PHASE ONE

DraFt EnvironmEntal StatEmEnt Community Forum Area Report 18 | Stoneleigh, and HS2 London- May 2013

ENGINE FOR GROWTH DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Community Forum Area Report ENGINE FOR GROWTH 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green High Speed Two (HS2) Limited, 2nd Floor, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU

Telephone 020 7944 4908

General email enquiries: [email protected]

Website: www.hs2.org.uk

© Crown copyright, 2013, except where otherwise stated

Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.

You may re-use this information (not including logos or third-party material) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected].

Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

To order further copies contact: DfT Publications Tel: 0300 123 1102 Web: www.dft.gov.uk/orderingpublications

Product code: ES/18

Printed in Great Britain on paper containing at least 75% recycled fibre. CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Contents Contents

Draft Volume 2: Community Forum Area Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 5 Part A: Introduction 6 1 Introduction 7 1.1 Introduction to HS2 7 1.2 Purpose of this report 7 1.3 Structure of this report 9 Part B: Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green – overview of the area and description of the Proposed Scheme 10 2 Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green 11 2.1 Overview of the area 11 2.2 Description of the Proposed Scheme 15 2.3 Construction of the Proposed Scheme 20 2.4 Operation of the Proposed Scheme 30 2.5 Community forum engagement 31 2.6 Route section main alternatives 31 2.7 Proposals for further consideration 34 Part C: Environmental topic assessments 35 3 Agriculture, forestry and soils 36 3.1 Introduction 36 3.2 Policy framework 36 3.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 36 3.4 Environmental baseline 36 3.5 Construction 40 3.6 Operation 42

1 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Contents

4 Air quality 44 4.1 Introduction 44 4.2 Policy framework 44 4.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 44 4.4 Environmental baseline 45 4.5 Construction 46 4.6 Operation 48 5 Community 49 5.1 Introduction 49 5.2 Policy framework 49 5.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 50 5.4 Environmental baseline 50 5.5 Construction 53 5.6 Operation 57 6 Cultural heritage 59 6.1 Introduction 59 6.2 Policy framework 59 6.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 60 6.4 Environmental baseline 60 6.5 Construction 62 6.6 Operation 64 7 Ecology 66 7.1 Introduction 66 7.2 Policy framework 66 7.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 66 7.4 Environmental baseline 67 7.5 Construction 69 7.6 Operation 72 8 Land quality 74 8.1 Introduction 74 8.2 Policy framework 74 8.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 75 8.4 Environmental baseline 75 8.5 Construction 77 8.6 Operation 79

2 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Contents

9 Landscape and visual assessment 80 9.1 Introduction 80 9.2 Policy framework 80 9.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 81 9.4 Environmental baseline 81 9.5 Construction 82 9.6 Operation 87 10 Socio-economics 92 10.1 Introduction 92 10.2 Policy framework 92 10.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 92 10.4 Environmental baseline 92 10.5 Construction 93 10.6 Operation 94 11 Sound, noise and vibration 95 11.1 Introduction 95 11.2 Policy framework 95 11.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 95 11.4 Environmental baseline 95 11.5 Construction 95 11.6 Operation 96 12 Traffic and transport 99 12.1 Introduction 99 12.2 Policy framework 99 12.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 99 12.4 Environmental baseline 100 12.5 Construction 102 12.6 Operation 105 13 Water resources and flood risk assessment 107 13.1 Introduction 107 13.2 Policy framework 107 13.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 108 13.4 Environmental baseline 108 13.5 Construction 109 13.6 Operation 111 14 References 114

2 3 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Contents

List of figures

Figure 1: HS2 Phase One route and community forum areas 8 Figure 2: Area context map 12 Figure 3: Indicative construction programme for the area 30 Figure 4: Business Sector Composition in District and the West Midlands 93

List of tables

Table 1: Location of construction site compounds 21 Table 2: Location of temporary worker accommodation sites 23 Table 3: Demolition works 24 Table 4: Watercourse diversions 24 Table 5: Highway and road diversions 25 Table 6: Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions 26 Table 7: Viaducts, underbridges and overbridges 27 Table 8: Holdings affected by the Proposed Scheme 39 Table 9: Preliminary evaluation of likely value of protected and/or notable species occurring within this section of the route 69 Table 10: Significant residual construction effects on ecological receptors within this section of the route 72 Table 11: Significant residual operational effects on ecological receptors within this section of the route 73 Table 12: Significant landscape effects during construction 83 Table 13: Significant visual effects during construction 87 Table 14: Significant landscape effects during operation year 1 (2026) 88 Table 15: Significant visual effects during operation year 1 (2026) 89 Table 16: Options for further mitigation 98 Table 17: Construction site compounds and workforce numbers, average duration of use and peak hour trips 103

4 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Contents Draft Volume 2: Community Forum Area Report Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 Structure of the HS2 draft Environmental Statement The draft ES documentation for the purpose of this consultation comprises: • A non-technical summary (NTS) – providing a summary of the Proposed Scheme, the likely significant effects of the Proposed Scheme, both beneficial and adverse, and the means to avoid or reduce the adverse effects; and • A main report – consisting of two volumes: ȃȃ Volume 1: Introduction to the Environmental Statement and Proposed Scheme which provides an introduction to HS2, an overview of the hybrid bill process and the environmental impact assessment (EIA) methodology, an introduction to consultation and engagement, the main strategic and route-wide alternatives considered; and ȃȃ Volume 2: Includes 26 Community Forum Area (CFA) reports, each with a separate corresponding map book, which together provide the assessment of local environmental effects. An assessment of the effects of the Proposed Scheme on a route-wide basis is presented in Report 27.

HS2 Ltd set up 26 community forums along the line of route of the Proposed Scheme, as a regular way of engaging with local communities1. Volume 2 of this draft ES supports this engagement strategy by providing a draft ES report for each CFA. This is a report for the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area, CFA18.

The draft ES has been written in a clear and accessible manner; however, on occasion it has been necessary to use technical terms. Given this, a glossary of terms and list of abbreviations for all draft ES documentation is provided.

1 Details of these community forums are provided on the HS2 Ltd website at http://www.hs2.org.uk/have-your-say/forums/community-forums.

5 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Contents Part A: Introduction

6 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Introduction 1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction to HS2 1.1.1 HS2 is planned to be a Y-shaped rail network with stations in London, , Leeds, Manchester, South Yorkshire and the East Midlands, linked by high speed trains running at speeds of up to 360 kilometres per hour (kph) (225 miles per hour (mph)).

1.1.2 HS2 is proposed to be built in two phases. Phase One (the Proposed Scheme), the subject of this draft ES, would involve the construction of a new railway line of approximately 230km (143 miles) between London and Birmingham that would become operational by 2026; with a connection to the West Coast Main Line (WCML) near Lichfield and to the existing HS1 line in London. The Phase One route and the 26 CFAs are shown in Figure 1.

1.1.3 On opening, Phase One would run up to 14 trains per hour (tph). HS2 trains would be up to 400 metres (m) long with 1,100 seats during peak hours. Beyond the dedicated high speed track, these high speed trains would connect with and run on the existing WCML to serve passengers beyond the HS2 network. A connection to HS1 would also allow some services to run to mainland Europe via the Channel Tunnel.

1.1.4 Phase Two would involve the construction of lines from Birmingham to Leeds and Manchester; with construction commencing around 2027, and planned to be operational by 2033. After Phase Two opens, it is expected that the frequency of train services on some parts of the Phase One route could increase up to 18tph.

1.1.5 The Government believes that the HS2 network should link to Heathrow and its preferred option is for this to be built as part of Phase Two. However, the Government has since taken the decision to pause work on the Heathrow link until after 2015 when it expects the Airports Commission to publish its final report on recommended options for maintaining the country’s status as an international aviation hub. 1.2 Purpose of this report 1.2.1 This report presents the likely significant environmental effects as a result of the construction and operation of Phase One (the Proposed Scheme) that have been identified to date within the area of Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green (CFA 18). It provides a summary of the likely environmental issues and proposed mitigation measures that are being addressed during the design development process within the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area.

1.2.2 The final details of the Proposed Scheme and assessment of its environmental impacts and effects will be presented in the formal ES submitted in accordance with the requirements of Parliamentary Standing Order 27A (SO27A)2.

2 Standing Order 27A of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons relating to private business (environmental assessment), House of Commons.

6 7 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Introduction

Figure 1: HS2 Phase One route and community forum areas

8 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Introduction

1.3 Structure of this report 1.3.1 This report is divided into three parts: • Part A – an introduction to HS2 and the purpose of this report; • Part B – overview of the area, description of the Proposed Scheme within Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green and its construction, community forum engagement, and a description of the main local alternatives; and • Part C – environmental topic assessments – overview of the policy framework, the environmental baseline within the area, an assessment of construction and operational effects, the proposed mitigation measures, and significant residual effects for the following environmental topics: ȃȃ Agriculture, forestry and soils; ȃȃ Air quality; ȃȃ Community; ȃȃ Cultural heritage; ȃȃ Ecology; ȃȃ Land quality; ȃȃ Landscape and visual assessment; ȃȃ Socio-economics; ȃȃ Sound, noise and vibration; ȃȃ Traffic and transport; and ȃȃ Water resources and flood risk.

1.3.2 The maps relevant to Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green are provided in a separate corresponding document entitled Volume 2: CFA 18 Map Book, which should be read in conjunction with this report.

1.3.3 In addition to the environmental topics covered in Part C of this report, Report 27 also addresses climate, electromagnetic interference and waste and material resources on a route‑wide basis.

9 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Introduction Part B: Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green – overview of the area and description of the Proposed Scheme

10 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green 2 Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green 2.1 Overview of the area 2.1.1 The Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green CFA covers an 11.2km section of the Proposed Scheme where it passes through the narrow gap of countryside between Kenilworth and . It extends from a point just before the A445 Leicester Lane in the south to Waste Lane at Beechwood in the north. The area includes land within the parishes of Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green, and Balsall.

2.1.2 As shown in Figure 2, and (CFA17) lies to the south and and Hampton in Arden (CFA23) lies to the north-west. Coventry lies to the north and the administrative boundary extends into the eastern side of the area around Gibbet Hill (map CT‑01-48, B9), the University of Warwick Campus, and Tile Hill. Settlement, land use and topography

2.1.3 Kenilworth is the main settlement in the centre of the area, whilst Coventry city centre lies about 6km to the north. The villages of Stoneleigh, and the small hamlet of are situated in the southern part of the area. The village of Burton Green and the small hamlets of Beechwood and Catchems Corner are situated in the northernmost part of the area.

