Hs2: 20 Reasons Why It Can Take 20 Years To Build A Railway

[Tired of Waiting]

"HS2: 20 reasons why it can take 20 years to build a railway"

LINK

[R K]

Just don't take it to London would be my answer. Start at the other ends.

Cheek!

Load of people in Osborne's back yard didn't look to happy with him on telly last night. I'd say they were mostly natural 'Tory' voters too. Rabid boomer farming community types about to have a 250mph trainset run past their rural idyll window.

He'd find it a lot easier starting at the Euston end

Edited January 29, 2013 by R K

[geezer466]

I liked this bit....

HS2 costs £32bn. With the £15bn Crossrail not due to finish until 2018, the government is keen to spread the cost of the new North-South railway over a longer period.

Once Crossrail is finished, the £2bn a year that is being put into it will shift to HS2, says David Meechan, a spokesman for HS2. In other words, a longer timescale allows more of the financial burden to be passed on to the next generation.

As Mrs Brown would say.. They never miss a feckin trick do they......

[gadget]

Is that bit about Camden true? I would have thought there would be more publicity about that bit.

Well i think the heading "Demolishing Camden" is a bit of an exaggeration.

A couple of hundred homes destroyed (with promises to replace them nearby) and enormous redevelopment of the area.

Of course every local councillor is against it.

[deflation]

All these Nimbys p**s me off. They will get compensated, in fact for some it'll be a godsend if they are stuck in an old run-down house they can;t sell.

There may not be a business case for it, but just 'cos 'locals' don't want it isn't enough. No railways or motorways would ever have been built in this country if people directly affected had been able to stop them. Maybe that would be a good thing?

[crashmonitor]

I read an article today that said a retired lady had an unsellable house because it was within 500 yards of the planned HS2 line. Apparently the value had plummeted from 285K to zero. This all seems a bit of an exaggeration. indeed I think it is far preferable to have a main line at the bottom of your garden than a neighbour's garden. indeed i knew someone who had an embankment at the bottom of their garden, it was a million pound house in Sutton Coldfield and it certainly didn't detract from the property.

In my area, Broxtowe, there is a planned station at Toton. I think the majority of locals are in favour. The neighbouring town is Stapleford (Stabbo) and as you can guess anything is an improvement. the local tory MP Anna Soubry is very much in favour too. Not so the Tory nimby MPs in rural Leicestershire a few miles to the South.

Edited January 29, 2013 by crashmonitor

[gadget]

I read an article today that said a retired lady had an unsellable house because it was within 500 yards of the planned HS2 line. Apparently the value had plummeted from 285K to zero. This all seems a bit of an exaggeration.

That's one property i'd buy as a BTL. The return would be infinity!

[@contradevian]

Well i think the heading "Demolishing Camden" is a bit of an exaggeration.

A couple of hundred homes destroyed (with promises to replace them nearby) and enormous redevelopment of the area.

Of course every local councillor is against it.

Camden was pretty badly devastated during the first railway boom to build the deep cuttings, so I doubt anyone would notice.

HS2 should just miss London altogether IMO

Edited January 29, 2013 by Secure Tenant

[Ash4781]

"HS2: 20 reasons why it can take 20 years to build a railway"

LINK

Lets hope no new major technology comes out in the next 20years that makes HS2 obsolete.

[winkie]

Lets hope no new major technology comes out in the next 20years that makes HS2 obsolete.

....by the time they have spent time and money arguing about it, you could well be right.......meanwhile the rest of the world has moved on.

[@contradevian]

I read an article today that said a retired lady had an unsellable house because it was within 500 yards of the planned HS2 line. Apparently the value had plummeted from 285K to zero. This all seems a bit of an exaggeration. indeed I think it is far preferable to have a main line at the bottom of your garden than a neighbour's garden. indeed i knew someone who had an embankment at the bottom of their garden, it was a million pound house in Sutton Coldfield and it certainly didn't detract from the property.

As your train slowly pulls into St Pancras wonder at the valueless London properties backing onto the railway line.

Only for country bumpkin nimby's would a feckin rail line be a problem.

The Penistone Line runs past my flat, and OK its in a deep cutting but I don't know how I cope. Maybe I can get compensation.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Secure Tenant

[Tired of Waiting]

All these Nimbys p**s me off. They will get compensated, in fact for some it'll be a godsend if they are stuck in an old run-down house they can;t sell.

There may not be a business case for it, but just 'cos 'locals' don't want it isn't enough. No railways or motorways would ever have been built in this country if people directly affected had been able to stop them. Maybe that would be a good thing?

+ 1

Lets hope no new major technology comes out in the next 20years that makes HS2 obsolete.

Quite probable.

Though that would be a good thing.

[sossij]

Lets hope no new major technology comes out in the next 20years that makes HS2 obsolete.

Yup - remote robotic avatars c/w telepresence software.

You log in to your avatar, attend meetings, 'work' any where in the world while your meatware lives somewhere more comfy. Commuting at the speed of light.

[interestrateripoff]

I have no idea how it can take this long, unless they don't intend to ever complete it.

Brunel must be rolling in his grave.

