There is an alternative to HS2 route

YOUR Editorial (Yorkshire Post, January 30) paints a somewhat misleading picture of the High Speed UK proposals.

Just like HS2, our plan is to build a dedicated high-speed line linking London and Leeds. But that’s where the similarity ends.

HSUK will be faster than HS2 between Leeds and London, because its M1-aligned route avoids the unnecessary deviation via Birmingham and the Chilterns.

HSUK will be fully integrated with the existing rail network – so trains can branch off the trunk line, and serve intermediate centres such as Doncaster and Wakefield (which are bypassed by HS2), without compromising journey times to Leeds.

HSUK will offer direct high speed services from Leeds to city centre stations in all other major UK cities. This is possible with our alternative “spine and spur” network configuration which includes a trans-Pennine link to Manchester and Liverpool. Trans-Pennine journey times will be halved. HS2 can only offer city centre links to London and Birmingham, and does nothing whatsoever for trans-Pennine connectivity.

HSUK will cost around 25 per cent (circa £12bn) less than HS2. Its total route length is 10 per cent less, its tunnelled length is half that of HS2, and it generally avoids HS2’s expensive and controversial rural alignments.

HSUK will improve virtually all UK intercity journeys, offering average 40 per cent journey time reductions. By contrast, HS2 will only enhance a few selective journeys, and makes many more journeys less frequent, slower and requiring more difficult changes (the eight minutes claimed by HS2 to transfer at Leeds is measured from the barrier line at the proposed New Lane station – but for a passenger arriving at the far (south) end of a 400m long train, the transfer could take at least 15 minutes).

HSUK will serve the existing city centre station at Leeds. Our plan is to spend a very small fraction of the £50bn HS2 budget to widen the viaduct east of Leeds station to four tracks, and to build a new link between the York and Castleford lines. This will allow many more trains to run through Leeds, rather than terminate there, and this will free up enough platform space within the existing station to accommodate high speed trains there.

The above is something of a Leeds-centric view.

But most UK cities will derive similar benefits from High Speed UK. This stems from the crucial difference – the fact that HSUK has been planned as an integrated network.

HS2’s problem is not one of marketing. HS2’s more basic problem is that it’s not a cost-effective solution for UK inter-city transport. The people of Yorkshire – and of the UK – deserve better, and they deserve a choice. We aim to provide that choice with High Speed UK.

From: Stuart Spensley, Church Fenton.

The proposed HS2 route with a spur at Church Fenton joining the existing rail system and onward to York is a disaster for the village as 120 properties are affected by “isolation” the largest number along the whole route.

In addition a high level viaduct has been deemed necessary to go over the existing rail line before joining it, causing yet more environmental damage to the area. Joining at this point will reduce existing services and require the closure of Ulleskelf station. These proposals have seen house prices dramatically fall and the health of a number of people has been affected.

Alternative routes that involve little or no additional costs have been submitted that would greatly reduce the impact on the local community and yet still achieve MP Hugh Bayley’s objective of linking HS2 to the East Coast line and York.

From: Barry Foster, High Stakesby, Whitby.

CONGRATULATIONS to Wakefield Council on the way they are dealing with the HS2 situation. Who really needs to get to London 20 minutes sooner? We are told this country has no money and here we go wanting to spend billions on this foolhardy scheme.

Added to which services are being cut left, right and centre. No public toilets, libraries, places of leisure and heaven knows what else. We are giving millions away to foreign countries far better off than we are, and now millions to Syria. Our hard-working National Health Service is going down the drain and the fat cats seem to get richer as each day passes. Added to this our MPs, of whom half don’t appear to attend anything to do with their jobs.

Most of us do our level best to keep going and to contribute to life as best we can. It would be nice to see a few more doing the same.

From: MGC Burgoyne, Schoolhouse Terrace, Kirk Deighton, Wetherby.

THE answer to HS2 is to update the old lines. Make the carriages double deckers which will allow for more passenger capacity and goods transport.

The bridges will have to be higher, and the tunnels lowered. The station platforms will be half the length. By doing this you can have both speed and capacity.

Goods traffic could operate at night so the lines are used to full capacity.

From: Ron Firth, Woodgarth Court, Campsall

I FULLY understand Councillor Peter Box’s call for a wider debate on the future of HS2, following the rejection of the present scheme by Wakefield Council (Yorkshire Post, January 30).

It is well known that Leeds Bradford Airport is very restricted by virtue of its location and single runway. It certainly makes little sense to spend millions on a dedicated rail link between that airport and HS2.

I, and others, have been stressing for several months the availability of Doncaster Airport for development. It has the second-longest runway in the UK with plenty of space for a second runway and the necessary terminal buildings. Access by road is being improved with the link from the M18 in the course of construction,

By 2032 when, if, HS2 is delivered, Leeds Bradford Airport will be at saturation point and careful thought must be given to making best use of the vast sums available.