427 replies to this topic

[hyposmurf]

Are there no listed buildings in Old Amersham?The proposed route shown on the Amersham map doesnt show any.

[Bengley]

Do you mean the existing met line in Chesham or are you talking about the proposed new train route that will pass below The Lee in Chesham.The proposed route shouldnt impact Chesham that much at all.Other than extra traffic for the works the Lee is about 5 miles out of the centre of Chesham,most of the are it will effect is farmland.Shame it cant be underground in that location to.Please correct me if Im wrong but I cant see it effecting Chesham that much once the work is complete.Neither towns are fantastic, but they are nice places to live and far better than many towns of a similar size that Ive visited.

Looking at the Section drawing of the railway line where can I find a key indiacting what the green,red & blue stand for?Green I guess is existing terrian and blue/red the proposed train route?Whats the difference between blue and red,also are the red line lines running perpendicular to the route,showing noise or whwere cutting will be carried out?
If that is the case some of the proposed train route passing The Lee will be below some of the highest terrain, limiting some of the noise.

I mean the Met line, the roar on the stretch close to Chesham's waterside is deafening.

[Jinni]

The proposed line is in a tunnel from the M25 to Mantles Green, Old Amersham (red) then in a cutting then another short tunnel..... I havn't had time to look at it yet - 152 pages!
There is information about all the considered routes - some would involve demolishing many properties, which I don't think would be too popular either.
Question is whether we accept that in the future the country will need this railway and where is the least damaging place to put it.

[David P]

where is the least damaging place to put it.

You know the answer to that - anywhere but my back yard .

Why is there always a knee-jerk reaction to proposals like this, immediately condemning it as in the wrong place and coming up with the same old arguments?

Noise will not be a problem. a) it's underground as it goes through Amersham. when it comes out of the tunnel it will be in a cutting about 25m deep, which will funnel any noise upwards. c) in only 15 seconds it's going to be a mile away. The continuous drone from the by-pass and the racket from all those infernal helicopters is much worse.
Construction traffic will be confined to the by-pass - there is no reason for it to affect the town.
I've no idea of the relevance of listed buildings - there is no suggestion that anything is going to be demolished.
With much of the route in tunnels it's not going to have a great impact on the scenery.

[Fran]

Like many people, my instinctive reaction is negative, but 24 hours on, my feelings are more mixed:

• I think the principle of a high speed rail network is a good one (I've found them useful in other countries), and if we're going to have one, the routes have to go somewhere.
• By definition, a high speed line can't have many stops, or it ceases to be fast. However, it would seem sensible to have at least one stop between outer London and Birmingham to maximise its usefulness and passenger numbers.
• I cannot see the point in having such a line heading vaguely west out of London that doesn't stop at Heathrow. At present, the Conservatives seem to agree. (From a selfish point of view, a Heathrow route has the additional advantage of being likely to go near Wycombe rather than Amersham.)
• The proposed tunnel entrance/exit by old Amersham may be in a cutting, but it would surely be better for Old Amersham (and only marginally more expensive) if they extended the tunnel another hundred metres or two.
• Prospects are worse for Gt Miss and especially Wendover - see Zoom's comments on page 1.
• I'm not as optimistic as David P about the problems of construction. Presumably ~50% of the tunnel workforce, equipment and rock/soil will be in or via Old Amersham, and even if it comes and goes on the bypass, it's likely to cause major traffic problems for the duration.
• I think it's useful to look at the proposals and discuss them here, but I don't think there's any need to panic and start a major campaign just yet. The scheme is hugely expensive, won't start for 7 years at the earliest and we are likely to have a change of government in a couple of months. The whole scheme could be cancelled, or replaced with a different one.
• Meanwhile, the uncertainty may complicate matters for anyone trying to move - but if it depresses house prices that might mean developers are not so keen to build in everyone's back gardens.

And for anyone coming late and wanting to see the proposals:

• HS2 Amersham map
• HS2 summary map (with reference numbers for all the others)
• HS2 clickable list of all maps
• Government consultation document.

