Will Crossrail2 Be Built In The Next 40 Years?

[RichmondCommu]

G'day everyone,

I'm curious to know members views on the above. Other than TFL I'm not so sure that there is a political will to build another very expensive railway line across London and I wonder whether the project will be shelved indefinitely.

Your thoughts would be very welcome.

Kind regards,

Richmond Commuter!

 

[yorkie]

It's clearly essential, so I think yes.

The existing lines cannot cope well with current demand, let alone future demand, and it would release much needed capacity at stations like Waterloo.

 

[HSTEd]

It appears there is a bit of political trouble brewing over it because neither Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn want to be accused of spending the money on London in light of somewhat unbalanced transport infrastructure spending - at least from the perspective of the press.

If it gets built, I think London will have to go it alone.

 

[Bantamzen]

It appears there is a bit of political trouble brewing over it because neither Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn want to be accused of spending the money on London in light of somewhat unbalanced transport infrastructure spending - at least from the perspective of the press.

If it gets built, I think London will have to go it alone.

Personally speaking I would have no problem in it going ahead, just as long as other planned projects elsewhere didn't quietly get shifted back onto the shelves. Because whilst it is a key project for the capital, there are other equally important projects around the country that need completion too. If financially it come down to Crossrail 2 or a few other projects elsewhere like electrification of the Trans-Pennine or Great Western then I would say that London would either have to wait, or fund it themselves.

 

[AM9]

Clearly its provision and expenditure should be justified by the same criteria as any other national infrastructure scheme, i.e. its impact on the environment and cost benefit to the UK economy respectively. Any 'London vs the rest of the UK' judgement of fairness is subjective and essentially a political construct furthered by the media as it sees fit.

 

[Chester1]

Clearly its provision and expenditure should be justified by the same criteria as any other national infrastructure scheme, i.e. its impact on the environment and cost benefit to the UK economy respectively. Any 'London vs the rest of the UK' judgement of fairness is subjective and essentially a political construct furthered by the media as it sees fit.

Political constructs matter, especially in regards to £32bn! The Tories seem to be moving towards getting London to pay for most it instead of half. They are finally starting to gain some support in the north and they are not going to risk losing it by prioritising Crossrail 2 over "Northern Powerhouse Rail".

 

[AM9]

Political constructs matter, especially in regards to £32bn! The Tories seem to be moving towards getting London to pay for most it instead of half. They are finally starting to gain some support in the north and they are not going to risk losing it by prioritising Crossrail 2 over "Northern Powerhouse Rail".

I'll repeat the most important part of my post:

"Clearly its provision and expenditure should be justified by the same criteria as any other national infrastructure scheme, ..."

Politics often clouds the judgement in major infrastructure investments, but the true, (i.e. not political) cost of not making the investment also forms part of the relevant data.
There are of course other 'fairness' criteria, e.g. the environmental cost of not investing, the cost per passenger mile, the impact on health. Fairness is such a devisive and misleadingly convenient word.

 

[The Ham]

I fear that the political fallout from not building it would likely be bigger than if it were built after a few Northern schemes.

As not only does it serve London but quite a large area beyond London.

For instance, it is unlikely that Exeter would get 2tph without it, which means that the redoubling of the WofE line would probably also be on hold until such time as it is done.

Also if Crossrail 2 isn't built then the fifth line would need to be done, which London would almost certainly insist was totally funded by the government. As such there would still be a London focused scheme happening anyway, but one that wouldn't make Londoners happy.

Given the potential for more local services once long distance services are moved across to HS2, then the need for some of the extra investment is reduced. That could result in more political fallout in the form of lots of capacity being created whilst relatively little being done about services that are already in the top ten busiest trains in the country with no plan to be able to solve that problem.

Yes, for now the politicians can kick the can down the road. However, to do so for the next 20 to 30 years (so that it doesn't start being built in the next 40 years) would likely be a very bad political move. Even just in the fact that it passes through so many constitutes​ which could make it enough of a priority for a party trying to win enough seats.

