven minutes to the journey time.

See also

• High Speed 1
• High Speed Rail in the UK
• Channel Tunnel
• Rail transport in the United Kingdom
• Transport in London
• UK Ultraspeed

Notes

1. DfT (2010a), page 127
2. Atkins(2009)
3. DfT (2009a) page 4 paragraph 5
4. ^ DfT (2009a), page 24 paragraph 62
5. DfT (2009a), page 6 paragraph 7
6. DfT (2009a), page 24 paragraph 63
7. ^ DfT (2010a), page 67 F4.2
8. DfT (2009a), page 16 paragraph 37
9. DfT (2010a), page 9
10. DfT (2009a), pages 78 paragraph 4.47
11. DfT (2010a), page 107
12. DfT(2010a), page 118.
13. DfT(2010a), page 112
14. Department for Transport (2010a), page 115
15. DfT(2010a), page 127
16. DfT(2010a), page 127
17. DfT(2010a), page 129
18. DfT(2010a), page 130
19. DfT(2010a), page 129
20. DfT(2010a), page 129
21. HS2(2010a), para 4.1.23
22. DfT (2009a), page 5 paragraph 8
23. DfT (2009a), page 24 paragraph 61.
24. DfT (2009a), page 23 paragraph 56.
25. ^ DfT (2009a), page 6 paragraph 9.
26. DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 37.
27. DfT (2009a), page 17 paragraph 40.
28. DfT (2009a), page 24 paragraph 65.
29. HS2(2010a), Chapter 5.2
30. HS2(2010a), p213
31. HS2(2010a), p214
32. HS2(2010a), p213
33. DfT(2010a), page 140
34. DfT(2010a), page 138-9
35. High Speed 2(2010), page 118
36. Booz Allen Hamilton (2007)
37. Booz Allen Hamilton (2007), p.6
38. Booz Allen Hamilton (2007), p.13
39. DfT(2010a), page 53
40. DfT (2009a), pages 12-16 paragraphs 32-37
41. DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 31
42. DfT (2009a), page 18 paragraph 48
43. DfT (2009a), page 18 paragraph 47
44. ^ DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 36
45. DfT (2009a), page 5 paragraph 4
46. DfT (2009a), page 17 paragraph 41
47. DfT (2009a), page 18 paragraph 43
48. DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 43
49. DfT (2009a), page 5 paragraph 6
50. DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 38

References

Documents referenced from 'Notes' section

• Booz Allen Hamilton (2007). "Estimated Carbon Impact of a New North South Line" (PDF). Department for Transport.
• Atkins (2009). "High Speed Line Study: Summary Report" (PDF). Department for Transport. Retrieved 2010-03-13.
• DfT(2009a): Department for Transport (2009). Britain’s Transport Infrastructure High Speed Two (pdf). Department for Transport. ISBN 9781906581800. Retrieved 2010-03-13.
• DfT(2010a): Department for Transport (11 March 2010). High Speed Rail - Command Paper (pdf). The Stationery Office. ISBN 9780101782722. Retrieved 2010-03-13. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |publisherlink= ignored (help)
• HS2(2010a): High Speed Two Ltd (11 March 2010). "High Speed Rail London to the West Midlands and Beyond: A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited". Department for Transport. Retrieved 2010-03-16.