[roob_the_doob]

Are there no listed buildings in Old Amersham?The proposed route shown on the Amersham map doesn't show any.

Yes, I asked that. It shows a worrying lack of attention to detail. Amongst the Grade I listed buildings very near the route are High and Over and St Mary's Church. Also Shardeloes. And there are any number listed as Grade II in the old town. Given those glaring omissions, I do wonder what else they've missed.

One other thing - I got the impression that there was a possible loop going via Heathrow at a later date.

[Zoom]

A few further thoughts and explanations.

1. I've tried to get my head around the diagrams:

a) at the top you have a plan view of the route, the red line is the line laid on top of an ordinance survey map with key features marked.

b ) the red 'hatched' area is where there is a cutting - the hatching marks the width of the cutting.

c) below the map is a diagram of the vertical cross-section of the line - aligned with the map above.... in this diagram the broad red/blue line marks the track, the green dotted-line marks the current ground level.... this is an important diagram because it shows how far above or below the existing ground level the line will be ie how deep the cutting/tunnel will be or (in other parts of the route) how high above the existing ground level the embankment/bridge/viaduct will be. Key features are marked.

d) At the bottom of the page are some lines of figures and funny looking lines. These relate to the plan and cross-section above and line up so you can read the whole page in a line from top to bottom. These are:
d1) chainage : the distance from the start of the line (40+ km)
d2) horizontal alignment and vertical alignment : not entirely sure how to read these but I think these show how the line shifts up, down, left and right as you move along the route - "L" = the length of that particular stretch and "G/R" = the gradient or radius of the curve
d3) existing level / proposed level / cut and fill are fairly obvious - these are the figures that relate to what I described in c) above.

2. As someone else pointed out the proposed cutting between Amersham and Little Missenden is really deep (15m-25m, although it looks as if it is 40-50m wide). The depth should lessen the noise quite a lot but it is quite close to the old town - in particular only 200m from the school, Mill lane and the recreation ground. Although the cutting design will hold the noise down and the trains are electric, they will still be noisy when travelling at 320kmh.

Someone else said that the trains would only be in the cutting for 15seconds. That's not quite right. At 320kmh it would take the trains nearly 25 seconds to transit the cutting from Amersham to Little Missenden, and the route is planned to have 8 trains an hour. So that's 25 seconds noise every 8 minutes.... that's quite a disturbance.... its definitely quite a big disturbance if you're within 200m of it.

I really don't understand why they made this a cutting rather than extending the tunnel to link up with the tunnel at Little Missenden. Can it really be cheaper or better to construct a cutting and all the road/bridge works than to build a longer tunnel ?

If I was being cynical I would suggest that they're proposing this option now so that when there are lots of protests they can be all conciliatory and conceded making it a tunnel (which they might be planning all along !) and then all the protesters will say oh ok that's alright then.

3. Someone pointed out that the tunnel under Amersham is a twin bore and the tunnel at Little Missenden is a single bore. Looking at the diameter of the bores I don't quite understand this... each of the twin bores is almost the same diameter as the single bore. Maybe it is something to do with airflows and the length of the tunnels.

4. There is an emergency access shaft by the A413 at the bottom of Stanley Hill but there is no indication of what this would be like in terms of size or construction, presumably there would be a building of some sort at ground level
.

[Zoom]

Oh and a second thing....

The loop via Heathrow is the competing route being proposed by the conservatives... it isn't part of this official plan. The conservative plan involves taking the line via Heathrow and then following the M40 to High Wycombe and then on to Aylesbury.


This official route doesn't have include a station at Heathrow or anywhere else West of London (how stupid is that)... they talk about an interchange for heathrow at 'Old Oak Common' where people could catch a connecting service to Heathrow - this is just plain misleading.... looking at the plans you can see that this station would be at Wormwood Scrubs by the A40 Westway which is a totally stupid place for a station... what use is that ? Why no station actually AT Heathrow, or a parkway station West of London say near Uxbridge/M25/High Wycombe ? From using Eurostar I know that the parkway station at Ebbsfleet/Ashford is really useful and used by masses of people. A similar station West of London would attract huge amounts of business from Herts/Bucks/Berks/Oxon/West London, etc.

