Underground HS2 station ‘too expensive and disruptive’
RAIL BOSS SAYS ‘£5BN COST’ TO BUILD IT AT PICCADILLY OUTWEIGHS THE BENEFIT
RAIL bosses have explained why they won’t be funding an underground station at Manchester Piccadilly as part of HS2 – claiming its ‘£5bn cost’ and the disruption it would cause outweigh the benefit.
Northern leaders have long warned that an overground station will ‘blight’ a huge swathe of the city centre, damage the economy and limit future capacity on our congested rail network.
But in November, with the release of the Government’s Integrated Rail Plan (IPR), it became clear that warnings had not been heeded when a preference was stated for a surface level ‘turn-back’ station. And this week, they finally provided an explanation, with High
Speed Rail director general Clive Maxwell claiming it would be too costly to go underground.
Mr Maxwell appeared before the Public Accounts Committee, where Kate Green, MP for Stretford and Urmston, asked the panel to explain the analysis of the costs and benefits of the Manchester station.
Mr Maxwell confirmed the station was ‘intended as a surface station for High Speed 2 and Northern Powerhouse
Rail.’ He added: “The Department has looked very extensively at what the alternatives were and at doing that underground. It would have meant digging a very large underground box and cavern to accommodate all those platforms, and that would have cost very large sums of money.
“It would also have led to huge amounts of disruption in central Manchester. I think the estimates we had were up to £5bn extra for that station, so the department, ministers and the Government took the view that that was not the right thing to do, and instead a surface station with a turn-back facility should be used, allowing trains to go in one way and come back out the other way.” The M.E.N. has asked Mayor Andy Burnham and Transport for the North for their views. Both have longargued for an underground station to futureproof rail connections across the north and boost the value of HS2. They have also argued that the alternative – a ‘turn back’ station above ground on the northern flank of the existing hub – would create a concrete jungle of viaducts which will ‘sever’ east Manchester, with 14,000 potential new jobs lost due to the amount of land needed to build it, cutting potential economic growth by an estimated £333m by 2050.