2.1.4 Land uses within the area are varied. In the southern part, there is the Exhibition and Showground (the Former National Agricultural Centre) (map CT‑01-47, B4). Further south is (map CT‑01-47, E9), an historic country house and important visitor attraction set in a registered historic parkland. Other estate parkland around Stoneleigh is accessible to the public and is well used for local walks. Abbey Park (map CT‑01‑47, E9), which is a modern business campus in a parkland setting, is located just to the south of Stareton and alongside the Stoneleigh Deer Park Golf Course (map CT‑01-47, C9). In the northern part of the area agriculture is the main land use, with the exception of the National Grid transformer compound just north of Burton Green and the golf course for the Nailcote Hall Hotel (map CT‑01-50, E8).

2.1.5 Overall the landform of the area is gently undulating and low lying. The rivers Avon and Sowe flow through the southern part of the area, with their confluence being about00m 5 west of Stoneleigh village. Brook flows through the area between enilworthK and Stoneleigh, broadly following the line of Dalehouse Lane, just north of Kenilworth golf course (map CT‑01‑48, F4). Canley Brook flows in to , draining southwards from the Warwick University Campus area via Cryfield Grange (map CT‑01-49, H8 and I8).

2.1.6 There are pockets of woodland dispersed throughout the area, with Crackley Wood (map CT‑01-49, G2), in the centre of the area being the largest. Crackley Wood has a good network of paths accessible to the public.

11 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

Figure 2: Area context map

12 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

Key transport infrastructure

2.1.7 The principal roads through the area are orientated in a south-west to north-east direction, reflecting the dominance of movement patterns between Kenilworth and Coventry. The A46 dual carriageway and the A429 are the main routes which run between Kenilworth and Coventry. The B4113 and B4115 rural routes run parallel to and south of the A46, connecting the villages of Ashow, Stareton and Stoneleigh.

2.1.8 The A452 is the main north-south route in the area, which connects Kenilworth to in the south and Balsall Common in the north. A well-used rural route on the east side of the area connects Stoneleigh with Burton Green, via Gibbet Hill and Westwood Heath. North of Kenilworth and in the gap of countryside separating the town from Coventry, there is a network of minor rural lanes, which provide connections to Burton Green and to Westwood Heath on the southern edge of Coventry.

2.1.9 The Coventry to Leamington Spa Line crosses through the area, running south of, and parallel to, the A429. Tile Hill in the north has a station on the Rugby to Birmingham Line, which passes to the north of the area.

2.1.10 The long-distance footpath and Centenary Way long-distance footpath wind their way through the area. The Coventry Way long-distance footpath is a 64km circular route around the outskirts of the city, passing through Stoneleigh and Kenilworth and for part of its length following the Kenilworth Greenway north of Crackley. The Centenary Way long- distance footpath is a 158km route, which runs from Shipston-on-Stour in the south to Kingsbury in the north, and was opened in 1991 to mark the centenary year of County Council (WCC). It shares the same route as the Coventry Way through Kenilworth and Stoneleigh, but then diverges to pass to the east side of Coventry. Demographic profile

2.1.11 The area contains the Demographic Character Areas (DCAs) of Stoneleigh, Kenilworth East, Warwick University and Tile Hill. A DCA represents an area of settlement concentration for which demographic data is collected and analysed. According to the 2011 Census, the population of each of the DCAs was as follows: Stoneleigh 3,500; Kenilworth East 11,300; Warwick University 6,100; and Tile Hill 1,300.

2.1.12 The population of is forecast to increase by 19.6% between 2013 and 2035, and the population of the Coventry City Council (CCC) administrative area is set to increase by 29.8% over the same period3. These projections are greater than those for the West Midlands region (17.9%) and (15.9%).

2.1.13 According to 2011 Census statistics, the Kenilworth East DCA and the Tile Hill DCA have relatively low levels of ethnic diversity, with 92% and 89% of their respective populations being white British. The Stoneleigh DCA and the Warwick University DCA have higher than average levels of ethnic diversity, with white British residents accounting for 63% and 50% of their respective populations, which is lower than the regional and national averages.

2.1.14 Warwick District has low levels of deprivation and the CCC area has relatively high levels of deprivation4.

2.1.15 Home ownership levels across the area are higher than the regional and national averages, ranging from 64% in the Stoneleigh DCA to 84% in the Warwick University DCA.

3 Office for National Statistics (2010), Population Projections. 4 Department for Communities and Local Government (2010), Indices of Deprivation.

13 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

Notable community facilities

2.1.16 In the south of the area, the villages of Ashow and Stoneleigh have a small number of community facilities. Stoneleigh has a church, village club, village hall and recreation ground, whilst Ashow has a church and village club. The hamlet of Stareton has no facilities. There is a day care nursery situated within the grounds of Stoneleigh Park (map CT‑01-47, B2).

2.1.17 Crackley is situated in the centre of the area on the northern edge of Kenilworth. It comprises a mixture of post-war housing, together with industrial estates at Princes Drive and Common Lane. Given the lack of facilities, Crackley residents are dependent upon Kenilworth for most of their day-to-day needs. There is an independent school, Crackley Hall School, located to the south of Crackley close to Kenilworth Common (map CT‑01-48, C1).

2.1.18 The University of Warwick is a major educational/institutional use in the centre of the area. Cryfield Grange, just west of Gibbet Hill, is used as accommodation for visiting academics and researchers. There is a school for children with behavioural, social and emotional difficulties at Gibbet Hill.

2.1.19 Burton Green in the north of the area has a limited range of community facilities. Notable amongst these is a primary school on the south side of the village, two day care nurseries which are located on either side of the village, a community hall on the west side of the village and a pub to the north. Recreation, leisure and open space

2.1.20 Kenilworth and Coventry provide the focus for recreational activities in the area. The Kenilworth Golf Course lies in the centre of the area along with the sports fields for the University of Warwick, which are situated on the southern edge of Coventry. Outside the main urban areas there are a number of outdoor recreation facilities, including another golf course at Stoneleigh (map CT‑03-47, C9), a fishing lake at Brook Farm which is about 2km to the east of Kenilworth and horse riding establishments to the north-west of Burton Green.

2.1.21 There are a number of open spaces which are publicly accessible within the area, most notably the Stoneleigh Park Estate (map CT‑03-47, B4) and Crackley Woods (map CT‑04-17, E5), which are located north of Kenilworth. A recreation ground at Stoneleigh and both Stoneleigh Meadows and Stoneleigh Orchard, which lie closer to the village itself, are publicly accessible.

2.1.22 Burton Green no longer has a recreation ground in use, but has a small play area to the south of the village at Red Lane. The Kenilworth Greenway, which runs along the route of the disused Berkswell to Kenilworth railway, is the main focus of outdoor recreation in the area. The route serves as a public footpath, cycleway and bridleway and is managed by WCC as a country park. A new pedestrian and cycleway link from the University to connect with the Kenilworth Greenway at Crackley, known as the “Connect2 Kenilworth” project, was completed during 2012 and a greenway bridge over the A429 has also been built recently (map CT‑02-17, E5). Planning context and key designations

2.1.23 Volume 1 sets out the national policies under which HS2 has been developed. Given that the Proposed Scheme has been developed on a national basis and to meet a national need it is not included or referred to in many local plans. Nevertheless, in seeking to consider the Proposed Scheme in the local context, relevant local plan documents and policies have been taken into account in relation to environmental topics.

2.1.24 Warwick District Council (WDC) is the local planning authority for the majority of the area with responsibility passing to Metropolitan Borough Council (SMBC) at the borough

14 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

boundary, just north of Burton Green and broadly following the north and west side of Cromwell Lane and Hob Lane. The south-western fringes of Coventry, encompassing Gibbet Hill, Westwood Heath and Tile Hill are within CCC’s administrative area. The saved policies of the Warwickshire Structure Plan5; the saved policies of the Warwick District Local Plan (WDLP) 20076; the saved policies of the Solihull Unitary Development Plan (SUDP) 20067; and the saved policies of the City of Coventry UDP 2001 form the current adopted development plan for the area8. Emerging planning policy is contained in: • The WDLP Preferred Options9; • The Solihull Draft Local Plan (SMBC Local Plan): Shaping a Sustainable Future, which SMBC submitted to the Secretary of State for examination on 14 September 2012. The hearing sessions for the Examination were held in January 201310; and • CCC Core Strategy Proposed Submission, July 2012 (with minor amendments, October 2012)11. 2.1.25 Relevant policies from these documents have been taken into account in relation to the technical assessments reported in Sections 3 to 13.

2.1.26 The emerging WDLP Preferred Options for Warwick District proposes some growth in the area. Whilst the Plan has yet to be adopted, it envisages in the order of 770 dwellings to the south-east of Kenilworth, supported by community facilities, open space and employment uses; and between 20 and 80 new dwellings at Burton Green. Both of these proposals would require a de-allocation of part of the greenbelt and the specific sites for expansion of Burton Green would be developed in partnership between the district and Parish Council. A new cycle route section is also proposed through Stoneleigh Park (Preferred Option 14: Transport).

2.1.27 With regards to planning designations, parts of the University of Warwick campus, the business park at Abbey Park, and Stoneleigh Park Exhibition and Showground are identified as “Major Developed Sites in the Green Belt” in the adopted WDLP.

2.1.28 There are two nationally designated Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) within 5km of the centre of the Proposed Scheme (Tile Hill Wood and Ryton Wood). There are several parcels of designated ancient woodland within the area, some of which are also designated as local nature reserves (LNR). A number of other open spaces within the urban areas, notably Kenilworth Common at Crackley, together with both Tocil Wood (map CT‑01-49, H10) and Park Wood (at Westwood Heath) in Coventry, are also designated as LNRs.

2.1.29 Both Stoneleigh Abbey grounds and Stoneleigh Abbey Deer Park are listed as Grade II in the English Heritage Register of Historic Parks and Gardens. There are also several hundred other listed buildings within the area and numerous scheduled monuments. The settlements of Stoneleigh (map CT‑01-48, I9) and Ashow, as well as the historic core of Kenilworth and Gibbet Hill on the outskirts of Coventry, are designated as conservation areas. 2.2 Description of the Proposed Scheme 2.2.1 The general design of the Proposed Scheme is described in Volume 1. The following section describes the main features of the Proposed Scheme in the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area, including the main environmental mitigation measures.

5 Warwickshire County Council (2001), Warwickshire Structure Plan 1996-2011. 6 Warwick District Council (2007), Warwick District Local Plan 2007. 7 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2006), Solihull Unitary Development Plan 2006. 8 Coventry City Council (2001), Coventry Unitary Development Plan 2001. 9 Warwick District Council (2012), The Warwick District Council Draft New Local Plan Preferred Options (May 2012). 10 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2012), The Solihull Draft Local Plan: Shaping a Sustainable Future, Local Development Framework Submission Document, September 2012. 11 Coventry City Council (2012), Core Strategy Proposed Submission, July 2012, with minor amendments, October 2012.

15 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

Overview

2.2.2 The Proposed Scheme through the area would be approximately 11.2km in length. Initially in cutting, it would pass underneath the A445 before entering a retained cutting under Stoneleigh Road and the eastern part of the Stoneleigh Park.