[Wayo]

I read an article today that said a retired lady had an unsellable house because it was within 500 yards of the planned HS2 line. Apparently the value had plummeted from 285K to zero. This all seems a bit of an exaggeration. indeed I think it is far preferable to have a main line at the bottom of your garden than a neighbour's garden. indeed i knew someone who had an embankment at the bottom of their garden, it was a million pound house in Sutton Coldfield and it certainly didn't detract from the property.

In my area, Broxtowe, there is a planned station at Toton. I think the majority of locals are in favour. The neighbouring town is Stapleford (Stabbo) and as you can guess anything is an improvement. the local tory MP Anna Soubry is very much in favour too. Not so the Tory nimby MPs in rural Leicestershire a few miles to the South.

Might be tricky to get a mortgage for a start. One stroke of the surveyors pencil and it would be razed. Best hope nobody 'important' lives within 1000 yards of the other side of it.

[Wayo]

Lets hope no new major technology comes out in the next 20years that makes HS2 obsolete.

Like the telephone, the internet, smartphones, tablets, video conferencing or laptop computers?

The whole business case for it hinges on the value of travelling time saved by business users. Many of them find reasons to travel just to be away from the OH or the office or both. They will just have to travel further to make a day of it.

[the gardener]

Yup - remote robotic avatars c/w telepresence software.

You log in to your avatar, attend meetings, 'work' any where in the world while your meatware lives somewhere more comfy. Commuting at the speed of light.

+1

[Eddie_George]

There's a good argument in The Times about how it would make more sense (and cost much less) to give everyone superfast broadband than a new trainline

My link

South Korea boomed on the back of broadband. HS2 will be out-of-date before it’s built.

‘We have a 19th-century network straining to support a 21st-century economy, with all the inherent limitations that brings.” So says the Department for Transport’s consultation document on High Speed 2, published yesterday.

Disappointingly “network” is used very much in its Victorian sense — miles of steel and metal joined together to create a railway system. This is not the best way to spend £33 billion.

[stormymonday_2011]

Like the telephone, the internet, smartphones, tablets, video conferencing or laptop computers?

The whole business case for it hinges on the value of travelling time saved by business users. Many of them find reasons to travel just to be away from the OH or the office or both. They will just have to travel further to make a day of it.

This is pretty much my view. Even in business terms the sole point of face to face meetings now is the opportunity they give for informal social interaction outside of the meeting room. That is facilitated if the travelling parties gets to stay away for the night an opportunity which may well get negated by HS2. If the point is just to plough through some tedious agenda or discuss a project plan then it can be done just as easily on a tele conference.

Meanwhile in the UK if you live in some parts of rural southern Surrey only 30 odd miles from London you will struggle to get Broadband at speeds much faster than dial up and it is quite possible that your mobile phone reception will be poorer than experienced in some African villages. Can not help thinking this money would be better spent on the creaky IT and telecoms infrastructure of the UK with rail investment going to improve conventional rail lines.

Edited January 30, 2013 by stormymonday_2011

[thecrashingisles]

Lets hope no new major technology comes out in the next 20years that makes HS2 obsolete.

At least we can be sure it won't come out of Britain so that's reassuring.

[Bob8]

London often seems to be forgotten when in comes to major infatstructure investments and large one-off injections of cash, so it is nice that it has been remembered for once.

[winkie]

There's a good argument in The Times about how it would make more sense (and cost much less) to give everyone superfast broadband than a new trainline

This is happening anyway........both are very important they should run alongside each other.

[southmartin]

Would it not be better to upgrade the entire network (or at least the overcrowded lines) so they can take those nifty double-decker carriages - thus doubling capacity at a stroke...

Granted they'd be a lot of tunnel upgrades, and bridge changes too (or at least dig the line deeper so the track goes lower rather than try to raise the bridge)... am pretty sure this would cost less than HS2 and benefit almost everyone... and as the lines are already there, they'd be no planning objections

[Tired of Waiting]

Yup - remote robotic avatars c/w telepresence software.

You log in to your avatar, attend meetings, 'work' any where in the world while your meatware lives somewhere more comfy. Commuting at the speed of light.

Of course! You are absolutely right. I was thinking within a much more "20th century" frame of mind, thinking that air transport would get cheaper and cleaner, perhaps larger helicopters, kind of "air buses", reducing the need for (and hassle of) airports, or perhaps even personal air transport - the long awaited "flying cars", but you beat me, and by a long margin! Thanks! You are right! We already have Skype, of course we'll have virtual reality by then.

I have no idea how it can take this long, unless they don't intend to ever complete it.

Brunel must be rolling in his grave.

+ 1

It will be too late by then.

Edited January 30, 2013 by Tired of Waiting

[Bloo Loo]

Like the telephone, the internet, smartphones, tablets, video conferencing or laptop computers?

The whole business case for it hinges on the value of travelling time saved by business users. Many of them find reasons to travel just to be away from the OH or the office or both. They will just have to travel further to make a day of it.

Yep. they save all this time by being more efficient, so they can have more time for team building like laserquest and paintballing.

Of course, behaving as a team in the first place would be good.