[hyposmurf]

2. As someone else pointed out the proposed cutting between Amersham and Little Missenden is really deep (15m-25m, although it looks as if it is 40-50m wide). The depth should lessen the noise quite a lot but it is quite close to the old town - in particular only 200m from the school, Mill lane and the recreation ground. Although the cutting design will hold the noise down and the trains are electric, they will still be noisy when travelling at 320kmh.

Someone else said that the trains would only be in the cutting for 15seconds. That's not quite right. At 320kmh it would take the trains nearly 25 seconds to transit the cutting from Amersham to Little Missenden, and the route is planned to have 8 trains an hour. So that's 25 seconds noise every 8 minutes.... that's quite a disturbance.... its definitely quite a big disturbance if you're within 200m of it.

I think youre right about the depth of cutting and tunnel reducing some of the noise,but Im sure there will still be considerable noise breakout.On a late night I can hear the train last trains moving into and out of Chesham station and I live over 1.6km from the nearest point of the station,with the majority of Chesham town in between myself and station.This is partly due to living at the top of a valley.
These met trains are electric, as a guess the trains probably dont even go over 20mph pulling into/out of the station, where as these proposed electric trains will be travelling at almost 200mph.It would be a high volume of disturbance at that rate as you say Zoom.Its hard to tell what it will sound like until its built, but by that stage theres no turning back.

Couldnt find the train proposed for the line, but this is the French Equivalent:

French TGV Train

David is right its not the correct way of approaching it being anti straight away,but its worth debating and looking at what can be improved and how it will effect the town.Our rail services does need improving, but do we really need to be spending and estimated £34 million to shave 35 minute of a journey time from London to Birmingham, when we already have a train line built serving that area,surely the money would be better invested at improving our existing train network.

[Fran]

do we really need to be spending and estimated £34 million to shave 35 minute of a journey time from London to Birmingham, when we already have a train line built serving that area,surely the money would be better invested at improving our existing train network.

It's not really about London to Birmingham, or even London to Scotland; it's about connecting up with Eurostar and the rest of Europe, so Paris to Edinburgh, for example. At the moment, we're the weak (slow) link.

[hyposmurf]

It's not really about London to Birmingham, or even London to Scotland; it's about connecting up with Eurostar and the rest of Europe, so Paris to Edinburgh, for example. At the moment, we're the weak (slow) link.

I still have to be convinced on that one as I tried to book a train journey from London to Prague and it takes something like 18hours, due to all the crap interchanges and waits.This was via the Eurocity trains and much talked about Eurostar.The cost was also terrible.Flying was the only viable option, which is around 1hr and 45mins.

[David P]

It's not really about London to Birmingham, or even London to Scotland; it's about connecting up with Eurostar and the rest of Europe, so Paris to Edinburgh, for example. At the moment, we're the weak (slow) link.

Which is why the original report recommended that the line should go from St Pancras (and go via Heathrow). As it stands people will have to lug their luggage along the Euston road from Euston to St Pancras if they want to go from B'ham to Paris. The taxi drivers will probably make a mint charging a tenner to go a couple of hundred yards.

[hyposmurf]

True and the big problem is that we and Europe may have super fast trains but the interchanges really need reviewing,between countries to make the system efficient.This service will be in direct competition with the airlines,so it has to offer a similar if not more efficient/cheaper service to be worthwhile.Otherwise businesses will still fly for travel within Britain.I can see that as a long term option Britain really needs to move business away from London to keep property prices down to a managable level.I suppose this link to the North is to help facilitate this trend.I do in part think this proposed train is a good idea,but am just concerned at how it will effect such places as old Amersham.
Zoom you are probably right in thinking they have proposed the worst case solution first in the hope that they can get away with more and keep overall costs down and at the same time have some room for manoeuvre should they have to carry out alterations to fit in with public concern.

