I'm starting another thread now for key points from the so-far unpublished Govt-commissioned review into #HS2. See previous thread for first lot of conclusions #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions here come a few more...
"Primary need is for capacity, speed should not be primary driver of decision making." #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
2) “govt should recommit to the principle of the full Y-shaped railway, serving both sides of the Pennines” #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
3) the full network is needed to realise the highest value for money economic return on investment of HS2 #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
4) "Phase one as a standalone does not represent value for money, nor does building phase 2 without phase 1" #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
5) "it is hard now to stop Phase 1 and start HS2 in the north of England - the quickest way to deliver long-distance connectivity to the midlands and the north of England is to continue with Phase 1 and to fully commit to subsequent phases." #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
6) "HS2 should be planned as part of the national rail network - should include new investment proposals from midlands connect and Transport for the North." #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
7) HS2 can be part of transformational economic change but only if properly integrated with other transport strategies, especially those seeking to improve inter-city and intra-regional transport #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
8) "Controlling costs now key to remain within Cook stock take" (internal HS2 review by Chairman Allan Cook set upper limit on cost estimate of £88bn) #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
9) “before issuing NtP (green light) on Phase 1, govt should ensure…HS2 achieves satisfactory position with main works civil contractors, updated biz cases for phase 1 published (& approved by HMT) & there is a revised funding envelope for phase 1 with appropriate contingency.”
10) “Economic rebalancing (of the UK economy) is not reflected in the economic case (for HS2).” #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
12) “more work needed to understand the potential impact on homes and jobs and where (that impact would be felt)” #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
13) "HS2 Ltd and DfT should seriously look at reducing the specifications of HS2 phase 1 within the limits of the high speed rail act 2017 and in finalising detailed designs." #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
14) “This should include reducing the central planning assumption for HS2 to a more realistic 14 trains per hour (current plan is for 18 trains per hour), while future proofing the scheme for 16tph and noting loss of assumed benefits." #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
15) "A frequency of 14 trains per hour, with passive provision for 16tph needs to be considered in future biz case work." #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
16) "HS2 ltd should demonstrate how it intends to improve performance in cost estimation, cost management and cost control.” #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
17) "HS2 ltd’s governance needs to reflect projects complexity and scale." #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
18) "Systems integration (integrating signals systems with software on trains) needs to be strengthened now and maintained through life of project (to avoid a mistake made on Crossrail)." #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
19) "govt should consider merging construction of phase 2a with that of phase 1." #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
20) "Need to investigate potential to optimise design and reduce costs on Phase 2a" (Birmingham to Crewe) #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
22) On Phase 2b (Brum-Mancs & Brum to Leeds)..."establish a further study to be completed by summer 2020 to develop an integrated railway plan embracing Phase 2b alongside an integrated railway investment programme for the Midlands and north of E." #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
23) "Econ appraisal of integrated rail and investment prog should b assessed...any study needs 2 look at how to quickly bring forward rail improvements for midlands and north of E – BEFORE, HS2 Ltd’s view of opening phase 2b as currently designed in 2035-40" #HS2reviewconclusions
24) Review recommends Govt should “await the outcome of this study (see previous tweet) and pause the preparation of materials for the phase 2b (Crewe-Mancs & Brum to Leeds) bill as currently designed.” #HS2reviewconclusions
25) On whether Old Oak Common should be the London terminus? “The govt should continue with the OOC to Euston stretch. Euston is an important part of realising the benefits of HS2.” #HS2reviewconclusions #HS2
26) "Old Oak Common should act as the temporary london terminus for HS2 services until Euston station complete (time taken to get Euston right shouldn’t delay start of HS2 services)." #HS2reviewconclusions #HS2
27) “Construction of Euston is v challenging”…so govt should…”carry out a study, looking into efficiency of the future station as a whole, including considering options to simplify the HS2 approach to Euston.” #HS2reviewconclusions #HS2
28) “Construction of Euston is v challenging”…so govt should…”develop and set out a single plan for overall Euston project with (one body with) overall responsibility…this should not be HS2 ltd.” #HS2reviewconclusions #HS2
29) On HS2 stations….review recommends that Govt “ensures commercial opportunities are maximised” and that project “engages with private sector to develop stations.” #HS2reviewconclusions #HS2
That's everything I noted down from the exec summary and the intro. The report then makes 63 conclusions. I will tweet them all (I didn't note down one as it was v dull) on another thread. Some are repetitious of previous threads - but it's because they appear twice in report.
