Find by date
Other ways to search
Also look for
Never miss anything again. Sign up for our RSS news feeds and Newsletters.
The railway with no station
It’s been in the pipeline for years. Now finally the government has announced the route it thinks the new high speed railway between London and Birmingham, and eventually further north, should take.
It’s inevitable that this route will run through the Chilterns. The Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty guards London from the north-west and so as a result all existing London-Birmingham routes also run through them.
In principle I am in favour of high speed rail, and I think this project is a fantastic scheme. I’m not going to introduce those terms ‘environmentally friendly’ or ‘carbon emissions’ because they’re not the main reasons I support this railway. The biggest reasons are convenience and capacity. Network Rail’s estimates suggest that the West Coast main line will be full to capacity by 2025, and the Chiltern main line’s upgrades will help relieve some congestion but in the long-term, unless that route is quadrupled, little relief will occur in the future.
As I said almost any route will have to go through the Chilterns. The finalised route proposed today would mean new track from London Euston through west London to interchange with Crossrail, then up the old Great Western Railway’s lines to West Ruislip, on what is now the Chiltern Main Line. From there the new line would enter Buckinghamshire on a 2.5 mile long viaduct over the Grand Union Canal and River Colne. Then a tunnel would take the route to Amersham where the new railway would run alongside the old Metropolitan Railway north-west. After by-passing Aylesbury, the route would make use of the old Great Central main line, which until 1966 provided connections from Aylesbury to Manchester and Sheffield. Near Brackley, the line would enter Northamptonshire.
The only “new” alignments needed in Bucks would be the viaduct connecting the two main lines of south-mid Buckinghamshire, and the bypass of Aylesbury. Other sections in the county would run alongside existing railway tracks.
What about stations? The plan includes only very few stations: two in London and the rest in Midlands and the north. None will be provided in Buckinghamshire. And that’s something that really bugs me. The people of Kent were appeased with high speed stations near Dartford and in Ashford. So why not us? Looking at the map above I was thinking Aylesbury would be a good location for a high speed station. It’s roughly a third of the way along the route and could become a hub for connecting bus and rail services.
Then what about funding and construction? Sadly 2017 is the earliest any work could start. Crossrail is the government’s main priority at the moment, and that’s costing £16 billion. But that project would just improve London and a few outlying towns. As it is the new Crossrail line would call at two Buckinghamshire stations, but only to provide services to central London and Essex. It is my view that any high speed route should take priority and be built before Crossrail, as HS2 is a national project and Crossrail is a London one.
So yes, I am in support of this high speed railway. I too love the countryside and wish it to be preserved as far as is practical, but there has to be exceptions, and for the sake of two running tracks I feel that exception is justified, as long as a station is provided for the residents of Buckinghamshire, and all possible effort is taken to minimise impact on the AONB, as was done in Kent for HS1.
This is a subject of polarising debate, and I welcome your comments.
XI © MMX
-
Jobs
Search for Jobs
Search Now » -
Dating
Find the right person for you
Search Now »
-
Homes
Search for Homes
Search Now »
-
Cars
Search for Cars
Search Now »
Comments (12)
11/03/10
demoness says...
The area will not benefit.
The only people that will benefit are the greedy fat cats who thought it up.
How the hell you can even try and justify this amazes me Ollie.
Let me tell you something - this planet does NOT belong to us.
We share it with a lot of other creatures .
So to you it is fine to rip up trees, destroy habitats, kill animals birds and insects all to knock a few miles off a journey time.
I am sickened by this - truly sickened.
11/03/10
OllieNewbury says...
-
I cannot stand people like David Shakespeare, the leader of BCC who said in the news story on this topic that the line should go through Hertfordshire. That is the true definition of a NIMBY: "bugger off and build it elsewhere 'cos I don't care about anywhere else".
-
No station, no support from me.
11/03/10
Melanie1 says...
.
However, I agree with Demoness regarding the loss of habitat for animals, the impact on this AONB and the fact that for any Bucks resident to be able to use this high speed link to Birmingham and beyond we would have to travel into London but I can see that a high speed link could be necessary.
.
I admit that I haven't spent hours studying the details but I do have one question which is; why can't they use more of the existing infrastructure? Can they not upgrade it? Can it not be used in conjunction with the current service? If it could then that would have a positive impact on the lives of thousands of commuters every day by cutting their journey time into London and it may garner more support.
11/03/10
Melanie1 says...
11/03/10
OllieNewbury says...
n line to Aylesbury is unsuitable for high speed trains, as it contains a lot of bends and some quite steep inclines. That is why the Great Central Railway, who ran over the line a hundred years ago built a new line to London: the Chiltern Main Line through High Wycombe. To upgrade the line through Amersham would probably cause more disruption that building a new one.
-
The line through High Wycombe is already fairly busy, though if an extra set of tracks were constructed, maybe it would work (with tunnelling under Wycombe).
-
Of course there are pro's and con's for every route, and I'm not sure what they all are.
11/03/10
OllieNewbury says...
13/03/10
Eachban says...
.
The first is, this is almost certainly not the route it will take, assuming it ever goes ahead at all.
.
If it does go ahead, it will be a positive for the vast majority. On the other hand, maybe we should just can the whole idea because some bloke doesn't want a railway nearby.
.
Sheesh, the Victorians never let all this cobblers hold them back - and we've never advanced as a nation as much since then either. SO where do you want to be - 21st Century Britain, or 3rd World Britain (which is perilously close, in case you didn't know)?
14/03/10
mikesmith says...
You will in fact find the same problem with curves and inclines with Princes Risborough to London. Line speed is restricted to 50mph through Wycombe town centre because of the track layout, and just north of Saunderton (north bound) is a sharp summit.
And as an aside, if you think building this sort of infrastructure through the middle of a large town like Wycombe would be a reasonable idea, then maybe you should think twice about considering a career in transport planning.
Down with HS2.
15/03/10
hondo says...
Answers on a postcard, if anyone who can write would want to go to Birmingham.
16/03/10
OllieNewbury says...
16/03/10
mikesmith says...
ondon, never through Wycombe (this was only ever an 'alternative route', and it was shared with Great Western Railway). Until 1992 line speeds through Wycombe railway station were restricted to 40mph because of the curves in the tracks, meaning, no, it is not suitable for high speeds.
16/03/10
OllieNewbury says...