High Speed 3

High Speed 3 (HS3) is a conceptual coast to coast, east-west rail line in northern England, connecting Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield and Hull. In March 2016 at the 2016 Budget the line was greenlit and £60 million development funding was provided for the preparation of a route plan for the line.

History

Background

Historically the use of the term High Speed 3 was loose – the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee (March 2015) stated there was no firm definition of the route implied by HS3:

Improvements to east-west links in the north of England have often been referred to as "HS3". This term has been used interchangeably to mean the connection between Leeds and Manchester or a longer route running from Liverpool to Hull via Manchester and Leeds. Such a railway would not necessarily need to be high-speed. [..] We refer to "east-west links" rather than "HS3" in this report as there is no clear indication yet what form or route the proposals might take or if the trains will be "high speed" in the same sense as HS2.

— The Economics of High Speed 2, Economic Affairs Committee (2015).^[1]

A plan to improve rail journey times in northern England, the Northern Hub, was developed from a 2009 scheme to improve the rail network around Manchester.^[2] Schemes to improve the Leeds-Manchester linespeed by 2014 were included in Network Rail's CP5 improvements, with an aim to reduce Manchester-Leeds journey times from 54 to 40 minutes.^[3] In 2011 the approximately £290 million electrification of the Transpennine Manchester Leeds line was given funding.^[4][5] Work started on the electrification in 2013,^[6] with full electrification between Manchester, Leeds and York expected by 2018.^[7]

In June 2014, at a speech given at the Manchester Museum of Science and Industry, the incumbent Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne proposed a high speed rail link between Leeds and Manchester; the line would utilise the existing route between Leeds and Manchester, with additional tunnels and other infrastructure. Osborne argued that the northern cities' influence was comparatively less than London's and that the link would promote economies of agglomeration.^[8][9][10]

Osborne suggested the line should be considered as part of a review of the second phase of High Speed 2.^[8][11] Initial estimates suggested a rail line with a 140 miles per hour (230 km/h) line speed, and Leeds-Manchester journey times reduced to 30 minutes,^[8] Osborne estimated the cost to be less per mile than that of HS2, giving a cost of under £6 billion.^[12] Initial responses to the proposal were mixed: Jeremy Acklam of the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) suggested that plans should look at connecting other northern cities such as Liverpool, and potentially northeast England via York;^[12] commentators noted that the proposal could be viewed as an attempt to gain political support in the north of England in the run up to the 2015 general election:^[9][10] the Institute of Economic Affairs characterised the proposal as a "headline grabbing vanity project designed to attract votes"; the British Chambers of Commerce, Confederation of British Industry and others were cautiously positive about the proposal, but emphasised the need to deliver on existing smaller scale schemes.^[13]

On 5 August 2014, an alliance of six city councils - Leeds, Liverpool, Hull, Manchester, Newcastle upon Tyne and Sheffield - unveiled an initial regional transport plan linking their cities called 'One North'.^[14] This plan incorporated a new 125 miles per hour (201 km/h) trans-Pennine high speed rail link connecting to the northern branches of HS2 at Manchester and Leeds (30min journey time), together with other regional rail developments, and the bringing forward of the construction of the northern part of HS2, as part of a regional transport plan including other road, intermodal port rail freight improvements. The estimate cost of the high speed Manchester-Leeds rail link was circa over £5bn, with a proposed completion date of 2030; the entire project was costed at £10-15 billion.^[15] George Osborne attended the project launch, and provided his backing for the project.^[16] A report Rebalancing Britain published by High Speed Two Limited in late 2014 also acknowledged the need for improved east-west transportation links in northern England, and recommended the progressing of the schemes in the 'One North' report.^[17][18]

In 20 March 2015 the Department of Transport published plans for transport infrastructure improvements in the north of England, including proposals by the Transport for the North (TfN) working group;^[19][20] the TransNorth report proposed a number of options for improved rail links between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle and Hull with line speeds up to 140 miles per hour (230 km/h). The proposals included new build routes between the major northern cities, with cost estimates from £5 to 19 billion, with estimated journey times of one half to two thirds of current routes; alternative upgrades of existing routes were costed in the £1 to 7 billion range, and had lesser journey time reductions, of the order of 10–15 minutes; the proposals were in addition to existing High Speed 2 route options for Liverpool and Sheffield-Leeds. The development options were planned for Network Rail Control Period 6 (2019–24).^[21][22]

As of November 2015 Transport for the North (TfN) main proposals included a trans-Pennine railway line linking to HS2; and a new Liverpool-Manchester line with a connection to Manchester Airport; as well as a tunnelled road between Manchester and Sheffield.^[23] The rail plans, named "Northern Powerhouse Rail" (NPR) by TfN were in addition to planned improvements including electrification, the Northern Hub, and Transpennine route upgrade. HS2 Ltd and Network Rail were commissioned by TfN to prepare costing studies on a range of rail upgrade options. Whilst some new lines were expected to be required between Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds; improvements to connectivity to Newcastle and Hull were expected to be met by improvements to existing lines and rolling stock.^[24]

In March 2016 the newly established governmental advisory body, the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC), chaired by Lord Adonis, reported on transport infrastructure projects in the north of England. It recommended bringing forward HS3 proposals, beginning with the Manchester-Leeds section.^[25][26] The NIC's report, "High Speed North", also recommended collaboration between TfN and HS2 Ltd. on the design of the northern parts of HS2; and on the design of the improved Manchester Piccadilly station, together with Manchester City Council and other rail bodies.^[27] The report suggested the development of a HS3 link after the completion of Network rail's c. £2 billion transpennine electrification upgrade (scheduled 2015-2022, with a resultant 40 min journey).^[28] A report by Arup commissioned by the NIC studied additional improvements on the Manchester-Leeds route, focussing on the Diggle route (via Huddersfield) utilising disused track plus new build tunnels, and identified potential journey time savings of between 1 and 10 minutes.^[29] A prelimary study by Network Rail did not rule out that the aspirational Leeds-Manchester journey time of 30 minutes could be achieved on the Calder Valley route.^[30] TfN's aspirational Manchester-Manchester airport and Leeds-Sheffield journey times were identified as being achievable by the HS2 scheme, with modifications to through running to Sheffield city centre.^[31]

In August 2016, the Institute of Public Policy Research urged the government to prioritise HS3 over HS2.^[32]

Planning

At the 2016 Budget the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, greenlit the general proposals by the National Infrastructure Commission for a high speed line between Manchester and Leeds, with an aim of reducing journey times to 30 minutes. £60 million of funding was provided to generate plans for a route by 2017.^[33][34][35]

See also

• High speed rail in the United Kingdom
• Huddersfield Line
• The Northern Way

References

Sources