2.2.3 The route would exit the north-western boundary of Stoneleigh Park, crossing the River Avon on viaduct before passing beneath the A46 and the A429, to the north-east of Kenilworth. After exiting the cutting the route would cross over Finham Brook and the realigned Canley Brook on viaduct. Passing through undulating topography to Burton Green, the route would alternate between cutting and embankment.

2.2.4 Approaching Burton Green the route would enter a cut-and-cover tunnel, following the footprint of the dismantled Kenilworth to Balsall rail line, before entering a deep retained cutting to the south-west of the proposed Burton Green feeder station. Climbing away from the cutting, the route would pass under Waste Lane before leaving the area.

2.2.5 For information on noise barriers within the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green CFA, please refer to Section 11 of this report and the SV-01 maps.

2.2.6 Since the January 2012 scheme was announced by the Secretary of State, route development work has continued and the Proposed Scheme now differs in some respects. These changes are discussed in more detail in Section 2.6. The following represent the principal design changes in this area: • Realignment of Canley Brook to achieve crossing of the floodplain; • Raising of route over Finham Brook to achieve crossing of the floodplain; and • Raising of route through Burton Green cut-and-cover tunnel and shift in tunnel portal positions. Proposed Scheme – Section by section

2.2.7 On leaving the Offchurch and Cubbington area (CFA17), the route would enter the area in the south (map CT‑06-093) in cutting. It would continue in either cutting or retained cutting for approximately 2.9km, passing under the A445, to the east of Stone House Farm (map CT‑01‑47, F5), under the B4113 Stoneleigh Road (map CT‑06-094, G4) and into Stoneleigh Park. Key features of this section would include: • A 400m long shallow cutting with an average depth of approximately 2m, with raised earthworks on both sides to provide visual screening; • A 200m long embankment with a maximum height of 2m, with raised earthworks on both sides to provide visual screening; • An auto-transformer station on the east side of the route just north of Leicester Lane as shown on map CT‑06-093, E5 and E6 (Furzen Hill auto-transformer station); • A 500m long cutting increasing in depth to the north to a maximum of approximately 10m; • A 1.6km long retaining wall within a cutting at Stoneleigh Park to reduce land take, provide noise screening, and exclude groundwater adjacent to the River Avon; and • A 20m long cutting reducing in depth to the north (map CT‑06-094, B5).

2.2.8 In addition, as shown on map CT‑06-093, the A445 Leicester Lane would be diverted approximately 50m south of its current location to pass over the route on a raised alignment approximately 10m above current ground level. Two ponds for railway drainage would be provided on the east side of the route, together with a pumping station immediately to the

16 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

east of the rail line, just south of Stoneleigh Park12. The B4113 Stoneleigh Road would be diverted about 50m south of its current location on a slightly raised alignment, with associated diversions to minor roads and tracks to retain access to Stoneleigh Park and properties. Planting would be undertaken on both sides of the route to provide a combination of visual screening, landscape integration and habitat connectivity. A potential ecological mitigation area to include provision of a replacement bat roost and an otter holt has been identified within Stoneleigh Park, adjacent to the River Avon (map CT‑06-094, B7). Further consideration will also be given to revised entrance arrangements at Stoneleigh Park.

2.2.9 The route would then come out of cutting for about 350m to cross the River Avon, immediately to the north of Stoneleigh Park. Key features of this next section of the route (from map CT‑06-094, A5; to CT‑06-095, H5 and I5) would include: • A 100m long embankment increasing in height to the north; • An 80m long viaduct over the River Avon; and • A 150m long embankment decreasing in height to the north.

2.2.10 In addition, as shown on map CT‑06-095, a railway drainage pond would be provided on the west side of the route immediately north of the River Avon. Planting would be undertaken on both sides of the route north and south of the River Avon to provide a combination of visual screening, landscape integration and habitat connectivity.

2.2.11 The route would continue into cutting for about 1.3km, passing beneath the B4115, A46 and Dalehouse Lane to the east of Kenilworth Golf Club. The key feature of this section of the route (from map CT‑06-095,H5 to CT‑06-095, B4) would comprise a 1.3km long cutting, increasing in depth to about 14m, at which point the width of the cutting would be approximately 100m.

2.2.12 In addition, as shown on map CT‑06-095, H5, the B4115 would be diverted to pass over the route on a bridge approximately 50m north of its current location. The road would be on a raised alignment approximately 6m above current ground level. The A46 would cross the route on a new bridge at its existing location (map CT‑06-095, E5). Footpath K29 would be diverted over the route on a new footbridge at the approximate location of New Kingswood Farm (map CT‑01-48, E6). Dalehouse Lane would cross the route in its current location on a raised alignment and bridge approximately 10m above current ground level (map CT‑06-095, B4 and B5). Strengthened earthworks would be used where practicable, to minimise the footprint of the embankments within the floodplain and the golf course. Planting would be undertaken along the new road embankments, and on both sides of the cuttings to provide a combination of landscape integration, visual screening, and habitat connectivity.

2.2.13 The route would continue in a north-westerly direction, over the Finham Brook on viaduct before entering a 1.7km length of cutting, passing to the east of Kenilworth, under the existing Coventry to Leamington Spa Line and Kenilworth Road and over a diverted Canley Brook. Key features of this next section of the route (from map CT‑06-095, A4; to CT‑06-097, G5) would include: • A 60m long viaduct over the Finham Brook (map CT‑06-095, A4); • A 50m long approach embankment on the north side of Finham Brook, approximately 4m high; • A 1.7km long cutting varying in depth up to a maximum of about 10m just north of the Coventry to Leamington Spa Line (map CT‑06-096, D5), and a maximum width of

12 Railway drainage would generally be gravity driven, but where track levels required it, pumping stations would be utilised.

17 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

approximately 100m, with raised earthworks on both sides to provide visual and noise screening; • A 1.35km long retaining wall within the above cutting to exclude groundwater from the cutting; • A 50m long viaduct over the new Canley Brook flood alleviation channel; and • A 220m long cutting decreasing in depth from about 5m to ground level.

2.2.14 In addition, as shown on maps CT‑06-096 to 097, four new bridges over the Proposed Scheme would be constructed in this section. A new farm accommodation bridge would be constructed for Milburn Grange Farm, located immediately to the south of the Coventry to Leamington Spa Line (map CT‑06-096, E5). The A429 Kenilworth Road would be diverted over a new bridge about 50m south of its current location, with new access provided to a pumping station and auto-transformer station on the east side of the rail line (“Crackley auto- transformer station”) off Kenilworth Road (map CT‑06-096, C5). A new bridge would be constructed to carry bridleway W164, which would be diverted around the proposed Canley Brook diversion to cross the railway about 250m north of its current location (map CT‑06-097, H5). Canley Brook would be diverted to the west to cross beneath the railway about 600m north of its current location (map CT‑06-097, H5). Two new railway drainage ponds would be provided, to the east of the rail line, one adjacent to the pumping station, and one just north of the realigned Canley Brook. Planting would be undertaken along the new road embankments, and on both sides of the cuttings to provide a combination of landscape integration, visual screening, and habitat connectivity. A potential ecological mitigation area to include replacement habitat for reptiles and amphibians as well as watercourse enhancements has been identified immediately north of the Finham Brook crossing on the east side of the rail line (map CT‑06-096, I6).

2.2.15 The route would continue in a north-westerly direction, alternating between embankment and cutting as it passes between Crackley Wood to the west and Roughknowles Wood (map CT‑01-49, F5) to the east. It would then pass to the west of South Hurst Farm and gradually converge with the alignment of the dismantled Kenilworth to Balsall Line, now used as the Kenilworth Greenway, where it would enter into tunnel just to the south of Burton Green. Key features of this next section of the route (from map CT‑06-097, G5; to CT‑06-098, B4 and B5) would include: • A 150m long embankment up to 2.5m high, with a culvert provided to carry an existing small drain under the new embankment in Broadwells Wood (map CT‑01-49, C5); • A 800m long cutting with a maximum depth of approximately 12m and a maximum width of approximately 100m; • A 2km long embankment, varying in height up to about 8m with raised earthworks on both sides where the route is not in existing woodland to provide visual and noise screening; • A 400m long cutting up to 3m deep with raised earthworks on both sides to provide visual screening; • A 100m long embankment about 2m high with raised earthworks on both sides to provide visual and noise screening; • A 100m long porous portal13 structure at the entrance to the Burton Green cut-and-cover tunnel and raised earthworks on both sides to provide visual and noise screening; and

13 Porous portals are perforated structures at tunnel portals, usually formed of concrete, designed to allow the passage of air from the tunnel. These are required to reduce air pressure changes generated when a high speed train enters the tunnel.

18 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

• A tunnel services area including a building and emergency assembly area would be provided at the southern entrance to the tunnel (map CT‑06-098, B4), with access constructed from Red Lane.

2.2.16 In addition, as shown on maps CT‑06-097 to 098, bridleway W165X would be diverted approximately 350m south of its current location and, combined with bridleway W164, would cross over the cutting on the overbridge described in the previous section (map CT‑06-097, H5). Crackley Lane would be diverted over a new bridge approximately 75m north of its current location, with associated realignment of the access to Cryfield Grange (map CT‑06‑097, D5). A new culvert would carry an unnamed stream below the route in Black Waste Wood (CT‑01-49, A6). An accommodation underpass for a diverted track through Broadwells Wood would also carry diverted footpaths W167 and W168 beneath the new embankment (map CT‑06-098, G4). The Kenilworth Greenway would be diverted and re-located onto the top of the finished tunnel as it passes through Burton Green (map CT‑06-098, A4). Planting would be undertaken on both sides of the route to provide a combination of landscape integration, visual screening, and habitat connectivity. A potential ecological mitigation area has been identified to the west of the rail line north of BroadwellsW ood, between the route and the dismantled Kenilworth to Balsall Line (map CT‑06-098, E3, F3 and G3). This could be used for woodland creation, ancient woodland soil translocation, creation of water bodies and hedgerow improvements.

2.2.17 On entering the proposed cut-and-cover tunnel, the route would continue in a north-westerly direction, passing through Burton Green before exiting just north of the village into retained cutting. It would then pass under Waste Lane. Key features of this next section of the route (from map CT‑06-099, H5; to CT‑06-100, E5) would include: • A 520m long green cut-and-cover tunnel, with porous portals at each end (map CT‑06-099, E5, F5 G5 and H5); • A 1.1km long retained cutting on the west side, and a combination of retained cutting and natural cutting on the east side, up to 12m as shown on maps CT‑06-099 and CT‑06-100; and • A 120m length of low embankment (approximately 2m high).