[PaulEden]

This service will be in direct competition with the airlines,so it has to offer a similar if not more efficient/cheaper service to be worthwhile.Otherwise businesses will still fly for travel within Britain

Indeed so. Do you know what the two most popular destination from Heathrow, the world's busiest international airport are? You might think it'd be the financial or manufacturing hotspots of the world. New York, maybe? Tokyo? Perhaps the upcoming Beijing?

Think again. Paris and Manchester. Yes, the two most popular destinations, in terms of *aircraft destination, is Paris and Manchester. Which leads me to think that if we could get good rail links between those two cities, we'd make a significant dent in the much debated carbon footprint of Heathrow and potentially, remove the case for a third runway.

It's bonkers that the fastest train line ever in this country doesn't go direct to our biggest airport, and I'm not saying this because it would potentially move the route away from us.

*More aircraft leave for Paris and Manchester than other destination, but these flights are often under utilised, so they may not be the most used destination per passenger.

[roob_the_doob]

Which is why the original report recommended that the line should go from St Pancras (and go via Heathrow). As it stands people will have to lug their luggage along the Euston road from Euston to St Pancras if they want to go from B'ham to Paris. The taxi drivers will probably make a mint charging a tenner to go a couple of hundred yards.

I thought that, and then realised that trains will be going direct from Birmingham to Paris via Stratford, without calling at either StPancras or Euston.

Think again. Paris and Manchester. Yes, the two most popular destinations, in terms of *aircraft destination, is Paris and Manchester. Which leads me to think that if we could get good rail links between those two cities, we'd make a significant dent in the much debated carbon footprint of Heathrow and potentially, remove the case for a third runway

Yes, but I very much doubt that people actually want to go to/from Heathrow. They first have to get there. Travelling from Euston to Manchester (eventually) is likely to be at least as easy for most people

[Zoom]

I thought that, and then realised that trains will be going direct from Birmingham to Paris via Stratford, without calling at either StPancras or Euston

Well I've just had a look at this.... I can't find any evidence in the plans of the line connecting with the HS1 line from St Pancras to the Channel Tunnel.... if they're not going to join up then there is no possibility of through trains Birmingham to Paris/Brussels.

The idea of HS2 not linking to HS1, not having an interchange at Heathrow and not having a station in the far west of London near the M40/M25 is unbelievable.

Personally I think the overall proposal can be improved, and as far as Amersham is concerned I think we'd be fine if they just extended the tunnel for another 500m minimum and preferably extend it to join up with the tunnel at Little Missenden.

The construction period will be dreadful for us (dirt, noise, mess, traffic) but someone has to suffer it and if it is managed properly it would be worth it.

[Elmodesham]

If you squint enough at the map, you can see a UFO.

Isn't Sarcasm the lowest form of Wit??

[Elmodesham]

Having studied the map of the intended rail link, I can only see it as a negative venture from a 'local' aspect.

Once completed the commuters on the link will appreciate the benefits of such a line but for the years of suffering of inevitable construction disruption, for the locals of Amersham (and surrounding areas).

(And I thought the Parking proposals were a bad idea)


Regards,

Elmodesham.

[PaulEden]

Dear Department of Transport. Please find enclosed a sensible High Speed rail network.

The station west of London is Heathrow, and the one east of Manchester is Leeds.

My consultation fee is £2 million. Cash accepted.

[Fran]

If I suggest that the NE spur should go beyond Middlesborough, to Newcastle, can I claim 5% of your fee?

[PaulEden]

Ah now. I considered a east coast branch from Stratford, taking in Cambridge and/or Norwich, then north to Newcastle with maybe a stop in Lincoln.
This would encompass and engulf Crossrail.

[roob_the_doob]

If I suggest that the NE spur should go beyond Middlesborough, to Newcastle, can I claim 5% of your fee?

And if I suggest the line goes to Folkestone and not New Romney, can I have another 5%?

Rather than going across the pennines, I'd suggest a split at Birmingham going through Burton, Derby, and then east of Sheffield heading north.

[PaulEden]

Roob, yes, but it'd need a stop at Sheffield if it was nearby. It's an important city.

