mayor of london addendum to lord mawhinney paper review of hs2 access to heathrow airport

8/8/2019 Mayor of London Addendum to Lord Mawhinney paper Review of HS2 Access to Heathrow Airport

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mayor-of-london-addendum-to-lord-mawhinney-paper-review-of-hs2-access-to-heathrow 1/11

Mayor of London Addendum to Lord Mawhinney paper

Review of HS2 Access to Heathrow Airport 8 June 2010

Background The Mayor has submitted a statement to Lord Mawhinney to assist with his review of options for serving Heathrow Airport with the proposed route of High Speed 2 (HS2). Following a meeting between the Mayor and Lord Mawhinney on the 3 June 2010, the Mayor would like to submit further evidence, which is set out in the attached paper as an addendum to the original submission. This additional paper covers the following areas: 1. Why serving Heathrow as part of HS2 is important for London 2. Options for serving Heathrow on a high speed spur / loop 3. The benefits of connecting HS2 to HS1

1



1. Why is it important for HS2 to provide access to Heathrow Airport?

1.1. The overall proportion of HS2 passengers wishing to access Heathrow Airport is expected to be small compared to those wishing to access central London. However,

as

the

UK’s

only

International

Hub

airport,

serving

Heathrow

by

high

speed rail is essential for a number of reasons set out below:

1.2. There is an opportunity for some of the domestic flights serving Heathrow to be transferred from air to high speed rail. This is particularly relevant for those domestic flights connecting at Heathrow from Scotland. Whilst the full potential of this will not be realised until the full high speed network is completed, it is clearly sensible to plan for this from the outset. Reducing the number of regional flights whilst maintaining (and possibly improving) accessibility to Heathrow from regional UK cities is consistent with the role of Heathrow as a hub airport and could help release capacity at Heathrow for additional long haul services which is positive for the London economy. These improved connections by rail rather than air will also benefit various UK regions.

1.3. Whilst Heathrow achieves a high public transport mode share for access to/from central London, for journeys to Heathrow from outside London, car usage remains dominant. If HS2 improves access to UK regions, it has the potential to significantly increase the use of public transport to access Heathrow, with a potential reduction in congestion and vehicles emissions, particularly in West London.

1.4. For those in the UK regions who currently access Heathrow via Central London, a link into Heathrow from HS2 could contribute to easing the pressure on central London’s transport infrastructure by reducing the amount of travel across Central London

2. Serving Heathrow on a high speed spur

2.1. There is an option for serving Heathrow Airport as a spur from the main high speed line at Old Oak Common. This would mean that the station at Old Oak Common would be provided (giving all the benefits for London set out in the earlier paper) and a separate alignment would be constructed to access Heathrow from Old Oak Common. Whilst TfL has not seen any details of this proposal, Figure 1, below, sets out how this proposition could work.

2



‐ –

4 or Terminal 5. There is potential to increase the provision of trains using the Heathrow Express tunnel to 12 trains per hour. In the future, it might be feasible to merge Heathrow Express and Crossrail services to provide unified 12tph nonstop/one‐stop service from OOC (and beyond). In this scenario, the journey time from Old Oak Common to Heathrow CTA would be 11 minutes, plus 2.5 minutes wait time.

2.6. This proposal is set out in more detail in Figure 2, below: Figure 2 – Serving Heathrow using existing Command Paper plans

Euston

Heathrow CTA

Old Oak Common

Crossrail services

11 mins 21 mins

Heathrow Express services

Birmingham

Paddington Central London

Key High Speed line Heathrow Express Crossrail

2.7. A comparison of each option is set out below: Option

from OOC to Heathrow Frequency of services

OOC LHR Journey time

OOC LHR CTA No. of changes

Additional cost Option 1 – Old Oak Common with Heathrow high speed spur

Up to 15 tph 9‐10 mins1 1 c. £2bn (incl. new station)

Option 2 – Old Oak Common and no Heathrow high speed spur

Up to 12 tph 13‐14 mins 0 small increase in

operating costs to run 12 tph in HEx tunnel

1 Assumes high speed spur from Old Oak Common to Heathrow has average speed of 180 km/hr

4



2.8. A latter phase of this option (possibly introduced alongside an extension of HS2 north of Birmingham to Leeds and Manchester) would be to connect the Heathrow spur back into the main route of HS2 around the M25, allowing through running of HS2 services via Heathrow Airport as an alternative to running direct to Central London via Old Oak Common. This is illustrated on Figure 3 below.