2.2.18 In addition, as shown on maps CT‑06-099 and 100, Cromwell Lane would be replaced on its current alignment over the cut-and-cover green tunnel (map CT‑06-099, G5), and the B4101 Waste Lane would cross the route on a new bridge with a slightly raised alignment (map CT‑06-100, F5). Footpath M186 would be diverted approximately 80m north of its current location to cross a new bridge over the retained cutting (map CT‑06-100, H5). M198 would be diverted approximately 250m south of its current location and use the new Waste Lane overbridge and the Kenilworth Greenway would be diverted along the west side of the new rail line once north of the cut-and-cover tunnel. An auto-transformer feeder station would be constructed on the east side of the rail line just north of the tunnel portal in the grounds of the existing National Grid Berkswell substation, as shown on map CT‑06-099, D5. Planting would be undertaken on both sides of the route to provide visual screening of the auto-transformer feeder station and route, as well as integrating the Proposed Scheme into the landscape.

2.2.19 The route would then continue north on low embankment, leaving CFA18 and passing into the Balsall Common and Hampton in Arden area (CFA 23). Land required for the Proposed Scheme

2.2.20 The Proposed Scheme would require land on both a temporary and permanent basis. The land required for construction is shown on the construction map series CT‑05 and will be subject to

19 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

review as the engineering design and formal ES is prepared. The final permanent and temporary land requirements will be set out in the formal ES. 2.3 Construction of the Proposed Scheme 2.3.1 This section sets out the key construction activities that are envisaged to build the Proposed Scheme in the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area and the control measures that are proposed to manage the works. General descriptions of construction works that are relevant to the whole of the Proposed Scheme are provided in Volume 1. Environmental management and Code of Construction Practice

2.3.2 All contractors would be required to comply with the environmental management regime for the Proposed Scheme, which would include: • Code of Construction Practice (CoCP)14; and • Local environmental management plans (LEMPs), which would apply within each study area.

2.3.3 The CoCP, in conjunction with associated LEMPs, would be the means of controlling the construction works associated with the Proposed Scheme, with the objective of ensuring that the effects of the works upon people and the natural environment are eptk to a practicable minimum. The CoCP will contain generic control measures and standards to be implemented throughout the construction process.

2.3.4 A draft CoCP has been prepared and will be published alongside this document. It will be kept under review as the design of the Proposed Scheme develops and further engagement with stakeholders is undertaken. Construction site operation Working hours

2.3.5 Core working hours would be from 08:00 to 18:00 on weekdays (excluding bank holidays) and from 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays. While there would not normally be any construction activity on Sundays, some activities (e.g. tunnelling) would be undertaken. Site-specific variations to core hours and/or additional hours likely to be required would be included within LEMPs following consultation with the relevant LPA. To maximise productivity within the core hours, HS2 Ltd’s contractors would require a period of up to one hour before, and up to one hour after, the core working hours for start-up and close down of activities. These activities would be subject to controls set out in the CoCP.

2.3.6 Track laying activities and work requiring possession of major transport infrastructure (e.g. highways) may be undertaken during night-time, Saturday afternoon, Sunday and/or bank holidays for reasons of safety or operational necessity and would often involve consecutive nights work, including over weekend possessions. Construction site compounds

2.3.7 Main site compounds would be used for core project management (engineering, planning and construction delivery), commercial, and administrative staff.

2.3.8 Satellite site compounds would generally be smaller in size, providing office commodationac for limited numbers of staff. The satellite site compound would provide local storage for plant and materials and limited car parking would be provided for staff and site operatives. Limited welfare facilities would be provided at each site.

14 Arup/URS (2013), Phase One: Draft Code of Construction Practice, HS2 Ltd, London.

20 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

2.3.9 The location of all site compounds, along with their duration of use and a broad current estimate of the number of workers likely to work at the construction sites, is set out in Table 1 and shown in maps CT‑05-093 to CT‑05-100. Construction site details and arrangements are continuing to be refined and will be confirmed in the formal ES. All construction staff would be required to comply with codes of behaviour set out in the CoCP.

Compound Location Typical use Estimated duration Estimated number of type of use15 workers

Average Peak period work day16 work day

Main site Coventry Road Main Main area administration and 60 months 105 150 Compound support Map CT‑05-095, F8

Satellite site A445 Leicester Lane Offline road realignment & 9 months 18 25 Map CT‑05-093, F7 construction of road overbridge

Satellite site Stoneleigh Park Construction of retained cutting 24 months 70 100 retained cutting Map CT‑05-094, B5

Satellite site Stoneleigh Road Offline road realignment & 24 months 88 125 overbridge construction of road overbridge Map CT‑05-094, H4

Satellite site River Avon viaduct Construction of river viaduct 24 months 35 50 (south) Map CT‑05-094, A5

Satellite site River Avon viaduct Construction of river viaduct 24 months 35 50 (north) Map CT‑05-095, I6

Satellite site B4115 Coventry Road Offline road realignment & 9 months 18 25 overbridge construction of road overbridge Map CT‑05-095, H6

Satellite site A46 overbridge Offline road temp diversion & 24 months 35 50 Map CT‑05-095, E6 online road overbridge

Satellite site17 Foot Path K29 Construction of PRoW 4 months 70 100 overbridge overbridge Map CT‑05-095, C5

Satellite site Dalehouse Lane Construction of online road 12 months 70 100 overbridge overbridge (road closure) Map CT‑05-095, B6

Satellite site Finham Brook viaduct Construction of river viaduct 12 months 70 100 Map CT‑05-096, H5

Satellite site Milburn Grange Farm Construction of farm access 4 months 18 25 overbridge overbridge Map CT‑05-096,E4

Satellite site Coventry to Construction of bridge below 24 months 60 85 Leamington Spa Line existing rail overbridge Construction of Kenilworth 18 months 42 60 Map CT‑05-096, E4 retained cutting

Offline road realignment 12 months 42 60 & construction of A429 Kenilworth Road overbridge

21 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

Compound Location Typical use Estimated duration Estimated number of type of use15 workers

Average Peak period work day16 work day

Satellite site Railway infrastructure Construction of rail systems 18 months 60 85 installation A infrastructure

Satellite site Railway infrastructure Construction of rail systems 18 months 60 85 installation B infrastructure

Satellite site Canley Brook viaduct Construction of river viaduct 12 months 18 25 Map CT‑05-097, H5 Construction of PRoW 4 months 18 25 Bridleway W164 overbridge

Satellite site Crackley Lane Offline road realignment & 18 months 42 60 overbridge construction of road overbridge Map CT‑05-097, C6

Satellite site Track & Foot Path Construction of PRoW 4 months 18 25 W168 underpass underpass Map CT‑05-098, F4

Satellite Retaining wall left (A) Construction of retaining wall 9 months 60 85 site18,19 Map CT‑05-099, D4 Construction of cut-and-cover 24 months 60 85 tunnel

Replacement of Cromwell Lane 6 months 60 85 on top of cut-and-cover tunnel

Satellite site20 Retaining wall left (B) Construction of retaining wall 9 months 60 85 Map CT‑05-099, D4

Satellite site Retaining wall right Construction of retaining wall 24 months 88 125 Map CT‑05-100, F3 Construction of PRoW M186 4 months 88 125 and F4 overbridge

Construction of retaining wall 12 months 88 125

Construction of online B4101 6 months 88 125 Waste Lane overbridge (road closure)

Table 1: Location of construction site compounds

2.3.10 All main site compounds would contain space for the storage of bulk materials (aggregates, structural steel and steel reinforcement), an area for the fabrication of temporary works equipment and finished goods, fuel storage, plant and equipment storage and necessary operational parking. Buildings would be generally temporary, modular units and layout would maximise construction space and limit the land take required. Hard standing areas would be installed at all site compounds.

2.3.11 The Coventry Road main construction site compound would be accessed via the B4115 Coventry Road and would provide the site office and welfare accommodation. The compound would provide administration and support facilities for the majority of the construction works in the area. The adjacent areas would be used for the temporary storage of any topsoil stripped as part of the works.

15 The duration for each site compound is currently based on a draft programme, which will be refined for the formal ES. 16 70% of peak values assumed. 17 Use of the Dalehouse Lane overbridge satellite site would not be continuous. 18 Use of the retaining wall left (A) satellite site would not be continuous. 19 Satellite construction compound shading not shown on CT‑05-099 in draft ES. These compounds will be shown in the formal ES. 20 Satellite construction compound shading not shown on CT‑05-099 in draft ES. These compounds will be shown in the formal ES.

22 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

Fencing and lighting

2.3.12 Security fencing would be provided on the perimeter of each site compound. Individual site compounds for offices, welfare and storage would generally be demarcated and secured with fences and gates. Fence type and construction would be appropriate to the level of security required, likelihood of intruders, level of danger, and visual impact to the environment.

2.3.13 Lighting of site compounds during hours of darkness would seek to reduce light pollution to the surrounding area, as far as reasonably practicable, in accordance with the requirements of the CoCP. Temporary worker accommodation sites

2.3.14 One temporary worker accommodation site would be located within this section of the Proposed Scheme as detailed in Table 2. Temporary worker accommodation sites would adhere to the CoCP.

Location Site description Facilities provided Estimated Estimated duration of use number of workers

Map CT‑05-095, Coventry Road Living accommodation, welfare facilities, 60 months 30 F8 and F7 temporary workers car parking accommodation

Table 2: Location of temporary worker accommodation sites Construction traffic and access

2.3.15 The following lorry routes are currently proposed to access each of the site compounds: • The proposed construction route for Coventry Road main construction site compound is B4115 (Coventry Road), then left on to Stoneleigh Road and left on to A46 (southbound) through the following A452/A46 junction, A46/B4115/Warwick Road junction, Warwick Bypass/A4177/A425 junction and A46/M40 junction before joining the M40 from the A46/ M40 junction.

2.3.16 Satellite construction site compounds would generally be more remote and operational for shorter durations, accessible either via internal site access routes or A, B or minor unclassified roads (shown on map CT‑05-093 to 100), including: • The proposed lorry route for A445 Leicester Lane satellite construction site is the A445; • The proposed lorry route for Stoneleigh Park retained cutting and Stoneleigh Road overbridge satellite construction site is the B4113 Stoneleigh Road; • The proposed lorry route for the River Avon viaduct and the B4115 Coventry Road overbridge satellite construction site is the B4115 Coventry Road; • The proposed lorry route for the A46 overbridge construction site is the A46; • The proposed lorry route for the Dalehouse Lane overbridge and the Finham Brook viaduct satellite construction sites is Dalehouse Lane/Stoneleigh Road, continuing onto the A46; • The proposed lorry route for the Coventry to Leamington Spa rail line overbridge, Kenilworth retained cut and the A429 Kenilworth Road overbridge satellite construction sites is the A429 Kenilworth Road; • The proposed lorry route for the Crackley Lane overbridge satellite construction site is Cryfield Grange Road, continuing onto the A429 Kenilworth Road; and

23 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

• The proposed lorry route for the Burton Green cut-and-cover tunnel construction site is Hodgett’s Lane/Waste Lane, continuing onto Spencer’s Lane/Meriden Road.