You could appease some people by building the southern approach to Heathrow, which would ease some congestion from Woking outwards. However now you are having to build more than one scheme and so politically​ causes more upset as now London is seen as getting lots of projects whilst the North is getting fewer new schemes.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Personally speaking I would have no problem in it going ahead, just as long as other planned projects elsewhere didn't quietly get shifted back onto the shelves. Because whilst it is a key project for the capital, there are other equally important projects around the country that need completion too. If financially it come down to Crossrail 2 or a few other projects elsewhere like electrification of the Trans-Pennine or Great Western then I would say that London would either have to wait, or fund it themselves.

This is exactly how I feel. If MML Kettering to Sheffield plus Trans - Pennine and the GWML get finished off then fair enough.

 

[Chester1]

I am not saying it shouldn't or won't be built but I do think the Tories have decided to make London pick up most of the bill. They can afford to do so if the treasury guarantees the loans. I reckon the Tories want to pay 10-15% not half.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I am not saying it shouldn't or won't be built but I do think the Tories have decided to make London pick up most of the bill. They can afford to do so if the treasury guarantees the loans. I reckon the Tories want to pay 10-15% not half.

Which seems reasonably fair

 

[AM9]

Which seems reasonably fair

Be careful what you wish for. If such a large project was subject to that precedent, as soon as any metropolitan areas elsewhere want investment that benefits the local economy more than the national position, there would be a temptation (particularly for a 'small government at any cost' right wing administration) to extract more and more from local economies. The more integrated the 'Northern Powerhouse' looks, the less national support would be tolerated for investment that only benefits that region.

 

[sk688]

I think it is needed , so to reduce overcrowding on the Tube . The Victoria line cannot cope , even with 36 tph for example

But I don't think it should follow this route . I think it needs a part through North West London , which is a part which has recieved very little investment compared to East and South East London , which has had money thrown at it - DLR , Docklands , Westfield Stratford , Olympic Park , countless regen projects , while NW London has not had anything , so I think a part of Crossrail 2 should pass through there , as it will help to regenerate some of London's most deprived areas , like Harlesden and Stonebridge Park

 

[Chester1]

Be careful what you wish for. If such a large project was subject to that precedent, as soon as any metropolitan areas elsewhere want investment that benefits the local economy more than the national position, there would be a temptation (particularly for a 'small government at any cost' right wing administration) to extract more and more from local economies. The more integrated the 'Northern Powerhouse' looks, the less national support would be tolerated for investment that only benefits that region.

The majority of the cost of extending Metrolink was local or borrowed money, not central government funding and the government has specified that the Manchester Airport HS2 station needs to be locally funded. I think the government should pay for the NR sections of CR2 because they will gain more access fees but TfL should pay for the new sections. Even Sadiq Khan expects London to pay £16bn of the £32bn.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The notion about the timeline for building HS2 was that it followed on from Crossrail 1 in terms of funding, skills and workforce needed.
So logically London will have to wait until HS2 is built before cornering the railway construction market for Crossrail 2.
Funding is the key, and Brexit may hit the City (and the UK) hard.

 

[matt_world2004]

The notion about the timeline for building HS2 was that it followed on from Crossrail 1 in terms of funding, skills and workforce needed.
So logically London will have to wait until HS2 is built before cornering the railway construction market for Crossrail 2.
Funding is the key, and Brexit may hit the City (and the UK) hard.

I believe that tflw have taken some of tbe construction teams inhouse from crossrail one for future engineering projects

 

[Clip]

I think it is needed , so to reduce overcrowding on the Tube . The Victoria line cannot cope , even with 36 tph for example

But I don't think it should follow this route . I think it needs a part through North West London , which is a part which has recieved very little investment compared to East and South East London , which has had money thrown at it - DLR , Docklands , Westfield Stratford , Olympic Park , countless regen projects , while NW London has not had anything , so I think a part of Crossrail 2 should pass through there , as it will help to regenerate some of London's most deprived areas , like Harlesden and Stonebridge Park

And where would you like this line to start and finish that you propose?

