High speed rail dilemma exposes council's Birmingham Grand Central station blunder
Pardon me for returning again to the elephant in the corner of the room, but the latest row over the likely route for a high speed rail link between London and North-west England underlines Birmingham's short-sightedness in failing to pursue plans for a Grand Central station at Eastside.
Whichever political party forms the next government, it seems pretty clear that High Speed2 will happen - and the favoured route for the 200mph service links London, Heathrow, Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool.
But as Lord Adonis, the Transport Secretary, has been pointing out for a number of months, it's unlikely the trains will ever use New Street.
This is because New Street Gateway, which is costing £600 million, will actually be not much more than a tarted-up shopping centre with cavernous glass-covered waiting areas for passengers attached. This will increase capacity by 150 per cent - but only capacity for passengers to wait for their trains.
What Gateway will not do is increase the number of platforms, making it impossible for more services to use the station than is the case at present.
Birmingham City Council which relentlessly, some might say recklessly, pursued Gateway in the certain knowledge that the project was largely cosmetic and would not deliver better rail services, is now staring an unpalatable fact in the face.
As things stand, it is difficult to see how high speed trains are going to get into the centre of Birmingham.
And wouldn't it be embarrassing if the UK's largest city outside of London didn't have a central high speed terminus when Manchester and Liverpool did?
There is talk at the council about the high speed link using an expanded Moor Street Station, or even Snow Hill. But this would be extremely costly, coming on top of almost £400 million of public sector investment already committed for New Street, at a time when government finances are under severe pressure.
Department for Transport planners, sitting in London, might compromise by deciding that the high speed rail link should stop at an enlarged Birmingham International station, serving the airport and the NEC, before sweeping serenely north-westwards to Manchester.
After all, it could be argued that rail links between New Street and BIA are already very good - shuttling airport and NEC customers in and out of the city centre within 20 minutes. These services could be enhanced by proposals to run trams from New Street to Birmingham International.
The arguments in favour of this could be overwhelming, particularly for a Conservative government faced by a public spending crisis.
The boost to the West Midlands economy by linking the NEC, Birmingham International Airport and Heathrow with a 45 minute rail service would surely run into billions of pounds - effectively making BIA Heathrow's third runway. More than that, the availability of train services into the centre of London in under an hour would add to the attraction of homes in Warwickshire, Solihull and south Staffordshire for business commuters to the capital.
It seems, to me, unthinkable that a high speed rail service from London to the North-west would not stop at Birmingham International.
Omitting BIA would deliver a hammer blow to the West Midlands economy, while threatening the future viability of both BIA and the NEC.
There should be, of course, no reason why high speed trains could not stop at both BIA and at a station in Birmingham city centre - if only the city council had not acted so pig-headedly in making sure Grand Central station at Eastside would never be built.
Strategically, the council's notion that talk of Grand Central would distract the Department for Transport and make government funding for New Street Gateway less likely looks like a blunder of gigantic proportions. With hindsight, perhaps the DoT would have put paid to Gateway - but if as a result Grand Central had gained government approval for a medium term project Birmingham would now be in a far more comfortable position.
A blunder which, it should be pointed out, was embraced by the business community in the shape of Birmingham Chamber of Commerce and Industry which appeared happy to go along with council leader Mike Whitby's insistence that Grand Central must not be mentioned, never mind giving the idea any serious consideration.
It is said that the council leader has embarked on a desperate campaign to try to make sure high speed trains reach the city centre, begging the question of whether he has taken his eye off the ball as far as the absolute importance of the services stopping at Birmingham International is concerned.
Interestingly, Coun Whitby's Conservative masters in London have appointed consulting engineers Arup to advise a prospective Tory government on high speed rail.
Arup, of course, was the company responsible for promoting the doomed Grand Central station at Eastside.
Older/Newer
« Mandelson is right to delay Rover report | Let's Invite The Whole of Birmingham to Be Part of a City of Culture »
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: High speed rail dilemma exposes council's Birmingham Grand Central station blunder. TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blogs.birminghampost.net/cgi-bin/mt421/mt-tb.cgi/138658
6 Comments
Leave a comment
News authors
Paul Dale - The Birmingham Post's public affairs editor
My postings |
My feed
Subscribe to receive updates by email
Jonathan Walker - The Birmingham Post's political editor
My postings |
My feed
Kate Cooper - Runs www.extelligence.org, a website for free-thinking and scientific discussion
My postings |
My feed
Latest Birmingham Post Business blog
Birmingham Post staff and guest bloggers from Birmingham and the midlands inform and entertain on all business matters.
Latest Birmingham Post Lifestyle blog
Birmingham Post staff and guest bloggers from the midlands give you the lowdown on what's happening in your region and some musings on culture in the UK and beyond.
Latest Birmingham Post Sport blog
Birmingham Post staff and guest bloggers from Birmingham and the midlands inform and entertain on all sporting matters.
Why am I not surprised?
"wouldn't it be embarrassing if the UK's largest city outside of London didn't have a central high speed terminus when Manchester and Liverpool did?”
Yes it would be, but nothing will change; it’s again another senseless use of tax payer’s money.
I am almost ashamed at the Birmingham transport system, we offer commuters busses tormented by predominately young trouble makers who smoke cannabis and play trashy music out of their phones and intimidate other passengers. Rail prices force those on lower incomes onto the busses which the majority don’t even have dedicated bus lanes helping congestion in Birmingham worsen and now a rail system which fails to meet the needs of the growing population.
The rail industry seems to another British institute which has failed. Do people in our political system sometimes forget to think? I really must stress 'Longevity and Usability’ to the decision makers in Birmingham City Council.
