Campaign grows to switch the building of HS2 station to Sheffield city

[Baron99 804]

So the entire project has been given the go ahead.  Currently, £102 billion will have to be borrowed so that I can get to London, 40 minutes earlier, sometime around the best estimate of 2040 - if I live that long & suddenly have a longing to take regular trips to the capital. 

 

£102 billion, up from £56 billion from 2015, so God knows what the final cost will be?  Our bit, if it does go ahead, is not going to start being constructed until 2030.

 

It's not going to help any current northern commuters with their daily struggle.  This is where the money should be spent, updating the lines & infrastructure of the major northern cities to improve the journey & connectivity.  That will generate the economic prosperity of the North & retain & bring the talent & expertise to the North. 

Edited February 11, 2020 by Baron99

[craigmason 10]

From chesterfield borough council

https://www.chesterfield.co.uk/2020/02/hs2-to-bring-economic-benefits-to-chesterfield/

[Annie Bynnol 613]

 

24 minutes ago, geared said:

Sheffield council screwed this one up, demanding a city centre station instead of the South Yorks interchange at Meadowhall.

The spur was the cheaper option, and with the council demanding it the choice was a total no brainer for HS2.

 

We get what we get and we should be thankful, if you wanted better then send your thoughts to the morons at the council.

You are confusing 'spurs' and wrong in saying that it supported the use of into Sheffield (Midland).

 

Conservative Government announced that there would only be two locations for a HS2 station in Sheffield Meadowhall (best for Sheffield) and on the main route North.

and Victoria/Nunnery(best for the region) on a 'spur' from the main route at Beighton  or a 'loop' from Beighton to the north of Chapeltown.

 

Sheffield (Midland) station had been rejected at a much earlier stage. No route was ever planned to use the station-just crayons.

Sheffield City Council could not have supported the use of Sheffield (Midland) station as it was not a choice and as they saw Victoria/Nunnery option as the best.

 

Without local consultation and for purely economic reasons the Conservative Government chose Meadowhall, the planning was well advanced when without local consultation and for purely economic reasons the Conservative Government changed its mind and moved the route towards Doncaster. A new railway would be needed to connect HS2 and Clay Cross on the MML and then to the totally inadequate Sheffield (Midland) station i.e a 'spur' off the main HS2 route. Or a 'loop' if the route continued north to rejoin the HS2 route.

 

 

 

 

 

[DavidFrance 19]

42 minutes ago, Longcol said:

Central Sheffield to London will take 1hr 37min.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/11/hs2-to-go-ahead-boris-johnson-tells-mps

 

How long would central Sheffield to London take if you had to get out to Meadowhall in the first instance?

 

 

One hour 22 minutes because you wouldn't have to go slow through Chesterfield and Alfreton or go via Leeds which would be at least as quick as going from Sheffield Midland.  Idiotic decision making in the Town Hall robbing the City yet again of the best transport options. They hate cars, now they hate fast trains. Backwater Sheffield. No wonder Channel 4 chose Leeds. 

[tinfoilhat 11]

28 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

So the entire project has been given the go ahead.  Currently, £102 billion will have to be borrowed so that I can get to London, 40 minutes earlier, sometime around the best estimate of 2040 - if I live that long & suddenly have a longing to take regular trips to the capital. 

 

£102 billion, up from £56 billion from 2015, so God knows what the final cost will be?  Our bit, if it does go ahead, is not going to start being constructed until 2030.

 

It's not going to help any current northern commuters with their daily struggle.  This is where the money should be spent, updating the lines & infrastructure of the major northern cities to improve the journey & connectivity.  That will generate the economic prosperity of the North & retain & bring the talent & expertise to the North. 

It's about capacity, not speed.

[tinfoilhat 11]

There's going to be "minimal changes" on the route to Leeds. Any guesses on what that will be ?

[dutch 68]

17 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

There's going to be "minimal changes" on the route to Leeds. Any guesses on what that will be ?

Thanks, no surprise. This HS2 thing sounds just like trumps wall to me.

[Robin-H 11]

1 hour ago, Baron99 said:

So the entire project has been given the go ahead.  Currently, £102 billion will have to be borrowed so that I can get to London, 40 minutes earlier, sometime around the best estimate of 2040 - if I live that long & suddenly have a longing to take regular trips to the capital. 

 

£102 billion, up from £56 billion from 2015, so God knows what the final cost will be?  Our bit, if it does go ahead, is not going to start being constructed until 2030.

 

It's not going to help any current northern commuters with their daily struggle.  This is where the money should be spent, updating the lines & infrastructure of the major northern cities to improve the journey & connectivity.  That will generate the economic prosperity of the North & retain & bring the talent & expertise to the North. 

No it's not. 

 

If adjusted to 2019 prices, the figures set out in the Chairman’s Stocktake are as follows:

Phase One: £40.4bn to £43bn, against a budget equivalent of £30.4bn

Phase 2a: £4bn to £4.5bn, against a budget equivalent of £4.2bn

Phase 2b: £36.3bn to £40.3bn, against a budget equivalent of £27.8bn

Total for HS2 project: £80.7bn to £87.7bn, against a budget equivalent to £62.4bn

 

The figure in excess of £100b is assuming that the figures will end up being 15-20% higher than those estimates, and doesn't take into account the real opportunities to reduce costs on Phase 2b.

 

That's not to say the figure won't end up being over £100b in today's money, but that's not the cost currently. 

[geared 319]

2 hours ago, Baron99 said:

£102 billion, up from £56 billion from 2015, so God knows what the final cost will be?  Our bit, if it does go ahead, is not going to start being constructed until 2030.

I'm thinking it'll be closer to £200bn when all is said and done.

 

Talking to a friend in a Rail engineering firm it's well known in the industry that no-one is paying attention to costs.

Companies are submitting the most ludicrous quotes for work and they're accepted without question every single time.

Edited February 11, 2020 by geared

[Robin-H 11]

50 minutes ago, geared said:

I'm thinking it'll be closer to £200bn when all is said and done.

 

Talking to a friend in a Rail engineering firm it's well known in the industry that no-one is paying attention to costs.

Companies are submitting the most ludicrous quotes for work and they're accepted without question every single time.

I highly doubt that. Bidders for work have to submit tenders. The only reason to submit ludicrous quotes for work would be if you didn't want to get the job. 

[RiffRaff 10]

3 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

It's about capacity, not speed.

So why isn't it "HC2"?

[Mister Gee 825]

1 hour ago, West 77 said:

Mr Johnson has vowed to restore discipline. I assume that includes not agreeing to ludicrous high quotes that would not be tolerated when the private sector is funding the cost of work in big projects.
 

Never fear, his guru says PJ Masks is on it.