HArlesden is going to be close to Old Oak Common station so you are going to be able to get anywhere in London and the West/North West of Eng;land with ease so I am unsure of you idea for a line from NW London

 

[D365]

I believe that tflw have taken some of tbe construction teams inhouse from crossrail one for future engineering projects

What's "tflw"?

 

[matt_world2004]

What's "tflw"?

Sorry tfl typing on tablet.

 

[NickBucks]

Crossrail 2 I believe passes through areas with potential for large housing developments but with poor transport links at present ( thinking of the outer areas not central London )so for this reason I think it will go ahead.

 

[nottsnurse]

But I don't think it should follow this route . I think it needs a part through North West London , which is a part which has recieved very little investment compared to East and South East London , which has had money thrown at it - DLR , Docklands , Westfield Stratford , Olympic Park , countless regen projects...

Firstly, as far as I'm aware, the closest the proposed Crossrail 2 route gets to "South East London" is London Victoria, the route south of the river following a very south western path.

Secondly, of those projects you mention only DLR affects "South East London", and then only a very tiny bit of it. Let's not forget your seemingly much ignored NW London has benefited from first the Metropolitan Line and then later many other tube lines, with the far more frequent services that go with them. South East London on the otherhand has little such provision, with the development of the Overground south of the river being the small glimmer of hope that perhaps TFL wouldnt be better described as Transport For North London.

Gipsy Hill station, which serves my old stomping ground, sees a far worse level of service provision than the likes of Harlesden and Willesden Junction, yet as far as I'm aware there is little to nothing being proposed to improve service to it and other similar stations in SE London. Not all SE London stations are East Croydon!

 

[AM9]

The notion about the timeline for building HS2 was that it followed on from Crossrail 1 in terms of funding, skills and workforce needed.
So logically London will have to wait until HS2 is built before cornering the railway construction market for Crossrail 2.
Funding is the key, and Brexit may hit the City (and the UK) hard.

It already has, - the devaluation has been the worst in history according to some. But that is OT.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It already has, - the devaluation has been the worst in history according to some. But that is OT.

I really meant in terms of employment levels and demand for commuting.
The harder the Brexit the greater the impact on City employment.
Then there's the whole "rebalancing" of the economy which is demanded by folks outside London.
Even the Tories want to export government departments from the capital.
I'm just saying we can't take the relentless growth of London for granted any more.

 

[adrock1976]

As nobody has mentioned in this thread exactly the locations that (London) Crossrail 2 will connect, am I right in thinking that this is the Chelsea-Hackney line that has been talked about for years by various elected representatives?

 

[Ianno87]

As nobody has mentioned in this thread exactly the locations that (London) Crossrail 2 will connect, am I right in thinking that this is the Chelsea-Hackney line that has been talked about for years by various elected representatives?

Yes, Crossrail 2 is an evolution of the Chelsea-Hackney line proposal.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Yes, Crossrail 2 is an evolution of the Chelsea-Hackney line proposal.

Although from what I've read if the project does go ahead Chelsea might not get a station in order to save money.

 

[Busaholic]

Although from what I've read if the project does go ahead Chelsea might not get a station in order to save money.

Or to spare the nimby billionaire protest.

 

[CdBrux]

The notion about the timeline for building HS2 was that it followed on from Crossrail 1 in terms of funding, skills and workforce needed.
So logically London will have to wait until HS2 is built before cornering the railway construction market for Crossrail 2.

So logically London will have to wait until HS2 AND NPR is built before cornering the railway construction market for Crossrail 2.

 

[Cowley]

Regarding financing (and I'm wondering whether I dare ask the question), if by some chance Corbyn gets into power and starts renationalising the railways. What would happen to the financing of a scheme like this?

 

[Chester1]

Regarding financing (and I'm wondering whether I dare ask the question), if by some chance Corbyn gets into power and starts renationalising the railways. What would happen to the financing of a scheme like this?

He is an Islington socialist and his main team live within a post dinner party taxis ride distance so it would get funded. Due to Corbyns weakness within Labour party hierarchy Sadq Khan would probably get the 50:50 funding split he wants.

Perhaps Cross River Tram should be looked at again and DLR extension to Euston and St Pancras.