Perhaps not totally called for, but is it passengers best interest to build something which will most likely will be in the future be the target of terrorist attacks out of glass really the best idea?
Vic
There is of course an easy and cost effective way to increase capacity at New Street Station; that is to relocate some services out of New Street into Birmingham's other two city centre stations.
Construction of two short link lines, one at Bordesley to connect to the 'Camp Hill Line', and one at Winson Green to connect to the 'Handsworth Park Line', would allow some trains to be relocated to serve Snow Hill and Moor Street Stations (both of which have scope for additional capacity and platforms) instead of New Street. This would then free up space space for additional services at New Street, including the 'High Speed 2' services.
As an added bonus this would also allow new local train services to be created because of the link lines into Snow Hill and Moor Street Stations, and thus provide more local train links to the 'High Speed 2' services and the city centre. All this for a fraction of the price of a new station and deliverable quickly.
^^ That is exactly what will happen - services will be taken out of New St and placed into Moor St, and when the Metro moves on to the new development at Snow Hill an extra platform will be liberated there. There will be more space in New St which will allow for expansion of rail services as well as passenger numbers.
Grand Central was a nice idea but never going to happen, and would have stripped Birmingham of it's main rail unique selling point - Brum is one of the only cities in the UK that has its major rail station right in the centre. All our rivals have theirs on the edge of the city centre. If we had pursued the idea of a new Grand Central, we would have relegated New St to a commuter station, and would have more than likely been turned down by the government for the £1b funding it would have cost. AND we would still be in the same position that we started at: no funding for New St and a real eyesore in the middle of the city. Do no underestimate how the new New St will transform a huge swathe of the city centre.
If we need a new International station (and why not have a HS2 station at the airport/NEC and one in the city centre - not all trains have to stop at both?) then we can build another one - how about at Bordesley, or Digbeth, or the Gun Quarter, or the freight terminal near Duddeston?
The good news is that key bits of the land remain unused, of course ownership is a key issue.
To progress what;s right, a new high speed station in brum, lets not muddy the issue with short term politics.
I objected to the Eastside Development in its original form on the grounds it would deny the best site for a Grand Central rail station providing a single rail station serving ALL rail routes into and out of the City including High Speed Rail and bus/tram interchange.
The city councils/CBI/Advantage West Mid/Network rail etc myopic vision has created precisely the situation I predicted and these organisations will forever be held to account for their short term greed. We will now have enormous quantities of student accommodation and a Glass Atrium waiting room come retail centre and a city centre rail station with no less than 42 escalators in a 1960s rail station that is more like a dungeon for the incarceration of Birmingham’s rail travellers.
That apart on reading in the Post that the Eastside scheme was to be scaled down I contacted the city planning office who assured me that the much changed/reduced Eastside scheme would have to go through the planning machine once again since there had been 'significant changes. As an objector they said I would be contacted I still await their communication.
This aside there still exists three possible sites for a grand central type station
1. The freightliner Depot could be moved to the advantage of all.
2. Somewhere along the line to Washwood Heath e.g. the area where the Stechford line crosses the Birmingham Derby line.
3. Where the Camp Hill line passes under the New St to Adderley Park
All of these could serve a HS line using 'any sensible route' into Birmingham. They could also provide for the exit route to the Northeast and Northwest via the Derby line/M6/M42 corridors.
Fast frequent services from any of the sites could serve a reduced New St Station.
Please Note New St could NOT accommodate high-speed rail services without massive reconstruction of New St/Monument lane tunnels HS2 will be built to continental guage+.
The PRIME reason for HS2 is NOT to connect airports Intermediate stops will cost more than 5minutes. A stop at Heathrow or BIA will make 200mph unlikely and 5minutes to brake a 5minute stop, 5 minutes to accelerate then 5minutes to brake again seem to mean no less than 15 minutes extra over a non stop service will be required even more if Heathrow stop is included.
If the HS2 serves BIA only and a train change has to be made there then City centre passengers will have to disembark from HS2 haul their luggage over bridges to catch a slower less favourable service to the city.
This would require 5 minutes to stop from 200mph 10 minutes to heave luggage between trains, 5minutes wait for train plus a 10 to 15 minute journey into the city.
Emphasis on the needs of aviation adds at least 15 to 30 minutes extra on the direct non-stop service. Now I wonder why the aviation industry would want this. In the past the aviation industry claimed HS rail would not effect their Domestic services I suspect their clamour for stops on HS rail routes has more to do with ‘lengthening HS rail journey times and so reduce rails competitiveness and thus market share.
The ‘Best’ Route into Birmingham would be via Midland Main Line/West Coast Main line/ M6 corridor to the region of Rugby where NE/NW/Scotland services would continue along Trent Valley line and Birmingham services continue via Coventry line corridor to Birmingham. Birmingham services to the North could join up the London to NE/NW/Scotland in the Lichfield/Tamworth area.
The primary objective of continental high-speed rail service has always been City (centre) to city centre with airports as a secondary objective. We should follow them to do otherwise would be to negate the other benefits of High Speed Rail – Shorter journey times, transfer of trips from road and air to rail, capacity relief to existing rail, road and air modes and of course energy efficiency and reduced CO2 emissions.
We must not subjugate any of these objectives to the false claims of the aviation industry to do so would repeat the failures of the past where the gain of the train was destroyed for the pain of the plane. Lets not repeat these mistakes Grand Central, Gateway and Eastside are enough for the whole of this century.
I agree with you ben!
Todd DiRoberto
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/todd-diroberto/14/8b8/851