Ingestre with Tixall Parish Council

Appendix 4 – Health & Wellbeing

INGESTRE WITH TIXALL PARISH COUNCIL

Health and Wellbeing Impacts of HS2

The parish of Ingestre with Tixall will be severely affected by HS2 if the project proceeds as planned. A direct consequence of the announcement of the Initial Preferred Route for Phase 2, in January 2013, has been the generation of considerable anxiety and distress amongst the residents of the parish, to an extent that, for some, it is understood to be negatively affecting their health and wellbeing. This mirrors the reported experience of communities along the full length of the route.

As part of a wider exercise to gather more information, Ingestre with Tixall Parish Council has been asked if it would be willing to conduct a survey of the health and wellbeing impacts of HS2 in the parish. We believe that carrying out such a survey has merit and that it will provide important information that can be used to inform decisions regarding compensation. It will also provide evidence to guide management of the project at both national and local levels. However, the Parish Council believes that assessment of the health impacts of HS2 is an exercise which is better addressed at a county level, where the relevant expertise and resources exist.

We are therefore writing to you, firstly, to alert you to the fact that there is an emerging health and wellbeing problem surrounding HS2 and, secondly, to ask that the Health and Wellbeing Board investigate this matter further.

Background information is provided as follows:

HS2 comprises 556km of new-build ultra-high-speed railway track of which 74km is in Staffordshire. HS2 Ltd assesses potential impacts against various different measures, one of which is health. The zone of potential impact is taken as 3km either side of the proposed route but principal effects are expected to be concentrated in the zone 1km either side of the track. Nearly half a million properties are located within this narrower zone, providing residential accommodation for over one million people. Construction of the railway is spread over 20 years (7 to 10 years in any location), with Phase 1 being complete in 2026/7 and Phase 2 in 2032/3. Following completion, services of up to 18 trains per hour in each direction are planned, operating at a nominal maximum speed of 360kph.

Statutory compensation will be paid to the owners of properties required for the construction of the railway (nominally those within 60m of the proposed route). The Government has announced additional discretionary compensation schemes which include the purchase of any property between 60m and 120m of the route at the unblighted open market price and a series of cash payments, on a sliding scale, for property owners living between 120m and 300m of the route. There is an additional Exceptional Hardship Scheme (recently rebranded as Need to Sell) which allows the Government to buy properties outside the 120m zone if the owners can demonstrate that they have a compelling reason to sell but are unable to do so because they cannot sell their property, except at a considerable financial loss. The criteria are very strict and very few have been successful.

Regrettably, less than 2% of the owners of the half-million homes within 1km of the route will be meaningfully compensated. The remainder are facing, on average, a 20% reduction in property value due to generalised blight.

Faced with unsellable blighted homes, the prospect of the best part of a decade of disruption due to construction and a wait of up to 20 years for any realistic prospect of the housing market returning to anything like normal, you will appreciate the demoralising impact this is having -- in the extreme leading to thoughts of suicide, as highlighted by the BBC1 Inside Out programme, broadcast on 10 Nov ( commencing at approx 8min 30s).

In an attempt to gather some information about the health impacts of HS2, The Chilterns Conservation Board conducted a pilot study by means of a questionnaire to households in two communities close to the Phase 1 route in Buckinghamshire . The report can be found here:

Ingestre with Tixall Parish Council has been invited to undertake a similar survey in our area to broaden the available data. The Parish Council has agreed in principle that something should be done but recognises that it is not well equipped to do so. We are also concerned that the CCB survey was too limited in scope and the questionnaire not structured well enough to satisfy the scrutiny of professionals. On investigation, a study more akin to that carried out by Derbyshire County Council seemed more appropriate ( ) but this is clearly beyond our capabilities.

Our experience, together with others, suggests that there is a significant adverse health and wellbeing impact due to HS2 but that it remains largely hidden. Not only is it hidden, but the extent and severity is not anticipated by the health Impact assessments made by HS2 Ltd which focuses on the construction and operation phases only; with no recognition of the anxiety arising simply from the announcement of a proposed route and all that flows from this. Furthermore, it would appear that HS2 Ltd go out of the way to emphasise the health benefits from building HS2, while down-playing the negative impacts, see:

We ask that the members of the Board study the above-referenced material and, at its next meeting, discuss how best it can assist in gathering information on and evaluating the health and wellbeing impacts of HS2 on the residents of Staffordshire.