2.3.17 The above list of satellite compounds is indicative and will be updated in the formal ES. Preparatory and enabling works Demolition works

2.3.18 It is anticipated that the Proposed Scheme would require the demolition of 31 buildings in the area. These works are outlined in Table 3.

Description of structure Location

Stoneleigh Park (total buildings – 7). Residential properties and one Map CT‑05-094, F5, 100m north of Stoneleigh Road outbuilding.21

Stoneleigh Park (total buildings – approximately 15). Commercial Map CT‑05-094,B4, C5, D5, and F5 buildings.

Agricultural buildings (total buildings – 2). Map CT‑05-095,D5, 50m south of footpath K29

New Kingswood Farm, Dalehouse Lane (total buildings – 1). Residential Map CT‑05-095,C5, immediately south of footpath property. footbridge K29

Burton Green (total buildings – 6). Three residential properties and Map CT‑05-099,G5, to the east of Cromwell Lane associated outbuildings.

Table 3: Demolition works Drainage and culverts

2.3.19 It is anticipated that drainage ponds would be required for both railway track and highway drainage. Indicative locations are shown on maps CT‑06-093 to CT‑06-100. Watercourse diversions

2.3.20 The route of the Proposed Scheme and associated highway works require two diversions of watercourses as detailed in Table 4.

Location Watercourse (status) Reason for diversion Diversion length and map reference

A445 Leicester Lane Unnamed watercourse (ordinary) To realign unnamed watercourse to suit 45m culvert CT‑06-093, F3

Canley Brook Main River To realign Canley Brook to allow clearance 1.15km from HS2 to flood level CT‑06-096 and 097

Table 4: Watercourse diversions Utility diversions

2.3.21 There are a number of major items of utility infrastructure in proximity to the Proposed Scheme, including: high pressure gas mains; large diameter water mains; large diameter sewers; fibre optic/signal cabling; fuel pipeline; and high and low voltage electricity lines. The proposed utility diversions include the diversion of major electricity and gas connections. This is primarily to address those locations where overhead electricity clearance cannot be amended to accommodate the height of the Proposed Scheme works and/or where connection to gas infrastructure, for example, could be compromised.

21 The status of the potential outbuilding will be verified as part of the formal ES.

24 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

2.3.22 The utility construction zones included on maps CT‑05-093 to CT‑05-100 provide an initial consideration of these diversions. Some would require revision to take account of further design development. Proposed diversions and an assessment of the effects of the major utility diversions will be provided in the formal ES.

2.3.23 Discussions with utility providers are underway to confirm whether plant and/or apparatus would need to be realigned away from the area of work; protected from the works by means of a concrete slab or similar; or have sufficient clearance from the work that they would not be affected.

2.3.24 Wherever practicable, temporary connections for construction site compounds would be made to local existing utility services (i.e. electricity, water, data, sewerage and surface water drainage, to reduce the need for generators, storage tanks and associated traffic movements for fuel tankers). Highway and road diversions

2.3.25 Proposed highway and road diversions are shown on CT‑05-093 to CT‑05-100 and shown in Table 5. The total duration of works does not necessarily indicate periods of actual closure. The closure of routes would be kept to as short a duration as reasonably practicable. Diversions show indicative alternative routes available to maintain general access which will be subject to change as part of the development of the design and will be detailed in the formal ES.

Name Location Diversion route Approximate Duration length of diversions

A445 Leicester Map CT‑05-093, F5 New overbridge. Permanent realignment. 1.2km Permanent Lane

Stareton Road Map CT‑05-094, G4 Closure. Divert to Stoneleigh Road overbridge. 280m Permanent

B4113 Stoneleigh Map CT‑05-094, G4 New overbridge. Permanent realignment. 750m Permanent Road

B4115 Overbridge Map CT‑05-095, H5 New overbridge. Permanent realignment. 970m Permanent

A46 Overbridge Map CT‑05-096, H5 New online overbridge. 680m Permanent

Dalehouse Lane Map CT‑05-095, B4 Temporary diversion during construction. New 450m 18 months online overbridge.

Millburn Grange Map CT‑05-096, E5 New overbridge. Permanent realignment. 390m Permanent Farm

A429 Kenilworth Map CT‑05-096, C5 New overbridge. Permanent realignment. 540m Permanent Road

Crackley Lane Map CT‑05-097, D5 New overbridge. Permanent realignment. 460m Permanent

Cromwell Lane Map CT‑05-099, G5 Temporary diversion (slight offline) and 0m 18 months reinstatement on cut-and-cover tunnel.

B4101 Waste Map CT‑05-100, F5 Temporary closure (slight offline). New online 4.2km 9 months Lane overbridge.

Table 5: Highway and road diversions

25 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions

2.3.26 Proposed footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions are shown on maps CT‑05-093 to CT‑05‑100 and in Table 6. The total duration of works does not necessarily indicate periods of actual closure. The closure of routes would be kept to as short a duration as reasonably practicable. Diversions show indicative alternative routes available to maintain general access, which will be subject to change as part of the development of the design and will detailed in the formal ES.

Name Location Diversion route Approximate Duration length of diversions

Footpath W171 Map CT‑05-094, G5 Divert to B4113 Stoneleigh Road overbridge. 490m Permanent

Footpath K29 Map CT‑05-095, C5 Temporary diversion during construction of new 170m 4 months overbridge footpath overbridge.

Bridleway W164 Map CT‑05-097, I5 New overbridge. 800m Permanent

Bridleway W165x Map CT‑05-097, F5 Combined with Bridleway W164 overbridge. 1.185km Permanent

Footpath W167 Map CT‑05-097, B4 Closure. Divert to Footpath W168 and 1.23km Permanent accommodation access underpass. Temporary at ground level minor diversion while underpass is constructed.

Footpath W168 Map CT‑05-098, F5 Divert to new underpass 510m Permanent

Kenilworth Greenway Map CT‑05-098, B4 Realigned beside the retained cut but reinstated Alongside 24 months (linear country park to CT‑05-099, B5 over the cut-and-cover tunnel. Temporarily and permissive diverted beside the worksite. bridleway)

Footpath W169 Map CT‑05-098, B5 Closure. Divert over the cut-and-cover tunnel 515m Permanent

Footpath W182 Map CT‑05-099, F5 Temporary diversion to Cromwell Lane 0m 6 months

Footpath M187 Map CT‑05-099, D5 Realigned over cut-and-cover tunnel portal. 680m Permanent Temporary closure for 24 months.

Footpath M186 Map CT‑05-099, B5 New overbridge. Temporary scaffold bridge 195m Permanent across retained cut for four months.

Footpath M184 Map CT‑05-100, F5 New Waste Lane overbridge. 0m 6 months

Footpath M198 Map CT‑05-100, E5 Closure. Divert to Waste Lane overbridge. 815m Permanent

Table 6: Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions Restricted accesses

2.3.27 There would be no restricted accesses in the local area. Main construction works – Earthworks

2.3.28 Major earthworks in the area would include: • Stoneleigh Park retaining wall; • Glasshouse wood cutting; • Canley Brook retaining wall; • Canley Brook diversion; • Roughknowles Wood cutting; and • Burton Green retaining structure.

26 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

2.3.29 Works would be carried out in a sequence, taking due consideration of the impacts of road and footpath closures, flows within watercourses and vehicle movements by road.

2.3.30 During design development consideration has been given to the movement of materials. Wherever possible excavated material would be moved directly from the area of excavation to areas of the works where fill material is required. Some processing and temporary stockpiling of fill material may be necessary if direct placement into the permanent works is not possible. Some material may require crushing and/or screening to render it acceptable for use elsewhere. Main construction works – Structures

2.3.31 The construction methodology for all structures is subject to further design and development and will therefore be finalised nearer to the time construction would commence. However, based on the current design detail, simplified construction sequences for the various structures in the area are described below. Bridges and viaducts

2.3.32 Viaducts and road bridges under and over the route of the Proposed Scheme would generally be of concrete construction. Structures over the Proposed Scheme would allow a minimum clearance of 7.15m. Structures under the railway would allow for the clearances required by other modes (e.g. typically 5.7m for highways).

2.3.33 A simplified construction sequence for a typical viaduct is provided inVolume 1. Proposed viaducts, underbridges and overbridges are detailed in Table 7.

Location Element description Length (m)

A445 Leicester Lane Overbridge 25m Map CT‑05-093, F5

B4113 Stoneleigh Road Overbridge 60m Map CT‑05-094, G4

River Avon Viaduct 80m Map CT‑05-095, I4

B4115 Overbridge 25m Map CT‑05-095, H5

A46 Overbridge 25m Map CT‑05-095, F5

Footpath K29 Overbridge (Footbridge) 75m Map CT‑05-095, C4

Dalehouse Lane Overbridge 25m Map CT‑05-095, B4

Finham Brook viaduct Viaduct 60m Map CT‑05-095, A4

Millburn Grange Farm Overbridge 65m Map CT‑05-096, E5

Coventry to Leamington Spa Line Overbridge 35m Map CT‑05-096, E5

A429 Kenilworth Road Overbridge 60m Map CT‑05-096, D5

Canley Brook Viaduct 50m Map CT‑05-097, H5

27 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

Location Element description Length (m)

Bridleway W164 Overbridge 55m Map CT‑05-097, G5

Crackley Lane Overbridge 90m Map CT‑05-097, D5

Footpath W168 Underpass 40m Map CT‑05-098, G4

Footpath M186 Overbridge 25m Map CT‑05-100, H5

B4101 Waste Lane Overbridge 25m Map CT‑05-100, F5

Table 7: Viaducts, underbridges and overbridges Cut-and-cover tunnel construction

2.3.34 A simplified likely construction sequence for cut-and-cover tunnels would be as follows: • Phase 1: Enabling works would be carried out in advance of the main construction works. These would include site investigation works, archaeological investigation (as required), installing monitoring equipment, and statutory utility diversions; • Phase 2: Establishment of a construction site compound and perimeter fencing. Haul roads would be constructed, which would allow plant on site to undertake site clearance activities. Establishment of traffic management and realignment of roads and footpaths, as required; • Phase 3: Excavate to the required depth. Side slopes of the excavation may be strengthened to allow slopes to be cut at steeper gradients, reducing “land take” and the potential import and export of materials; • Phase 4: Construction of the reinforced concrete tunnel “box” structure. Scaffold, falsework, formwork, steel reinforcement and other materials would be placed using cranes sited at the top of the excavation. Concrete delivered by mixer truck would be placed either directly within the excavation, or by concrete pumps located at ground level; • Phase 5: Backfill around the sides of the structure. Fill over structure to suit intended land use and complete landscaping as required;

• Phase 6: Backfill abutments, install parapets, divert and install utilities and lay road surfacing as required; and • Phase 7: Temporary works would be removed, including removal of any road and footpath temporary diversions.

2.3.35 Where limitations on construction space restrict an open excavation with side slopes, as is the case for part of the Burton Green tunnel, a “top down” construction method could be utilised, which would change Phases 3 and 4. Either bored pile or diaphragm walls would be constructed along each side of the excavation. Material would be progressively excavated between the two walls, with temporary or permanent transverse props being provided at different levels as the excavation deepens.

