Posted 15th October 2014 | 9 Comments
Stoke on Trent mounts bid to be on HS2 route
A BUSINESS case prepared by the city of Stoke on Trent has been presented to the Government today, which urges the inclusion of Stoke and north Staffordshire on the route of HS2.
The document has been produced by various specialists including economic consultants Volterra, who sit on HS2 Ltd’s Economics Advisory Committee.
Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire Local Enterprise Partnership chair David Frost said that the business case 'makes solid financial sense for UK plc'.
He continued: “We have to get maximum value from any infrastructure investment and something this big is a once in a lifetime opportunity for the UK economy. The Stoke Route connects up cities and delivers the maximum economic impact. The city has the development ready brownfield capacity to maximise the benefits of HS2 and avoids the costs of carving up the countryside.
“Routing HS2 via Stoke-on-Trent delivers equivalent or faster journey times than the alternatives. It connects up more people earlier. It delivers more impact for less cost for the tax payer. Stoke-on-Trent provides the best option for HS2.”
Volterra chief executive Bridget Rosewell said the Government and HS2 Ltd could not ignore their findings, which conclude that a proposed hub at Crewe is not the best solution.
She explained: “The economic impact of HS2 on Stoke-on-Trent will be significantly larger than it would be on Crewe. The city region is almost half a million people and a city that both needs and wants to change. HS2 will add extra energy to the drive to create a new high density commercial heart in the city.
“The high speed rail market is city centre to city centre and if HS2 is to increase economic growth in the north it should not skirt around the only city between Birmingham and Manchester. That would be a wasted opportunity. Crewe simply could not cope with this level of growth."
Staffordshire Chambers of Commerce president Jonathan Mitchell said this was an issue of 'national importance'.
He said: “Business is expecting Government to make a decision based on sound economic principles. This is not just about railway engineering; it’s about connecting cities, growing economies and creating jobs. The Stoke Route meets all these requirements – boosting the North Staffordshire economy and delivering full HS2 services to more cities - earlier, for less cost and with minimal disruption.
City Leader Councillor Mohammed Pervez added: “The Stoke Route would generate about £200 million extra growth for the regional economy, while Crewe would not lose out. In contrast the emerging Crewe scheme would generate much smaller gains and isolate the City economy. It could even have a net negative impact on the regional economy.
“The Stoke Route is better for the economy, generating more high impact city growth, faster, linking millions more people to HS2 services seven years early. That’s got to be good for business. It’s greener too because it delivers the station, the railway and the economic growth on existing brownfield land.
“While Crewe proposes a parkway station, Stoke-on-Trent’s solution would be in the heart of an urban conurbation of 470,000 people – around seven times the size of Crewe. It would be fully integrated into the city’s new business district.
“There is cross party consensus that HS2 is now all about cities – about better connecting the regional powerhouses and engines of economic growth. As the only major city between Birmingham and Manchester, the Stoke Route delivers this ambition.”
Reader Comments:
Views expressed in submitted comments are that of the author, and not necessarily shared by Railnews.
A, Waite, Beverly
Well done Stoke-on-Trent for using the power of local government to challenge some of the flaws in the current plans for HS2.
Large councils in Southern England should also follow suit. Running HS2 from Old Oak Common to Clapham Junction instead of the Euston cul-de-sac would avoid the disruption and eye watering expense of redeveloping Euston and allow HS2 trains to run south of the Thames to Gatwick Airport, East Croydon, Brighton, Southampton and points elsewhere on the South Coast, alleviating some of the chronic congestion at both London Victoria and London Waterloo stations.
Chris Neville-Smith, Durham, England
Before everyone gets too carried away with the Stoke option, there is one important reason to remember for the current Crewe route: HS2 isn't just about Manchester. There's also journeys to Liverpool and Scotland. The Stoke scheme sort-of takes this into account, but not as well.