Figure 3 – Serving Heathrow using a high speed loop

Heathrow CTA

Heathrow High Speed Old Oak Common

5 mins

Euston

Crossrail & Heathrow Express services 2 mins

5 mins

HS2 Alignment Birmingham

Key High Speed 2 Crossrail

2.9. This option would involve construction of a longer tunnel for HS2 services (an additional 16km) at an additional cost of c£1bn. However, the major benefit would be greatly enhanced flexibility for HS2 services to operate directly to Central London via Old Oak Common (with the fastest journey time) or to serve Heathrow Airport direct en route to Central London. The key issue with this arrangement would be to ensure there was consistency in service levels between both branches to ensure there was a sufficiently attractive service for passengers.

2.10. For example, if there were four HS2 trains an hour from Manchester to London, the number operating direct via Old Oak Common and the number that would run via Heathrow Airport would need to be determined. TfL has not seen any details of this proposal or any assessment of potential benefits to justify the additional cost but believe there would be merit in developing this idea further. It would also be possible to operate services between Heathrow and the North; however, terminating as well as through platforms would be required, adding to the cost of the high speed station at Heathrow.

2.11.A

further

development

of

this

option

would

be

to

examine

how

high

speed

services

could then be extended as a future phase to serve the south east of England both as

5



a way of improving rail access to Heathrow from the south east, but also to improve longer distance north‐south connectivity avoiding the need to travel through Central London. Construction of a loop to Heathrow would potentially have some benefit in making this connection easier and supporting the development of some of the wider options being considered by Greengauge 21. One possibility would be to create a link from HS2 south towards Woking to connect into the South West Trains network as shown on Figure 4.

Figure 4 – Serving Heathrow using a high speed loop

Heathrow CTA

Heathrow High Speed Old Oak Common

Euston

Crossrail & Heathrow Express services

HS2 Alignment

Woking

Southampton Portsmouth

Birmingham

Key High Speed 2 Crossrail Classic Line

2.12. Under this scenario, a whole range of service options would be available including: Southampton – Woking – Heathrow Portsmouth – Woking – Birmingham Southampton – Woking – Heathrow – Old Oak Common – Euston

6



3. Comparison of options 3.1. The following table summarises the three options for serving Heathrow.

Option Additional Cost to HS2

Journey time OOC ‐

LHR No. of changes OOC – LHR CTA Frequency

Option 1 – high speed spur c. £2bn 9‐10 mins 1 Up to 15 tph Option 2 – high speed loop c. £3bn 9‐10 mins 1 Up to 15 tph Option 3 – Command Paper proposal 0 13‐14 mins (HEx) 0 Up to 12 tph

3.2. A high speed spur from Old Oak Common to Heathrow will generate journey time savings of approximately 4‐5 minutes compared to using the proposed Heathrow Express / Crossrail services from Old Oak Common. However, a high speed spur would not serve the central terminal area (CTA) directly; a change would still be required at the high speed station onto Crossrail / Heathrow Express services or a series of travelators. There is potential to increase the frequency of Crossrail and Heathrow Express services from Old Oak Common to Heathrow Airport up to 12tph without

major

infrastructure

works

required

which

would

reduce

wait

times

and

increase capacity.

3.3. A high speed spur would have a higher capacity than the Command Paper proposal – however, only 2,000 passengers per day (by HS2) are forecast to want to access Heathrow directly, not justifying such a high capacity route initially. However, a high speed loop could provide wider connectivity benefits in the longer term allowing improved access to Heathrow Airport from the North of England and the potential for southern connections into the HS2 network, which would have major benefits for Heathrow access and also long distance north‐south connectivity. A high speed loop would mean Birmingham is only 46 minutes and one change away from Heathrow, compared to 58 minutes under the Command Paper proposals. However, sending all the HS2 trains via Heathrow would result in longer journey times (around 10 minutes) for the majority of passengers (Birmingham – Euston); therefore, it is likely that only a small proportion of HS2 services would run via Heathrow, which would imply a more limited frequency for Heathrow passengers.

7



4. HS2 connection to HS1 4.1. TfL has offered continuing support for High Speed 2 to be connected to High Speed

1, to allow a range of services to run, potentially bypassing central London. A connection between the two high speed services is important for the following reasons:

A link would allow through running from, say, Birmingham to continental Europe; Improved links could increase the public transport mode share for surface access to Heathrow; and A direct rail connection could allow Stratford International station to be fully utilised given its importance to east London and considerable onward public transport connections available

4.2. Furthermore, if there was a dedicated loop on HS2 serving Heathrow then this would allow for direct services from HS1 to Heathrow allowing longer distance services from Europe to Heathrow but also local regional services from Ebbsfleet and Kent to Heathrow. This would improve accessibility to Heathrow from this area, helping to reduce access by car and reducing journey times. Currently, only 1.3m passengers a year from Kent use Heathrow (out of 66m). 3m per year use Gatwick, but only 12% use public transport to access the airport2. A new link from Kent to Heathrow could potentially switch a significant number of passengers onto High Speed services to Heathrow Figure 5, below, indicates what links could become possible were HS2 connected to HS1.