28 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

Retaining wall construction

2.3.36 A simplified likely construction sequence for retaining walls would be as follows: • Phase 1: Enabling works would be carried out in advance of the main construction works. These would include site investigation works, archaeological investigation (as required), installing monitoring equipment, and statutory utility diversions; • Phase 2: Establishment of a satellite construction site compound and perimeter fencing. Haul roads would be constructed, which would allow plant on site to undertake site clearance activities. Establishment of traffic management and realignment of roads and footpaths, as required; • Phase 3: For pile wall construction, a piling rig would install a line of either bored or driven piles. A capping beam would be constructed connecting the tops of the piles. For diaphragm walls (constructed as discrete panels rather than piles), a trench would be excavated to the required depth. It may be necessary to stabilise the trench by filling the trench with supporting fluid prior to the placement of steel reinforcement and concrete; • Phase 4: Once the piled or diaphragm wall reaches the required strength, the material in front of the wall would be excavated; and • Phase 5: Temporary works would then be removed, including removal of any road and footpath temporary diversions. Rail infrastructure fit out

2.3.37 The principal elements of rail infrastructure to be constructed are track, overhead line equipment, communications equipment and power supply. The installation of track in open areas would be of standard ballasted track configuration, comprising principally of ballast, rail and sleepers. Further details are set out in Volume 1. Power supply

2.3.38 HS2 trains would draw power from overhead line equipment, requiring feeder stations and connections to the 275kV and 400kV National Grid network. There is one feeder station within the local area, located at Burton Green (map CT‑06-099, D5). In addition to feeder stations, smaller auto-transformer stations would be required at more frequent intervals. The anticipated locations of the proposed auto-transformer stations are: • East of the route adjacent to the A445, map CT‑06-093, E7; and • East of the route adjacent to A429 Kenilworth Road, map CT‑06-096, C5. Landscaping and permanent fencing

2.3.39 Landscaping (i.e. earthworks and seeding and planting) would be provided to address visual and noise impacts, as well as to provide screening for intrinsically important ecological habitats and heritage features. Where appropriate, the engineering embankments and/or cuttings would be reshaped to integrate the alignment sympathetically into the character of the surrounding landscape. The planting would reflect tree and shrub species native to the landscape. Opportunities for ecological habitat creation would be considered.

2.3.40 Permanent fencing would be erected and will be shown on maps to accompany the formal ES. Construction programme

2.3.41 A construction programme that illustrates indicative periods for each core construction activity in this area is provided in Figure 3.

29 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

Figure 3: Indicative construction programme for the area Commissioning

2.3.42 Commissioning is the process of testing the infrastructure to ensure that it operates as expected. This would take place in the year prior to opening. Further details are provided in Volume 1. 2.4 Operation of the Proposed Scheme 2.4.1 The operation of the Proposed Scheme is described in Volume 1.

2.4.2 Up to 11 trains per hour (tph) would travel in each direction in this area on day one of operation of the Proposed Scheme. This would increase to a potential maximum of 18tph should Phase Two of the high speed rail network become fully operational.

2.4.3 In this area, HS2 trains would run at speeds up to 360kph. During Phase One of HS2, up to 14tph would pass in each direction.

30 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

2.4.4 The trains would be either 200m (one-unit train) or 400m (two-unit trains) long. They would run between the hours of 05:00 and 24:00 (Monday to Saturday) and between 08:00 and 24:00 (Sunday). When required, maintenance would be conducted outside those operating hours. 2.5 Community forum engagement 2.5.1 HS2 Ltd’s approach to engagement on the Proposed Scheme is set out in Volume 1.

2.5.2 A series of community forum meetings and discussions with individual landowners, organisations and action groups were undertaken. Community forum meetings were held on: • 2 April 2012 at Burton Green Village Hall; • 26 June 2012 at St Francis Parish Centre; • 5 September 2012 at Burton Green Village Hall; • 21 November 2012 at Burton Green Village Hall; and • 12 February 2013 at the Kenilworth Centre.

2.5.3 In addition to HS2 Ltd representatives, attendees at these community forum meetings typically included local residents (and residents groups), public representatives, representatives of local authorities and parish and district councils, action groups, affected landowners and other interested stakeholders.

2.5.4 The main themes to emerge from these meetings were: • Effects on greenbelt designation; • Impacts of river and railway crossing at Crackley Gap; • Impacts on Ancient Woodlands, Stoneleigh Park, Little Poors Wood, Ancient Monuments and wildlife sites; • Impacts on the River Avon, Finham Brook, and Canley Brook; • Possibility of a tunnel at Burton Green, Stoneleigh and Kenilworth Golf Club; • Permanent and temporary land take needs including impacts on agricultural land and land uses; • Maintaining access to Dale House Lane; • Visual, noise and vibration effects; • Impacts on the Golf Club in Kenilworth; • Impacts of the feeder station in Burton Green and auto-transformer stations; • Impacts on the school in Burton Green; • The amount and disposal of excavated materials; • Construction: timeframe, impacts on Village Hall, construction compounds, road diversions, short and long-term impacts due to road adjustments; and • Security of HS2 during operation. 2.6 Route section main alternatives 2.6.1 The main strategic alternatives to the Proposed Scheme are presented in Volume 1. The main local alternatives considered for the Proposed Scheme within the local area are set out within this section.

31 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

2.6.2 Since April 2012, as part of the design development process, a series of local alternatives have been reviewed within workshops attended by engineering, planning and environmental specialists. During these workshops, the likely significant environmental effects of each design option have been reviewed. The purpose of these reviews has been to ensure that the Proposed Scheme draws the right balance between engineering requirements, cost and potential environmental impacts. Canley Brook crossing

2.6.3 The January 2012 announced route included a crossing of Canley Brook, located just north of Kenilworth Road, which on further evaluation does not meet the flood risk requirements at this location. The January 2012 announced route is noted as Option A and the baseline for assessing options against. The following further three options were considered for Canley Brook crossing: • Option B: Divert the course of Canley Brook and its floodplain to cross the route some 600m north-west of its current location where the alignment would be 4m above the floodplain level; • Option C: Raise the route by 6m at Canley Brook to provide adequate clearance for a viaduct across the existing floodplain. This would also require a raising of the alignment for the A429 and the Coventry to Leamington Spa Railway Line; and • Option D: maintain the route as the Revised January 2012 announced route, with a large inverted siphon beneath the Proposed Scheme that is designed to accommodate Canley Brook flood condition flows.

2.6.4 Option C, which lifts the route by 6m, was rejected on environmental grounds based on the resultant increased sound and visual intrusion for nearby housing.

2.6.5 Option D, which adopts an inverted siphon, was rejected as being an excessively long-term maintenance liability.

2.6.6 Therefore, Option B, which relocates both Canley Brook and the proposed viaduct, was selected as the preferred option and was taken forward for further development within the Proposed Scheme for the Canley Brook crossing. Finham Brook crossing

2.6.7 The January 2012 announced route included a crossing of Finham Brook which on further evaluation does not meet the flood risk requirements at this location. The January 2012 announced route is noted as Option A and the baseline for assessing options against, the following further option was considered for the Finham Brook section of the route

• Option B would raise the route at Finham Brook 2m above the Proposed Scheme, raise the route at the A46 crossing by 3m and raise the Dalehouse Lane diversion by approximately 2m. It would not require any changes to the Coventry to Leamington Spa Railway Line. Therefore, Option B achieves an engineering solution for the provision of a viaduct across the Finham Brook floodplain without significant net increase in visual and noise intrusion and provides no increase in the current flood risk at this location.

2.6.8 Therefore Option B was taken forward for further development within the Proposed Scheme. Burton Green tunnel

2.6.9 The January 2012 announced route through Burton Green follows an existing disused railway cutting and is proposed within a 520m long green tunnel. The vertical profile of the route is such that this would require significant excavation below the base of the existing cutting with

32 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

a significant cover to the roof of the cut-and-cover tunnel. The January 2012 announced route is noted as Option A and the baseline for assessing options against. The following further seven options were considered for the Burton Green to Kenilworth section of the route. Three cut-and-cover tunnel options were considered: • Option B: Raise the route by approximately 5m and reposition the cut-and-cover tunnel by extending it 50m to the south and reducing it by 50m to the north of the January 2012 announced route; • Option C: Raise the route to the north by approximately 5m but maintain the level of the January 2012 announced route to the southern end of the tunnel and reposition the 520m long cut-and-cover tunnel by extending it by 50m to the south and reducing by 50m to the north of the January 2012 announced route; and • Option H: Raise the route by approximately 5m and extend the cut-and-cover tunnel 50m to the south.

2.6.10 Four bored tunnel options were considered: • Option D: A short bored tunnel, from Broadwells Wood to Beanit Spinney incorporating cut-and-cover approaches at both the southern and northern extents with an approximate total length of 2.5km; • Option E: A bored tunnel, from Broadwells Wood to Marlowes incorporating cut-and-cover approaches at both the southern and northern extents with an approximate total length of 6km; • Option F: A bored tunnel from just north of Crackley Wood to Marlowes incorporating cut- and-cover approaches at both the southern and northern extents with an approximate total length of 7.4km; and • Option G: A bored tunnel from close to the A46 to Marlowes incorporating cut-and-cover approaches at both the southern and northern extents with an approximate total length of 10.7km.

2.6.11 Option C was discounted as it provided fewer construction environmental benefits than Option B, which raises the line at both ends.

2.6.12 Option H would have greater construction impacts and costs, due to the longer tunnel, than Option B.

2.6.13 The most cost effective bored tunnel proposal considered was Option D. This bored tunnel mitigates much of the construction disturbance and community severance immediately within the village of Burton Green. It would also decrease the visual and noise impacts during operation.

2.6.14 Whilst the bored tunnel options provide an overall reduction in environmental impacts, additional tunnelling would not achieve a significant improvement in sustainability and would come at a significant increase in construction costs.

2.6.15 Therefore Option B, which would reduce the construction impact, facilitate landscape integration and save cost, whilst maintaining a broadly similar impact during operation as the January 2012 announced route was taken forward for further development within the Proposed Scheme for the Burton Green tunnel.