Appendix 5 – Specific Environmental Issues – 5.1

Hopton & Coton Parish Council response to HS2 Environmental Impact Consultation

Our response will focus on the environmental impact on Hopton village whose community is very severely affected by the current HS2 route proposal. The response is in three parts which reflect the observations and suggestions gathered from Hopton and Coton parish councillors and parishioners, we hope that HS2 limited will consider and acknowledge all the points made and act upon them in the best interests of the Hopton community.

Part 1 – The Trent valley ‘Northern’ route alternative

The current choice of route horizontal alignment was made in 2012 despite there being a clear case with regard to ease of construction, cost and minimising disruption to services and households for the HS2 route to follow the Trent valley alongside the existing railway and the A51 road. This most logical route was ‘sifted out’ because of is its proximity to the Pasturefields SSSI and the perceived difficulty in carrying out the proper site assessments and satisfying national environmental bodies to allow this route to be considered. An enormous amount of effort has been put in by individuals and parish councils to convince HS2 limited that a ‘Northern’ route would have no detrimental effect on Pasturefields SSSI and that it should be considered as the most logical and economical alignment.

We would most strongly request that a ‘Northern’ route alternative be revisited and more rigorously assessed in order to save the huge additional and unnecessary construction costs of the current route and also greatly reduce the number of local households affected by the project.

Part 2 – Hopton tunnel, track levels and green tunnel

Prior to November 2015 the preferred route passed through the edge of the Staffordshire County showground, divided Hopton village and carried on toward Marston. The route design at that time featured two deep cuttings and a ‘green tunnel’ adjacent to Hopton village, which although very undesirable gave some hope to residents of screening from the high speed train operational noise and visual pollution. Local responses to the route design consultation in 2014 suggested a bored tunnel under Hopton or at least cut and cover tunnels in place of the cuttings, combined with the proposed green tunnel.

The modifications to the route near Hopton announced in November 2015, clearly aimed at cost cutting, were to raise the vertical alignment of the track by around 4.5 metres thus reducing the depth of the cuttings in addition to the removal of the green tunnel from the design. The reason offered for this decision was that it was necessary to prevent flooding where the railway crosses an unnamed brook. The brook in question rarely reaches a depth greater than 15cm, we would suggest that the height of the proposed embankment/culvert at the crossing is somewhat ‘over designed’ and does not need to be 30 times higher than the depth of water.

If the current horizontal route alignment is finally confirmed we would most strongly request that priority consideration is given to minimizing the impact on Hopton residents by reconsidering the route design to include tunnelling techniques and a vertical alignment affording the maximum possible noise and visual mitigation.

Part 3 – Observations and suggestions concerning the proposed HS2 route detail published in September 2016.

1. The residents of Mount Edge and the MOD will be severed from the rest of Hopton village and must have reasonable access by foot/cycle to Hopton village to avoid the additional 1.2km due to the displaced new Hopton Lane. We suggest that the solution is provide a foot/cycle bridge near the intersection of the railway and (old) Hopton Lane.

2. Although HS2 ltd. have provided a good selection of maps in ‘plan’ view, there are no elevation projections or data of the finished landscape around Hopton. Can we please have elevation/3D information for Hopton surrounds to help residents, particularly in the area of Kings Drive, understand the changes in landscape and views that might be expected?

3. There seems to be some confusion as to whether the horizontal alignment of the track through Hopton has been altered (up to 40 metres?) since November 2015. Can we please have a definitive answer on this question and how many households may be affected by compensation zone changes due to change in proximity to the route centreline?

4. Concerning the footpaths/rights of way near Hopton Culvert, the walking route from Kings Drive to the Beacon Hill is a route used regularly by many people. The proposed footpath diversion and overbridge will necessitate an inconvenient extension of that route. We suggest that the existing footpath alignment could be maintained by provision of a pedestrian underpass through the embankment and under the railway at this point thereby providing a more direct path to Beacon Hill.

5. Both construction work and (later on) service train noise levels are of great concern to all Hopton residents. The information currently available from HS2 ltd. consists of computer modelled noise level contour maps and draft Code of Practice documents using a form of noise analysis and data that will be incomprehensible to most people. This data may be useful in satisfying National health and safety standards but what we would suggest is that residents need a more practical and understandable method of presentation including a realistic demonstration of passing train peak noise levels and frequency content.

6. Local school children are currently collected from a bus stop at the entrance to Mount Edge (a private road) and the stop is also used by normal service buses. Can we assume that the proposed new extension link between Mount Edge and the revised Sandon Road (B5066) will be an adopted road with footpaths, drainage and lighting? We suggest that a replacement bus stop and turning provision (roundabout?) for the buses will have to be provided on this link road.

