By: John Porter

John Porter — Thu, 10 Aug 2023 13:24:48 +0000

DfT & politicians aims are unclear. Do they want HS2 to be as significant as the first motorways, or as cheap as possible?
They probably want to back both options within the available cash flow. That implies a phased solution eventually costing more and not contributing as much to net zero.
Presumably William Barter sees 7 platforms quickly at HS2 Euston PLUS passive provision for more, as one acceptable way forward. Its second stage would inevitably need to follow a different alignment from Old Oak, which opens up new opportunities if passive provision for future enhancements is made in the pile design for the Euston “over station” developments.
Those future enhancements could allow for a combined option of quarter hourly WCML Milton Keynes services & 2 to 6 HS2 services, following a common alignment under Regents Park to low level extra platforms at Euston.
If designed for different attractors beyond Euston in the 2060/70s, Euston High Level could be smaller, Underground station congestion less and levelling up better. For example Telford, Wolverhampton, Coventry and Milton Keynes which gain little from HS2 deserve direct quarter hourly WCML services to Crossrail 1 at Farringdon. 2070 extensions to Gabriel’s Wharf (with access to Waterloo East, Southwark and Temple Tube Stations) and eventually Portsmouth & Basingstoke, HS1 and/or Stansted would also be feasible mimicking the original Crossrail 2’s aim.

Comments on: HS2 | Euston with only 7 platforms is not fit for the future network, experts say

By: John Porter