High speed rail remains central to the UK’s post-fossil fuel transport transition and by 2019 Eurostar, which runs on HS1, accounted for nearly 80% of travel from London to Paris and Brussels. Those journeys produce 80% less CO2 emissions than flying. In fact, passengers choosing to travel on HS1 effectively reduce the UK’s emission by the equivalent of 60,000 short haul flights annually. Although the service’s operations have been complicated by the pandemic and Brexit-related changes, HS1 remains pivotal to how the UK decarbonises public transport at scale.
We believe that HS1 remains a beacon for the transformative potential of high-speed rail, where breadth of initial ambition ensures the benefits are widely shared for the greatest good.
Route planning and analysis
Our HS1 journey began in 1989, when we proposed connecting the Channel Tunnel to London via a station in Stratford, East London. At first, ours was a lone voice challenging the UK Government and British Rail’s plans to run HS1 through South London. The Arup approach was driven by a simple question: how to make the line as useful as possible, picturing a train service that worked well for commuters, local residents, and freight, as well as international travellers.
Arup’s proposed route ran north of the Thames, through Stratford and into St Pancras – an alignment that would catalyse the multibillion-pound regeneration of East London, the land around King’s Cross and the disused chalk pits of Kent in south-east England. It would provide not only a high-speed railway but a much-needed quality commuter service from Kent to London. Park-and-ride facilities would also encourage modal shift from road to rail. In 1991, our route was chosen by the UK government.
To build the support required for such a significant new line, local consultation was vital and extensive. With that in progress, we identified unused land in King’s Cross, St Pancras, Stratford, Ebbsfleet and Ashford, connecting them with a route alignment that managed to avoid areas of outstanding natural beauty. It was an imaginative and balanced proposal, one that addressed environment, regeneration and economic development while scarcely disturbing existing communities and housing (not a single house had to be demolished to accommodate the route).