7. We assume that the redundant lower part of Hopton Lane will be blocked off to traffic from the revised Sandon Road. If this is not the case it will inevitably encourage undesirable fly tipping and unauthorized overnight parking.

8. We notice that over a short isolated section of the lower part of Hopton Lane the map is marked with a ‘green dash’ indicating ‘construction traffic route’ on the construction phase map CT-05-216. This does not seem to make sense and at this proximity construction traffic would be totally unacceptable to Mount Edge residents.

9. It appears from the proposed scheme map CT-06-216 that residents on the north side of Mount Edge will be very exposed to visual/noise effects from the railway cutting exit especially prior to the proposed tree planting becoming established. We would suggest that they may benefit from additional screening methods and the use of more mature trees adjacent to the redundant Hopton Lane section.

10. It is anticipated that the new Sandon Road and the new Hopton Lane will have pavements and cycle paths, can this be confirmed and marked on the proposed scheme maps please?

11. Traffic congestion is a topic that concerns Hopton residents as our local link roads (A518, B5066, Beaconside and A51) at times have to handle volumes of traffic beyond their capacity for example due to the frequent closures of the M6 motorway between north and south Stafford junctions. With the village also under threat from construction traffic associated with a nearby building development of some 3100 houses we would ask how HS2 intends to manage their construction traffic near to Hopton in order to prevent the local road transport situation coming to standstill?

Appendix 5 – Specific Environmental Issues – 5.2

HS2 Phase 2a: West Midlands to Crewe

Working Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Response by Ingestre with Tixall Parish Council

Introduction:

Tixall and Ingestre are rural parishes, set in tranquil estate parkland, located approximately 5km east of the town of Stafford. We have a combined resident population of approximately 400.

The parishes are directly affected by the proposals for HS2 Phase 2a (West Midlands to Crewe), which is the subject of this consultation.

The Parish Council is opposed to HS2 but wants to make sure that, should it proceed, the impacts of construction and operation of HS2 are minimised and that residents who are adversely affected are properly and fairly compensated.

The comments that follow relate to the draft Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIA) for Phase 2a (West Midland to Crewe) published on 13 September 2016.

The parishes of Ingestre and Tixall are located within Community Area 2 (CA2): Colwich to Yarlet. The substantive body of comments below is specific to CA2.

We are only commenting on sections of the draft EIA where we feel we are able to offer an informed opinion. The absence of a comment on any particular part of the document should not be taken as an indication of agreement with the contents, in whole or in part.

Section numbers and principal headings mirror those of the referenced Draft EIA documents.

General:

a) Ingestre with Tixall Parish Council has responded in detail to numerous previous consultations. We are very concerned to find that most information provided to HS2 Ltd in previous communications has been overlooked or misrepresented in the Draft EIA.

b) HS2 Ltd has pursued a route alignment in our area that is more expensive to build, more environmentally damaging and which has greater impact on communities than available alternative alignments. More favourable alignments have been set aside to the detriment of the tax-paying public and the country in general. Comments below that are specific to the proposed route do not signify acceptance of the proposed route. Our position remains that, should the project proceed, it should do so on the basis of a different alignment, generally following route HSM03 as described in the March 2012 HS2 Phase 2 Route Options Report.

c) Shortage of time precludes a detailed response to all points across all documents associated with this consultation (and those of the two other consultations that are being run concurrently). There are many areas of overlap, with the same issues being raised multiple times in different places. Please take our responses to Q3 as the definitive set and, where appropriate, ensure that these are rolled out for inclusion in the other associated documents.

d) At the launch of the current consultation, HS2 Ltd announced that it would be writing to all owners/occupiers of properties located within 1km of the proposed route. It soon became obvious that many residents of Ingestre and Tixall, who live within 1 km of the route, had not received notification letters. A comprehensive list of addresses has been prepared and provided to HS2 Ltd. We hope and expect that HS2 Ltd use this information to amend their mailing list to ensure that all owners/occupiers most directly affected by HS2 are, in future, kept properly informed.

e) Notwithstanding d), we have taken the following actions to inform our parishioners of the consultations and obtain their views:

• Provided details in the monthly parish newsletter (delivered to households and displayed on the relevant parish notice boards)
• Posted details on the parish website and invited on-line comments/feedback
• Obtained additional copies of the CA2 map books, lodged these in the parish churches of Ingestre and Tixall and invited feedback of comments to the parish council.
• Ensured that hard copies of the consultation documents were available for inspection during community events at Tixall Village Hall (a shared facility with Ingestre), as well as having councillors on hand for guidance and to receive comments.
• One-to-one discussions.

Question 2: Please let us know your comments on the documents that form Volume 1 of the working draft EIA.