33 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green

Line raise through South Cubbington Wood

2.6.16 A change has been adopted into the Proposed Scheme which has resulted in a raise in route in this area, between Stoneleigh Road and the southern boundary of the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green CFA area (CFA18), just south of Leicester Lane. Details relating to this change can be found within Part B, Section 2.6 of the Offchurch and Cubbington CFA (CFA 17) Report. 2.7 Proposals for further consideration 2.7.1 The following proposals are to being considered for inclusion within the Proposed Scheme pending further assessment prior to release of the formal ES. Further engineering options

2.7.2 Further engineering options to the Proposed Scheme are being investigated, including: • Further consideration of the following road crossings: Stoneleigh Road, B4115, A46, Dalehouse Lane, Waste Lane, Crackley Lane and Kenilworth Greenway public right of way diversion; • The layout and form of the Burton Green Feeder Station; • Consideration of the Stoneleigh Park access works within the Proposed Scheme; • The arrangement for the diversion of Canley Brook; and • Ongoing development of mitigation earthworks, including in the vicinity of Dalehouse Lane. Further proposals from community forums

2.7.3 Seven proposals resulting from stakeholder engagement are to be considered within the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green section of the route: • A 2.1km long cut-and-cover tunnel from near Stonehouse Farm to the River Avon; • An extended 2.1km retained cutting from near Stonehouse Farm to the River Avon crossing; • A 900m long cut-and-cover tunnel from just south of the A46 to Dalehouse Lane; • A 2.5km long cut-and-cover tunnel extending from just south of the A46 to the north of the A429/Kenilworth Road; • A 3.2km long bored tunnel incorporating cut-and-cover tunnel approaches from just south of the A46 to South Hurst Farm; • A 200m long cut-and-cover tunnel adjacent to Milburn Grange Farm; and • A 250m long cut-and-cover tunnel adjacent to Birches Wood Farm.

34 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green Part C: Environmental topic assessments

35 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Agriculture, forestry and soils 3 Agriculture, forestry and soils 3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of the impacts and the likely significant effects to agriculture, soils and forestry arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. The section covers soils, agricultural land quality, farm enterprises, forestry and agri‑environment schemes. 3.2 Policy framework 3.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to this area are described in Section 2.1. Policies of relevance to agriculture, forestry and soil are set out below.

3.2.2 Adopted WDLP Policy DP3: Natural and Historic Environment protects Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land and Policy DP11: Drainage supports measures to protect rural land from flooding and pollution.

3.2.3 The emerging WDLP Preferred Options contains no specific references to agricultural land, apart from encouraging development on brownfield sites and indirectly supporting the protection of rural land from sterilisation by built development. Policies for the conservation of rural landscapes and woodland are contained in Section 15, Green Infrastructure, which stresses the importance of the natural and outdoor environment and the benefits it can bring for people and nature.

3.2.4 The adopted SUDP Policy C4: Agriculture states the Council’s intention to safeguard the BMV agricultural land and encourage the use of remaining land for farming. The policy states that development affecting the highest quality agricultural land will only be permitted if no suitable land of a lower agricultural classification is available, taking environmental and sustainability considerations into account.

3.2.5 The emerging SMBC Local Plan policies are similar to those in the SUDP and key themes relating to environmental protection are retained. Policy P17: Countryside and Green Belt continues to protect BMV agricultural land from development. Policy P18: Health and Well Being introduces a series of measures, one of which is to provide opportunities for growing local produce and resisting the loss of areas currently available for such cultivation.

3.2.6 There are no policies within the adopted City of Coventry UDP and emerging Core Strategy of direct relevance to agricultural land. 3.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 3.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the farm impacts and agricultural land quality assessments are set out in Volume 1.

3.3.2 There are no additional topic specific assumptions or limitations in this area. 3.4 Environmental baseline 3.4.1 The Proposed Scheme passes into the south-east of the study area across Leicester Lane, Cubbington Heath at 70m to 80m above Ordnance Datum (AOD) and descends to the River Avon at 55 to 60m AOD. Towards the north-west the gently rolling country rises to a narrow plateau at Burton Green, at 130m AOD, forming a watershed between the Severn and Trent drainage systems. The softer rocks have been eroded and resistant bands of sandstone and conglomerate form prominent south-facing scarps.

36 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

3.4.2 The main drainage is by way of the River Avon, a tributary of the Severn, which meanders south-westwards, and by the which flows southwards to join the Avon at Stoneleigh Park. The River Avon and River Sowe have cut deep, wide, gently sloping valleys which are flanked by a series of flat river terraces. The main tributary of the River Avon-River Sowe, the Finham Brook, flows north-eastwards into the River Sowe and has cut deeply into the landscape.

3.4.3 Reddish Triassic sandstone of the Bromsgrove Sandstone Formation is found in the south-east of the study area, with Carboniferous mudstone and sandstone over the remainder. Drift in the form of high-level sand and gravel and glacial material, and river terrace deposits of the River Avon, mask some of the outcrops. Elsewhere, thin drift influences the upper layers of some of the soils. A narrow strip of alluvium occupies the floodplains of the River Avon, Finham Brook and their tributaries.

3.4.4 The National Soil Map shows seven principal groups, or associations of soil types within the study area, and more detailed published information is also available for part of the study area22,23. These show seven principal groups, or “associations” of soil types within the area: • The Bromsgrove Association is mapped on reddish Carboniferous sandstones to the south and west of Stoneleigh, along the Finham Brook and on rising ground north-west of the A429. It contains well drained reddish light loamy soils over soft and hard sandstone, with deeper soils in places. There are also some medium loamy soils with slowly permeable subsoils in mudstone that experience slight seasonal waterlogging; • From Furze Hill across Leicester Lane towards Stoneleigh Park on the Bromsgrove Sandstone Formation occur light loamy soils over sandstone in the Rivington Association. The soils are well drained but, locally, similar soils over interbedded sandstone and mudstone are affected by groundwater; • Soils of the Wick Association are of limited occurrence on terraces of the River Avon north of Stoneleigh Park. They consist of deep light loams, mostly well drained, but with slight seasonal waterlogging where affected by groundwater; • Carboniferous reddish mudstones and interbedded sandstones form the subsoils along several sections of the Proposed Scheme north-westwards from the A46. Here the soils of the Whimple Associations consist of reddish medium loams over clay with slowly permeable subsoils and slight to moderate seasonal waterlogging; the latter more common on higher ground in the west. Locally, reddish light loamy soils over sand or soft sandstone are well drained; • Near Burton Green heavy clay loam and clay soils of the Salop Association developed in clayey glacial deposits. These are subject to seasonal waterlogging; and • Also on clayey glacial deposits near Burton Green are heavy clay loam soils of the Beccles 3 Association that are subject to seasonal waterlogging.

3.4.5 The soil underpins ecosystems which are central to social, economic and environmental sustainability. Other soil interactions relevant to the study area concern the role of woodland and permanent grassland as carbon sinks; the biodiversity interest in natural and semi-natural woodland and grassland; historic and cultural resources retained in or supported by soils; and the role of soils in the flood regime of land adjacent to watercourses, such as tributaries leading to the River Avon and the River Sowe.

22 Cranfield University (2001), The National Soil Map of England and Wales 1:250,000 scale, Cranfield University, National Soil Resources Institute. 23 Beard, G.R. (1984), Soils in Warwickshire V – Sheet SP27/37 (Coventry South). Soil Survey Record No. 81.

37 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

3.4.6 The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has produced predictive assessments of the occurrence of BMV agricultural land (Grades 1 to 3a). These show that there is a mainly high (greater than 60%) likelihood of there being BMV land within the study area. The area where BMV land is assessed as least likely to be found is on floodplains and on the heaviest land near Burton Green. The detailed field surveys corroborate the findings of the predictive assessments.

3.4.7 The assessment of land quality in the study area indicates that agricultural land is almost entirely in the BMV category (99%); there is no Grade 1 and the BMV land is divided between Grade 2 (60%) and Subgrade 3a (39%). Grade 2 land is most extensive between Stoneleigh and Burton Green on the light loamy soils of Wick 1 Association; on some lighter textured, better drained soils of the Whimple Association; and on the deeper soils of the Bromsgrove and Rivington 1 Associations. This is consistent with the predictive mapping prepared by Defra. Given that there is a mainly high likelihood of BMV land occurring in this local area, the loss of such land would be of low sensitivity.

3.4.8 Small scattered areas of Subgrade 3b land occupy only 1% of the agricultural area on the heaviest soils (Beccles and Salop Associations) and floodplains.

3.4.9 Local agricultural land use in the study area is dominated by arable crops based on wheat, barley and oil seed rape in rotation. This is a typical use of heavy land of good to moderate quality in the Midlands. This dominant land use is broken by grassland for stock rearing (cattle and sheep) as well as occasional woodlands (some substantial) and parkland.

3.4.10 The agricultural surveys to date have identified 19 holdings that could be affected in the study area, as set out in Table 8. Four are described as mainly arable farms, five are mixed arable and livestock, and five specialise in livestock (mainly beef cattle, but one with deer). One holding specialises in high value salad crops. Of the remainder, three are used for horses and there is one parcel of woodland. The average size of farm is approximately 66ha. Most farms are between 2ha and 130 ha, but one holding is approximately 180ha. Many farm businesses include diversified activities, including liveries, letting of surplus buildings and car parking for events at Stoneleigh Park.

38 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

Holding Primary farming activities

Furzen Hill Farm Mainly arable

Park Farm High value salad crops

Royal Agricultural Society of England Mixed arable and livestock and woodland

Stoneleigh Abbey Woodland

Kingswood Farmhouse Equestrian (commercial)

New Kingswood Farm Mixed arable and livestock

Dalehouse Farm Equestrian (commercial)

Milburn Grange Mixed arable and livestock

Cryfield Grange Mixed arable and livestock and woodland

Crackley Farm Mainly livestock (pedigree beef)

Birches Wood Mainly livestock (cattle and sheep)

South Hurst and Bockenhurst farms Mainly arable

Land west of Cromwell Lane Mainly arable

Land south of Hodgett’s Lane Mixed able and livestock

Little Beanit Farm Mainly livestock

Odnaull Farm Equestrian (non-commercial)

Crabmill Farm Mainly livestock (cattle and sheep)

Land adjacent to Waste Lane Mainly livestock (cattle and sheep)

Land north-west of Waste Lane Mainly arable

Table 8: Holdings affected by the Proposed Scheme

3.4.11 Much of the land in the study area has been voluntarily entered into Entry Level Stewardship (ELS) schemes. In addition, farmland owned or managed by the Royal Agricultural Society in and around Stoneleigh Park is participating in the Higher Level Stewardship (HLS) Scheme. ELS is principally concerned with field corner and hedgerow management and the creation of buffer strips and uncultivated field margins. HLS aims to provide more intensive environmental management, such as hedgerow planting and the creation of floristically rich field margins.

3.4.12 The whole area is a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone in which nitrate pollution is a potential problem and measures have been introduced to reduce nitrogen losses to water from agricultural sources.

3.4.13 In assessing the impact of the Proposed Scheme on farms, it is important to recognise that the ability of the farms to adapt to change depends, in part, upon the size of the holding, its layout and fragmentation (both before and after the Proposed Scheme) and the enterprises operated. Intensive smaller farms such as dairy farms and enterprises using irrigation – which are dependent upon the spatial relationship between land and key infrastructure (e.g. buildings and water supplies) – generally have less ability to change. In the study area, three holdings using irrigation are assessed as being the most sensitive to change (Furzen Hill Farm, Park Farm and Cryfield Grange).

