HS2 Mps & Members Meeting 27Th May

HS2 MPs & Members Meeting 27th May

Councillor Bob Stevens (BS)– Welcome and introduction; noted there are conflicting facts in circulation

Alison Munro (AM), HS2 ltd made her presentation - See Slides

Noted that:

All consultation responses will be considered.
Decision in Dec 2011.
Area Fact sheets - copies available.
Some sequencing issues – limited consultation followed by further consultation and work with LA committed to a Construction Code of Practice.
Hybrid Autumn 2013 – deposited
Royal Assent – 2015.
Start on site - 2017.

Questions from the audience:

Paul Lankester(PL)– Stratford District Council – Clarification

(1)Technical assessment – consultantswho are they?

Noted concern – duplication of assessment/

(2)Planning Section 106 Agreements - does nothing for Warwickshire- why is there no mitigation – affordable housing, other County facilities.

(1)No further technical assessments at present, if this proceed to the next stage – will work with you.

(2)S106 – benefits; this is part of consultation, what you want in Warwickshire is part of on going dialogue, want to work with you.

PLThis won’t be acceptable.

Jeremy Wright-MP (JW-MP)

(1)There is mention of alternatives - Rail package 2 - what is wrong with it?

(2)Required speed of 250mph; where does this come from? The route is constrained as a result. Reducing the speed to 200mph – surely that opens up more options.

(3)Local services WCML – the benefits fro Coventry– Rugby and on to London. There is a conflict with the technical annex

(4)The questions on the consultation for are leading. If other responses are submitted – will they be given equal weight?

(1)My understanding is not a technical one, RP2 can produce capacity but it is limited and not a step change. It will require investment – 4 tracking of Coventry – Birmingham line. It is not straightforward, it will disrupt the WCML substantially. I will pass this to the DfT.

(2)Speed is not the absolute goal, HS2 put forward views and other counties experiences were considered, we concluded: if possible it should be future proofed- faster journeys are desirable. In some areas its not possible, but where possible it should be done. We would need to go significantly before the 200pmh to follow the M4, there are part s of the route where speed has to drop.

JW – MPHow detailed is the work on dropping speed?

AMNot a lot has been done.

(3)In respect to local services; some assumptions have been made, taking the longer distance traffic off WCML will create capacity.Network Rail looking into it.

Stories put out by the Tax Payer Alliance are – implausable.

(4)Consultation – we will try to analyse it all the replies but it would help if they are retuned in the form supplied. Each response area is designed to enable you to broaden out your views. Will take account of every response we get.

BSJust to clarify – everything will be read and considered?

AMYou can attach additional papers to consultation form, we won’t ignore the content if its under the wrong question.

John Hammond JH

(1)We are fearful of the impact on our area. Will EIAs be done before decision is made? The area has a number of farms there is an issue of severance Cubbington – Wood prior to decision.

(1)Appraisal of Sustainability - this is appropriate to current stage. We have the Accusation that government is pushing through on the assumption of approval, we believe it is better go early to consultation without the full details. Recognise not all detailed work is done and use feedback to inform the future consultation. This is a massive work area but it would be wrong to do the detail before the decision to proceed is made. Next stage - will improve and change thereafter evaluation of the detail

BSIs it possible for minor variations to be made?

AMMinor improvements to the route , yes.

John Appleton (JA)

(1)Wish to press you on improving the existing services – the capacity seems reasonable.

(2)The business case assumes deterioration of journey times as a justification…… I’d like to see some clarity and assurance –

(3)are they both done on the same appraisal basis RP2 and HS2 - is this apples with apples?

(4)Comment on time and the view of action groups and value of time saving is off set by work done whilst travelling.

(5)Kenilworth and Burton Green – I’d like assurance that the relationships will be equal at the road shows – the same level of detail to both.

(1)I don’t have much to add over my previous comments, we engage withNetwork Rail, it is assumption at this stage.

(2)RP2; not my area, I understand that the approach is the same as HS2, based on the same assumptions. We will pass this question to the DfT for fuller reply.

(3&4)Time saving, we have used DfT standard appraisal tools based on a lot of research over years, I don’t deny business people work on trains but the majority value shorter journeys. Business people value quicker times. Sensitivity test; ½ are not productive and if crowded or standing …the can’t work and looked at adjustments but 2 sides cancel each other out – some work vs crowding and no work.

(5)There is local detail, Kenilworth – Arden. You can access the entire route, the boards are not specific areas but there are number of experts who will answer questions on Burton Green andKenilworth. Both venues have interactive maps of the local and whole route.

JA -

(1)In the Southam area there is deep concern over construction methods & how it will affect more properties. Can you comment on proposals for access?

(2)SimilarlyWCC Councillors have concern about materials; and impact on the highway network. WCC will have trouble maintaining the roads if there is no reimbursement to WCC for additional damage.

(1)No detail yet; next stage to work up processes and road routes. Would try to use railway where possible and minimise use of rural roads for materials.

