So here goes for the 63 (headline) conclusions from the Govt's official, so far unpublished review into HS2# CONCLUSION 1: "Overcrowding on the UK network the principle rationale" (for HS2) #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 2 (part a): "Inter-city connectivity is important but so too is regional and commuter connectivity. HS2 delivers inter-city improvements but also frees capacity for regional and commuter services to be improved..."
CONCLUSION 2 (part b) "No overarching strategy and analysis to optimise the allocation of released capacity on the basis of the project’s objectives. Given that it’s a core rationale, more work needed on integrated rail plan to maximise benefit and articulate them clearly."
CONCLUSION 2 (part c) "HS2 should be planned as part of the national network - including links to existing railways but also to new investment proposals from midlands connect and TfN and Network Rail's enhancements programme."
CONCLUSION 3 (part a) "given that supporting regional economic growth & a more balanced UK economy a core objective of HS2, further work should be done by HS2 ltd, DfT and wider govt to understand these impacts."
CONCLUSION 3 (part b) it was "hard for review to assess likely size of impacts on regional economic growth from HS2" #HS2 #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 4 (part a): "HS2 can b part of transformational econ change, but only if properly integrated w/ other transport strategies, espec those seeking 2 improve inter-city and intra-regional transport & also w/ nat & regional & local growth strategies." #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 4 (part b) "Transport investment alone with not rebalance the UK economy." #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 5 (part a): Govt’s 2050 net carbon zero target has placed new emphasis on design, build and operation of HS2 network. Hs2 needs to further cut carbon emissions when constructing - now only really poss on phase 2 #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 5 (part b): "Hs2 should be part of long-term govt strategy to encourage people to shift to greener modes of transport."
CONCLUSION 6: "review concluded that reducing specifications of HS2 phase 1 should be looked at, but only within limits of phase 1 act powers. This is due to significant costs of making changes to powers, both in terms of time & money" #HS2reviewconclusions
PART OF CONCLUSION 6: "review expressed concern about whether HS2 could reliably run 18 trains per hour. (this is a) higher frequency than anywhere in the world." #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS BIT: Phase 1 is 400km per hour alignment (so max speed any train could do on the track). The rolling stock will run at 330 kph with a max speed of 360 kph. BUT trains only able to run at 360 kph on 60% of phase 1 track #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS BIT: HS2 trains able to do 360 km per hour on "probably less than 60% of phase 2" (Crewe-Mancs and Brum-Leeds) #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS BIT: "330 km per hour is faster than anywhere else apart from China" #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS BIT: "The high speed has not added to the cost of the trains - the speed would have to be reduced to 250 km per hour to save money on this (aspect of the project)." #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS BIT: "Reducing the speed to 320 km per hour could increase journey times by a few minutes - and journey time benefits make up a large part of estimated benefits from HS2." #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS: "evidence suggests that super high speed, high capacity requirements have led to infrastructure costs in the order of magnitude 10% higher than if HS2 had been discerned at more internationally comparable standards." #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS: "if (you were) starting with a blank sheet - then cost savings (would) potentially (be) quite big of reducing the spec. It would require revising the route alignment" (the route of the track) and this requires a new act of parliament #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS: "The key question is whether to build HS2 now with the maximum capability of 18 trains per hour & 360 km per hour or reduce the requirements now and risk in the future wanting to add in this capability, which would be much more expensive to do" #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS: "on Euston approach…(there is) an expensive ‘dive-under’ junction which has been included to accommodate 18 trains per hour and could be avoided at 14 trains per hour. This junction exposes significant risks to the existing railway" #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS: "It would be prudent to have a core assumption of 14 trains per hour on HS2 infrastructure and understand the marginal impacts of increasing beyond this in the future." #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 7: "The specification of HS2 is ambitious compared 2 current international experience. A more prudent assumption of 14 trains per hour should be used as a central planning assumption and future biz cases should be updated accordingly." #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 8: "Review recognised impact of Hs2 on woodland landscape, biodiversity & more broadly on built & natural environments. Given the duration of hs2 project, such impacts along with mitigation & compensatory measures, need 2 be kept under review." #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 9: There are "opportunities to reduce or mitigate impact further" (on natural environments) #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 10: "Govt should recommit to full Y-shaped network...It only makes sense to do phase 1 if continuing with northern phases to deliver transformational benefits to the north of England and midlands." #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 11 (part a): "Transport for the North and Midlands Connect and Network Rail, Hs2 ltd and DfT should develop a plan to maximise the benefits of phase 2b and ensure an optimised delivery model." #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 11 (part b): "This review recommends a further study of around 6 months of phase 2b scope in the context of Midlands Engine Rail and Northern Powerhouse Rail proposals" #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 11 (part c): "study should consider the appropriate...upgrades of conventional network to improve reliability and service frequency and the sequencing of these to deliver service improvements as soon as possible - before Phase 2b open (2035-40." #HS2reviewconclusions
RELEVANT TO 11: "HS2 akin to France’s TGV where trains run off high speed and onto conventional lines. French system is better comparator and model for HS2. Evidence suggests Japanese model has been followed." #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS BIT: "HS2 phase 2b (Crewe-Mancs and Brum-Leeds) is currently having scope and design changes so it is future-proofed for Northern Powerhouse Rail and Midlands Engine Rail." #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS BIT: "Northern Powerhouse Rail services...under the current plans will make use of up to around 110km of the proposed HS2 phase 2b (Crewe-Mancs and Brum-Leeds) tracks" #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS BIT: "Midlands Engine Rail plans would also make use of the eastern leg of HS2 for proposed Brum-Nottingham and Bedford-Leeds connectivity." #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS BIT: "it is essential to integrate HS2 phase 2b and the existing rail network." #HS2reviewconclusions
AND THIS BIT: On phase 2b..."beneficial to pause preparations of hybrid bill to consider how best to break current proposal down into parts and deliver sections sequentially as become ready (in conjunction with improvements 2 conventional network & NPR, Midlands Engine Rail)"
CONCLUSION 12: "Preparation of material for phase 2b should be paused and await outcome of study (see previous tweets) - smaller phases might be better." #HS2reviewconclusions
Station at Calvert (Bucks)? "the review concluded that DfT should consider making passive provision for a future HS2 station near Calvert." (so make it poss for a station at some point in future) #HS2reviewconclusions
On Calvert station: "there could be merit in developing an HS2 station in the future here if local plans support a significant residential and commercial development in this region and if there is passenger demand to justify cost of developing station here" #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 13: "review recommends removing handsacre connection (one for the rail experts)" #HS2reviewconclusions
CONCLUSION 14: make "passive provision for future station at Calvert" (see previous tweet) #HS2reviewconclusions
ON COST AND SCHEDULE: Phase 1..."unless rigorous cost controls are put in place there is considerable risk that the prices for phase 1 will not remain at the level set out in stocktake" (HS2 internal review published in the summer) #HS2reviewconclusions
"The phase 1 procurement strategy and contracting model for Main Works Civils has in hindsight proved to be unsuccessful." #HS2reviewconclusions
On Phase 2a (Brum-Crewe): "If proceeds as currently planned the cost estimate may need to be revised upwards in light of emerging Land and Property cost estimates and 4 systems & indirect costs. A higher cost contingency could be used on 2a cost estimates #HS2reviewconclusions