However, if the Stoke scheme doesn't go ahead, I hope the the government still has a serious think about HS2 serving Stoke. There's nothing to stop HS2 services leaving the line at the Lichfield branch and continue to Stafford and Stoke, like they're planned to do for phase 1. The only limitation is that there's only so many destinations that can be served by 18tph, but I think the DfT needs to try harder to make this work. More dividing trains?
Garry Oldham, Locks Heath
I've had a quick look at the report and although it keeps on mentioning the times to Manchester are the same, it says 1:20 (I don't know where they got this from) but this should be 1:08 at completion. It seems to be the same for most other stations in that the stoke team are adding 12 minutes to all the journeys further North than Stoke.
Part of this may be because they aren't planning infrastructure to the same grade, e.g they are only going for 230kph tunnels instead of 400kph which will significantly decrease the cost which seems to be one of their major advantages (the only other one being it calls at Stoke).
SO although I can see this is a good idea for Stoke itself it seems to be a poor substitute for everywhere else.
James, London
So if there's space to build an extra pair of tracks alongside the existing Stoke branch of the WCML: why not build them, quadruple the tracks through the Trent Valley, and if appropriate join HS2 at the Jn outside Birmingham. We can't have too many junctions on HS, else it'll be the slightly fast HS2.
Graham Nalty, Derby
Stoke is a much better choice for a station on HS2 than Crewe. It has the population to benefit from high speed rail and to create far more new jobs. If HS2 Ltd. were to favour Crewe after reading this then their credibility as having expertise on rail matters is highly diminished. The report is the first to show with figures that parkway stations deliver much less benefit than city centre stations and the parkway stations at Meadowhall and East Midlands should immediately be abandoned in favour of HS2 trains running into the centres of Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield. A brilliant report by Stoke City Council which is a real game changer for HS2.
Graham Nalty, Derby
Stoke is a much better choice for a station on HS2 than Crewe. It has the population to benefit from high speed rail and to create far more new jobs. If HS2 Ltd. were to favour Crewe after reading this then their credibility as having expertise on rail matters is highly diminished. The report is the first to show with figures that parkway stations deliver much less benefit than city centre stations and the parkway stations at Meadowhall and East Midlands should immediately be abandoned in favour of HS2 trains running into the centres of Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield. A brilliant report by Stoke City Council which is a real game changer for HS2.
Pete B, Manchester
A valiant effort and historically I've always been impressed with Volterra's work. So let's see what HS2 to Stoke delivers...no high capacity, fast, continental gauge link to the fastest growing city region outside London. No link to that city's international airport...the biggest and most important outside London. No high-capacity, fast, continental gauge link between Birmingham and Manchester. No easy onward connection to places further west or north...Liverpool, Chester, North Wales, Warrington, Wigan or Preston. Stoke 250 / 470,000 versus Manchester 500,000+ (underbounded local authority), Combined Authority 2.7 million, wider area of economic impact 5 million+. Not exactly going to be a challenging decision for Sir David and George Osborne is it? Let's hope that £600,000 of local taxpayers investment delivers some dividend in enhanced links, electrification and perhaps, an LRT system. Face it you are too far east for what HS2 is intended to deliver!
MikeB, Liverpool
This is becoming like France, where local authorities clamoured to get on to the LGV network when it was first proposed. However, most places lost out, simply because it was not practical to build new high speed lines through every major town and city. The French government and SNCF were never going to amend their proposed route plans every time another Council asked for a particular high speed line to serve their town instead of their neighbour's. Stoke-on-Trent may indeed submit an excellent report showing why HS2 must run through their city, instead of Crewe, but if plans have to change every time another council says the line should be diverted to include their town, the whole scheme could end up just becoming a new meandering main line.
Chris Neville-Smith, Durham, England
Had a quick look at the report so far. It now accepts a dedicated line is needed all the way to Manchester, but argues that there's space to build an extra pair of tracks alongside the existing Stoke branch of the WCML.
That seems like a reasonable proposal. My only misgiving is that I suspect it's not as easy as Stoke Council thinks, because one would have thought such as obvious option would have got more serious consideration if it was.