(2)Not able to give detail yet. Will want to work with LAs and meet concerns.

BSWill this be picked up in the Hybrid Planning process

AMWe would aim to have this type of detail ready and be in agreement with LA prior to Bill.

Cllr Tilly May TM

(1)This isn’t a national consultation HS2 –there has been very limited publicity.

(2)Why is there no exhibition north of Water Orton? One of the most blighted areas?

(3)The route North of Birmingham - Derby, Yorkshire, if there is no detail how can it be seen as a National?

(1)This is a Line of route consultation jointly between HS2 DfT. There have been regional seminars lead by the DfT.

HS2 line of route.

(3)The route to Derby is not settled upon so we are not able to comment and feel it would be misleading to publicise a partial programme, this will be in a subsequent consultation.

This is the only chance for principle the principle to be discussed.

We will take your point back to DfT and reply

Cllr Dave Shilton

Deeply concerned abut the prospect of flooding in the area.

(1)I Can’t understand why it will bypass Kenilworth, its not sensible. Where’s the viability? RP2 is answer.

(2)Part of this means to link to 3rdLondonAirport, the benefits are all for Birmingham.

(3)Coventrywill loose all the economic benefits, the environmental impact outweighs benefits.

(1) Benefit – nearest station will be Birmingham International, it will serve City to City.

(2)Heathrow; Governmentsee it as part of strategy to reduce domestic flights & carbon footprint. We estimate 50%. Birmingham business leaders value it - B’ham airport – 42 minutes to London, we see it as an opportunity and its one of the considerations.

Cllr Mike Doody

There are noflights between Birmingham & Heathrow. The station into B’ham is at Curzon street and will still need a link to the rest of the city. Is there a Saving in time,– Really?

(1)The Hillingdon Exhibition, was a disgrace, the sound was at 100mph not 250.

(2)If its 14 trains an hour for the business case it will fail. Green tunnels, they won’t be doing full speed through them?

(1)The sound booths are specific to the pointon the line, they are variablerepresentations; and at full speed the sound booth will be accurate. We have used Independent verification on the noise modelling – they are bespoke noise demonstrations.

(2) The business case– its up to 14 trains 1,100 seats- capacity not the initial usage, this will build over time. In 2026 off peak 10 per hour; the n we will adjust trains to meet the needed capacity and build up from there. Tunnels- won’t loose speed as you described it.

Sandra Trickett on behalf of Dan Byles MP

(1)Noted there are 8 Road shows but only 1 in North Warwickshire – this is a disgrace. NW is impacted twice with the possible ‘Y’ route. We feel totally marginalised. Why won’t you provide 2ndroad show?

(2)The MPs office requested various documents which have not been forthcoming.

(3)Exceptional HardshipScheme; re-adjust – there are applicants who are dismissed on second round and may not ever qualify.

(1) Exhibitions, where spread out along the line.

(2)Sorry for not replying, Documents – we try to send quickly – we did run out – now all in stock now and will distribute

(3)Exceptional Hardship Scheme – have a panel; 2 independents and 1 HS2, follow guidelines. If turned down by interim report they can reapply. If turned down by final panel can reapply if their circumstances change.

Steve Maxey – Impossible to organise 6 shadows. –
It feels as through HS2 refused to come rather than no suitable premises.

(1)10k car park spaces at the NEC, there’s no analysis or EIA on driving to the station and the carbon emissions.

(2)The 1 reply per ISPN suggestion can you give reassurance this isn’t the case.

(1)NEC – next stage work; presently only a strategic land analysis.

(2)Computers – so long as they log out; its OK there is no conflict..

As time became short – the final questions were asked collectively - with a single reply

Peter Fowler

The consultation questionnaires, we have concerns about the leading nature.

When speaking to Philip Hammond – what economic benefits are there for NW – his reply …“very little”.

(1)Affordability of HS2 for business commuters – could be cheaper to drive?

(2)Coleshill divisions – rail station will blight us, 10K + cars …and have M6,M42, car-parks already.

(3)Exhibitions – staggered by lack of roadshows.

Joan Lea

I’m very disappointed – the people of North Warwickshire are left with impression this is a folly on landscape.

(1) I’m very concerned that MPs are being ignored and I support the comments made by Sandy Trickett.

(2)What Information is there on aviation and the future of BirminghamAirport?

Reiterated that people can answer “free form” in the questionnaire if they wish but it would help the analysis if they could use the given format.

(1) Affordability – the same principles as fares on existing railway. This is a policy issue not one for HS2.

(2)Regarding the interchange there is no detailed modelling yet. Work with the Highway’s Agency.

(3)Exhibitions and letters, I believe I’ve already answered those points regarding the MP letters.

The line beyond Birmingham, there is no detail available yet, we have set out broad assumptions and these will be refined and are being worked on.

Regarding the Aviation policy this is a DfT matter and not HS2

The debate closed.