http://www.gatwickairport.com/Documents/business_and_community/Misc/Gatwick_Surface_Access_Strat_ 2007.pdf

8

2

http://www.gatwickairport.com/Documents/business_and_community/Misc/Gatwick_Surface_Access_Strat_





Figure 5 – Potential connections with a link between HS2 and HS1

Key HS2 alignment HS1 alignment HS2 Heathrow loop Interchange Crossrail Terminal Potential link to HS1

Heathrow Canary Wharf

StratfordOld Oak Common

to France

to Birmingham

St Pancras Euston

Possible further link to east Midlands / Cambridge / Peterborough ?

4.3. However, the nature of the link is of high importance to the Mayor and TfL because it has the potential to impact considerably on local London services using the North London Line, which is in the process of being upgraded as part of the Overground network. This line has experienced rapid growth and has major potential as a key part of a much enhanced orbital rail network and any proposals by HS2 to reduce the capacity of the line or impact on the ability for its full potential to be realised for local services would be resisted. It is essential that the HS2 proposals for connecting HS2 and HS1 do not materially impact on the North London Line.

4.4. HS2 Ltd is currently assessing the feasibility of providing direct rail links between HS2 and HS1. A two‐track option running along the North London Line corridor has been costed at just under £1 bn. Line speed would be restricted to 60 kph. Connection to HS1 can only easily be made where HS1 is on the surface, so the most practical option is just beyond St Pancras station, where such a connection already exists. HS2 Ltd is focusing on an existing route via Primrose Hill and Camden Road. TfL have made it clear that London Overground operations cannot be adversely impacted, and the North London Line is also one of the most important freight routes in the country. HS2 Ltd is therefore investigating a mix of new infrastructure and upgrade of existing tracks to make this connection. The study will seek to understand whether HS2 services could run along this stretch of the NLL without overly reducing track capacity to other services.

9



4.5. If the potential for through running of HS2/HS1 services is achieved there will still be a demand for interchange between the two high sped rail terminals at St Pancras and Euston. Whilst physically close to each other, these two termini do not currently operate as a single location and it will be important that measures are taken to help achieve this. The Underground lines connecting Kings Cross/St Pancras and Euston are already some of the most congested in London and TfL would seek to minimise the amount of interchange between these stations via the Underground to help preserve any available capacity for longer distance underground journeys.

4.6. Options for reducing the severance between the stations include: 1. A high capacity people mover between Euston and St Pancras. This would

follow the Brill Place / Phoenix Road alignment, as shown below. An above ground people mover is being investigated by HS2 Ltd. Estimated cost is currently unknown. See Figure 6, below for alignment details: Figure 6 – Potential people mover alignment between Euston and St

Pancras

Euston Road

Euston station

St Pancras station

2. A DLR extension to Euston via St Pancras, which could fulfil the same function, is also being investigated.

3. TfL is currently investigating whether the Chelsea Hackney Line or a similar kind of system would be necessary to address the dispersal of passengers from high speed trains at Euston, given levels of crowding on existing Underground

10



lines. Diverting the safeguarded route of the Chelsea Hackney Line (CHL) to serve Euston would mean a station could be located to serve all three terminals (Euston; Kings Cross and St Pancras) with access at either end. Euston and Kings Cross / St Pancras would be linked by a subterranean link, an improvement on the existing walk along Euston Road.

5. Summary 5.1. In summary, this paper recognises that:

Serving Heathrow by High Speed 2 is important to the Mayor and TfL for a variety of reasons. Heathrow would be served adequately by the proposals for a station at Old Oak Common with a service frequency and journey time comparable to the High speed spur. The Mayor is supportive of the idea for a high speed loop allowing HS2 trains to serve Heathrow directly en‐route to London or pass by serving Old Oak Common. This would add c£2bn towards the cost of the project but could potentially add significant benefits. There would be longer term options to extend the line southwards to provide a link between the South West Trains network and Heathrow/HS2; Connecting HS2 to HS1 via a direct rail link is desirable, but must not compromise operations on the London Overground network. Such a link would allow new high speed “through” services to operate, maximising the potential of Stratford International station and giving direct rail access to Heathrow from Kent; Transforming Kings Cross / St Pancras / Euston into a single rail hub is required regardless of whether a direct rail link is provided. The uplift in demand as a result of HS2 is significant and TfL is examining the level of mitigation required to accommodate this growth.

11