[PaulEden]

And if I suggest the line goes to Folkestone and not New Romney, can I have another 5%?

Rather than going across the pennines, I'd suggest a split at Birmingham going through Burton, Derby, and then east of Sheffield heading north.

The destination on the south coast is approximate. I'd like it to link up with the Tunnel trains.

[Zoom]

Ah now. I considered a east coast branch from Stratford, taking in Cambridge and/or Norwich, then north to Newcastle with maybe a stop in Lincoln.
This would encompass and engulf Crossrail.

I'd say that would be the HS3 line... up the east coast to Edinburgh... Stratford, Cambridge, Peterborough, Middlesborough, Newcastle, Edinburgh...

[PaulEden]

I'd say that would be the HS3 line... up the east coast to Edinburgh... Stratford, Cambridge, Peterborough, Middlesborough, Newcastle, Edinburgh...

Yep.
Should HS2 and HS3 both terminate at Edinburgh?

[hyposmurf]

My costs for the infrastructure spend estimate were in correct, they actually estimated it at £15.8 to £17.4bn,for this new train line.Something else that is interesting is that they the trains are 400m long.How long are our usual length Chiltern line trains?14 trains per hour?Thats one at just over every 4 mins.
Does anyone know whether they will running trains on a single track or two sets of track?Also how much of this will be freight trains and how many passenger trains?

[HP6]

Dear Paul Eden,

My compliments on a fabulous illustration in the true spirit of internet pointlessness, though you've used an old representation of local government in the UK - and I don't know what's happened to Northern Ireland - it looks a bit fragmented. Good to see Newtown St Boswells, mind you.

Could you now come up with some suggestions as to what we can do in Birmingham once we've travelled into London to catch the train?

[Matthew (MPJ/Admin)]

With regards to a connection / station for Heathrow, there is a provision for a station around Old Oak Common for a connection to Crossrail, which will connect to Heathrow.

I'm still unsure about the impact on Amersham. I have travelled on HS1 through Kent and did not notice it go through many places, but it does have a few stops on the way that trains can stop at. I also over the past few years had to travel to Kent and was aware of the large area of works that were in places where the line was being built.

I suspect the impact on Amersham while the construction takes place will be a nuisance, but it might boost the local economy for a while with an influx of workers. Noise and dust may be a problem. We are "lucky" to have a tunnel going through most of our area, will its construction cause subsidence or vibration for a large area?

When the trains start to run, I suspect we will get used to the noise. I can only think it will be like the same sort of noise you get in Berkhamstead with the Euston line trains speeding through, plus the slower one, although I don't think there will be as many trains, but they will be longer. You do get used to train noise, but on the other hand, you would rather the noise was not there, but personally I would prefer that noise to a major road noise. What I don't know and I don't know if any research has been done, is the impact of the noise in the Misbourne valley. Will this amplify the noise spreading it further?

As for the actual line, I am in favour of rail travel (I don't drive, so perhaps it is obvious that I would be in favour). I travel a lot from Amersham to Leeds by train. From Kings X to Leeds is about 2 hours 20, very good. What annoys me is the time I have to take to get from Amersham to Kings X, which when I get there, I then have to in many ways revers my journey back north.

When I had to travel to Milton Keynes, I again had to go into London and then out again, very frustrating.

What I think is needed is a sort of M25 for rail, connecting all the major towns around London. This would save a huge amount of time for people who have to travel in and out of London, reduce crowing in central London and provide greater transport routes for many meaning reduced car travel. if HS2 connected at this, say at Aylesbury, then the line would be of benefit to Amersham. Will it ever happen?

[PaulEden]

Dear Paul Eden,

My compliments on a fabulous illustration in the true spirit of internet pointlessness, though you've used an old representation of local government in the UK -

It's a map of county towns.

Could you now come up with some suggestions as to what we can do in Birmingham once we've travelled into London to catch the train?

I'm not qualified in that field. Other than occasional trips to the NEC, the last time I went there it was by car and I got lost on the odd ring road.