Other references for article

1. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5icXEWibZfMQVoZVs8k_W35SJCRYA?docId=B20528841288783101A00002
2. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8434653.stm
3. "The Coalition: our programme for government", Cabinet Office, May 2010.
4. "The case for new lines" (PDF). Meeting the capacity challenge. Network Rail New Lines.
5. "High-speed rail plans to be submitted to government". BBC News Online. 27 December 2009. Retrieved 2009-12-28.
6. "High-speed rail plans announced by government". BBC News Online. 11 March 2010. Retrieved 2010-03-11.
7. "High Speed Rail". Department for Transport. Retrieved 2010-03-12.
8. "Proposed high speed rail network North of Birmingham confirmed" (Press release). Department for Transport. 4 October 2010. Retrieved 7 October 2010.
9. Savage, Michael (2 February 2010). "Adonis in all-party talks on high-speed rail link". The Independent. London. Retrieved 2010-01-04.
10. Pank, Philip (30 December 2009). "Britain in line for Europe's fastest railway". The Times. London. Retrieved 2009-12-31.
11. Arup. "Route Engineering Study Final Report: A Report for HS2, chapter 9" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-17.
12. "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 3 p134" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-17.
13. "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 3 p. 147" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-17.
14. "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 6 p. 226" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-17.
15. "Virgin Trains timetable" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-04-09.
16. ^ Harris, Nigel (28 July 2010). "'No business case' to divert HS2 via Heathrow, says Mawhinney'". RAIL. No. 649. Peterborough. pp. 6–7.
17. "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 3 p117" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-12.
18. "Birmingham City University wants £30m refund after high speed rail hits campus plan". 16-03-2010. Retrieved 2010-03-17. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
19. ^ "New 'parkway' station could be built in East Midlands". Nottingham Evening Post. 3 December 2009. Retrieved 2010-01-04.
20. "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 2 p41" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-17.
21. ^ http://www.networkrail.co.uk/documents/About%20us/New%20Lines%20Programme/5886_NewLineStudy_synopsis.pdf
22. Wright, Robert (16 January 2009). "High-speed line wins go-ahead". Financial Times. London. Retrieved 2009-01-20.
23. "Develop High Speed Rail Link to London". The Scottish Government.
24. Banbury Guardian Newspaper-as of the September 30th editon
25. The Bucks Herald Newspaper (as of the October 6th edition)
26. "Birmingham City University wants £30m refund after high speed rail hits campus plan". 16-03-2010. Retrieved 2010-03-17. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
27. "DfT/HS2 Ltd HS2 Exceptional Hardship Scheme consultation document" (PDF).
28. "Alison Munro spoke at a public meeting hosted by Civic Voice in Aylesbury on 24 June".
29. "Philip Hammond – Secretary of State for Transport response to questions regarding property blight". Hansard. 28 Jun 2010. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |column= ignored (help)
30. "HS2 Action Alliance's Alternative Compensation Solution and final response to EHS".
31. "8 Dec 2009: Column 31WH—continued". Hansard. Retrieved 2010-01-04.
32. http://www.chilternsaonb.org/hs2/
33. "West Midlands Map 4" (PDF). High Speed 2. Retrieved 2010-04-15.
34. "Park Hall". Retrieved 2010-03-18.
35. http://www.hs2actionalliance.org/yourlocalgroup.php
36. HS2 action groups (and other HS2 active organisations)HS2 Action Alliance website Accessed 18 May 2010
37. HS2 Action Alliance Accessed 18 May 2010.
38. HS2 Action Alliance Accessed 18 May 2010.
39. ^ "Figure 5: Loading levels in the 3-hour morning peak period, 2008/09" (PDF): 14. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
40. "Figure 6: Loading levels in the 3-hour morning peak period, 2024/25" (PDF): 15. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
41. Alistair Osborne (2009-07-04). "National Express's decision to quit East Coast franchise is a lose-lose for nearly everyone". Daily Telegraph.
42. "East Coast rail to be state-run". BBC. 2009-07-01.
43. "Select Committee on Public Accounts Thirty-Eighth Report". www.parliament.gov.uk.
44. Bent Flyvbjerg, Mette K. Skamris Holm, and Søren L. Buhl. "How (In)accurate Are Demand Forecasts in Public Works Projects?" (PDF). Journal of the American Planning Association.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
45. "Tories would scrap Heathrow plan", BBC News Online, London, 29 September 2008.
46. "Where we Stand: Transport", Conservative Party website.
47. "Heathrow runway plans scrapped by new government", BBC News Online, London, 12 May 2010.
48. Lib Dem Website - Transport Retrieved 19 May 2010.
49. "Ministers order re-think of high-speed rail route", TransportXtra.com, London, 28 May 2010.

External links

• High Speed 2 Ltd
• High Speed Rail London to the West Midlands and Beyond: A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited 11 March 2010
• Umapper map of proposed route with KML description
• The Case for High Speed Rail:- A review of recent evidence Published by the RAC Foundation, October 2009
• High speed rail: In your back yard? BBC News article with links to detailed scheme maps for the route
• http://www.stophs2.org Stop HS2, umbrella group for action groups opposing HS2
• http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/highspeedrail/hs2ltd/route/ (goverment info)
• http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/hs2 (Warwickshire council's info)
• http://www.chilternsaonb.org/hs2/ (A protest group)

• High-speed railway lines in the United Kingdom
• Construction projects in the United Kingdom
• Proposed railway lines in England
• Proposed transport projects in London