39 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

3.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

3.5.1 HS2 Ltd would require all of its contractors to comply with the draft CoCP, which would include the following measures: • Measures to maintain farm access and avoid traffic over land which is used temporarily during construction; • Ensuring that each affected farm holding would receive specific and relevant liaison regarding the construction activities that would affect the holding; • Ensuring that agricultural land and corresponding soil quality can be reinstated post construction where this is the agreed end use; • Ensuring that the impacts on infrastructure and livestock for individual farm holdings would be reduced; • Ensuring that there is appropriate access provided to areas of severed land during and post-construction; and • Ensuring the appropriate handling and conservation of soil stockpiles to allow them to be reused without any substantive reduction in long term productive capability.

3.5.2 Soil resources would be stripped at the outset of the construction phase and stored. Where land is required temporarily for construction of the Proposed Scheme, stored soils would be used to reinstate those sites to a pre-construction agricultural condition. Soils removed from the area of permanent works would be utilised, where reasonably practicable, in the construction of the Proposed Scheme. The soil associations affected most extensively by temporary works are Bromsgrove, Whimple, Salop and Beccles 3, although they differ in their sensitivity to disturbance and would require separate handling and storage. In particular, the heavier Salop and Beccles 3 soils would require more careful handling in wet seasons.

3.5.3 Aspects of the Proposed Scheme that would assist in reducing effects on agricultural resources include: • Overbridges at the A445/Leicester Lane, B4113/Stoneleigh Road, B4115, A46/Kenilworth Bypass, Dalehouse Lane, A429/Kenilworth Road, Crackley Lane and B4101/Waste Lane; and • Viaducts over the River Avon, Finham Brook and Canley Brook.

3.5.4 Agricultural land would be acquired temporarily during the construction phase, including land for access and working areas. This is in addition to the land which is required permanently as part of the Proposed Scheme. Any loss of this BMV land during construction is considered to be significant but temporary in nature, until such time that the soil and land returned to the land owner has been restored to its former quality.

3.5.5 The Proposed Scheme would result in the permanent loss of some agricultural and wooded land from the affected holdings. Most (approximately 99%) of the agricultural land permanently lost would be Grade 2 and Subgrade 3a; the remainder would be Subgrade 3b. The permanent loss of BMV land along the Proposed Scheme in the study area is considered to be significant to the resource of agricultural land.

3.5.6 The amount of agricultural land required for the Proposed Scheme would not only have an effect on the land resource, it would also affect farming interests utilising that resource.Of the approximately 19 holdings that could be affected in the study area, all would be significantly affected during the construction phase by land loss and/or severance and two would also

40 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

suffer loss of buildings and structures (a farmhouse and a portal-frame barn at New Kingswood Farm and a silage clamp (pit) on land off the B4115 owned by the oyalR Agricultural Society of England).

3.5.7 Eight holdings would experience a significant loss of land combined with the effects of severance, as follows: • Furzen Hill Farm; • Park Farm; • Royal Agricultural Society of England; • Stoneleigh Abbey; • New Kingswood Farm; • Milburn Grange; • South Hurst and Bockenhurst farms; and • Little Beanit Farm.

3.5.8 The eleven holdings below would mainly experience a significant temporary loss of land: • Kingswood Farmhouse; • Dalehouse Farm; • Cryfield Grange; • Crackley Farm; • Birches Wood; • Land west of Cromwell Lane; • Land south of Hodgett’s Lane; • Odnaull Farm; • Crabmill Farm; • Land adjacent to Waste Lane; and • Land north-west of Waste Lane.

3.5.9 Three affected holdings (Furzen Hill Farm, Park Farm and Cryfield Grange) have an irrigation system that would be disrupted by the Proposed Scheme and require relocation and reconnection to the water supply.

3.5.10 Irrigated crops, including salad produce, are sensitive to dust. In addition, a number of holdings have diversified enterprises, including horse stables/liveries, letting of surplus buildings and car parking for events at Stoneleigh Park, where dust, noise and vibration could cause problems. The emission of dust, noise and vibration during the construction phase would be controlled by implementing measures set out in the draft CoCP.

3.5.11 Many fields along the route contain drains. Drainage systems affected during construction would be restored where practicable.

3.5.12 Loss of forestry land, including some parcels of woodland around Stoneleigh Park, Birches Wood, Broadwells Wood and Black Waste Wood, would be mitigated by replanting in nearby locations. Such locations could include areas of agricultural land that are no longer accessible as a result of severance caused by the Proposed Scheme. The loss of forestry land would remain a significant effect during the construction phase but would not be significant once planting matures.

41 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

3.5.13 Forestry soils and resources that could be affected in the study area would be required by both the temporary and permanent works necessary to implement the Proposed Scheme. The loss and disruption of these forestry soils is considered to be a significant effect.

3.5.14 The construction process could lead to transportation of weed seeds and plants along the route. Since the land affected is largely in agricultural use there is the potential for the spread of existing weeds; particularly invasive and damaging weeds as listed in the Weeds Act 1959. Defra has powers to require occupiers of land on which weeds are growing to take action to prevent their spreading. Application of the control measures within the draft CoCP would regulate this potential effect24. Likely residual significant effects

3.5.15 The main, residual effect would be the permanent loss of agricultural and wooded land. The loss of a high proportion of Grade 2 and Subgrade 3a along the Proposed Scheme in the study area is significant.

3.5.16 Although the mitigation outlined above would reduce the effects of severance, and land not required for the permanent alignment would be restored back to agriculture following construction, at present there would be residual impacts for the twelve holdings below. This is due to either permanent land take and/or some residual severance effects: • Furzen Hill Farm; • Park Farm; • Royal Agricultural Society of England; • Kingswood Farm; • New Kingswood Farm; • Dalehouse Farm; • Milburn Grange; • Cryfield Grange; • Crackley Farm; • Birches Wood; • South Hurst and Bockenhurst farms; and • Little Beanit Farm. Further mitigation

3.5.17 No further mitigation is currently proposed. 3.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

3.6.1 All run-off from the operational area would be captured in designated drainage arrangements capable of control prior to discharge to watercourses.

3.6.2 There are no particularly sensitive holdings that would be likely to be affected by operational noise and vibration.

24 Weeds Act 1959 (7 and 8 Eliz II c. 54). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

42 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

3.6.3 Noise emissions could relate to the startle effect on livestock and to a deterioration of amenity conditions for some diversified activities, including equine liveries, letting of surplus buildings and car parking for events at Stoneleigh Park.

3.6.4 Dust generation is unlikely to be of a sufficient intensity as to lead to significant levels of deposition on neighbouring farmland. Comparison with other railway and highway land indicates that all corridors of transport infrastructure have the potential to support weed growth which may prejudice agricultural interests where weeds can spread to adjoining land.

3.6.5 The potential for the establishment and spread of weeds from the operational area is capable of being effectively addressed through the adoption of an appropriate land management regime by the network operator that identifies and remedies areas of weed growth, which might threaten adjoining agricultural interests. Likely residual significant effects

3.6.6 There are not considered to be any significant residual effects associated with the operation of the Proposed Scheme.

43 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Air quality 4 Air quality 4.1 Introduction 4.1.1 This section of the report provides an assessment of the impacts and likely significant effects on air quality arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme, covering nitrogen dioxide (NO2), fine particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5) and dust25. Emissions of these pollutants are typically associated with construction activities and equipment and road traffic. 4.2 Policy framework 4.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to this area are described in Section 2.1. Policies of relevance to air quality are set out as follows. 4.2.2 The WDLP describes the land use planning policies and proposals for the district. Its Core Strategy includes an objective to protect and improve air quality by guiding and controlling the location of new developments. The WDLP is expected to be fully replaced in 2014 by an emerging WDLP. WDC has also implemented an Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) which contains a number of predominantly transport-related actions to reduce emissions, including the promotion of rail and other public transport measures.

4.2.3 The SUDP sets policies to ensure that any new development contributes positively towards the council’s environmental objectives26. This includes considering the implications of new developments on air quality as part of policy ENV15. The SMBC Local Plan, which is part of the LDF, sets out plans for the future development in the borough27. Even though there is no policy specifically targeting air quality, the importance of improving air quality in the borough is addressed in Policies P12 regarding resource management and P14 regarding amenity.

4.2.4 The City of Coventry UDP does not contain any policies that relate directly to air quality. Policy GE1: Green Environment Strategy makes a commitment to protecting valuable local wildlife, habitats and landscapes; and Policy GE11: Protection of Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Local Nature Reserves and Coventry Nature Conservation Sites states that proposals that would have a negative impact on such sites would not be permitted. The emerging Core Strategy has an air quality policy (EM9). This promotes the use of sustainable low emission transport in major development schemes, in order to reduce the impact of vehicle emissions on air quality. This is particularly important as Coventry is a designated Air Quality Management Area (AQMA), and all major development proposals will have to demonstrate that they do not adversely impact on air quality. The policy encourages development where it can easily be accessed by public transport, walking and cycling. 4.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 4.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the air quality assessment are set out in Volume 1.

4.3.2 No local assumptions have been made for the air quality assessment in this area.

25 PM10 is any particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than 10µm. Particulate matter of this size is respirable. PM2.5 is any particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than 2.5µm. This size fraction of particulate matter is respirable and has been linked to adverse effects on human health. 26 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2006), Solihull Unitary Development Plan 2006. 27 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2012), Solihull Draft Local Plan: Shaping a Sustainable Future (Local Development Framework Pre- submission Draft).

44 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Air quality

4.4 Environmental baseline 4.4.1 The environmental baseline reported in this section represents the environmental conditions identified within the study area. The main source of existing air pollutants in the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area is road traffic on the A46 and the A429, and the town of Kenilworth. The area is predominantly rural with the main settlements being Kenilworth and the villages of Stoneleigh and Burton Green.

4.4.2 Estimates of background air quality have been obtained from Defra for 2011 and future years (2017 and 2026). These data are estimated for 1km grid squares for nitrogen oxides (NOx), NO2, PM10 and PM2.5. All average pollutant concentrations are less than the relevant national air quality objectives.

4.4.3 There are two continuous air quality monitoring stations within Warwick District. The nearer monitoring station to the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area is at Hamilton Terrace in Leamington Spa, which is located around 4km to the south-west of the route. The other monitoring station is located at Pageant House in Warwick, over 7km to the south-west of the route. There are no continuous monitoring stations within the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area.

4.4.4 The continuous analyser at Hamilton Terrace is part of the Automatic Urban and Rural Network (AURN) operated in association with Defra. The reported concentrations of NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 for this site in 2007 to 2011 were below the relevant national objective values. These concentrations are not considered to be directly representative of air quality conditions in the area immediately surrounding the route because the monitoring site is not located in a rural area. However, based on the fact that these concentrations are below the relevant national objective values, the concentrations in rural areas that are more typical of the route would be expected to also be below the relevant national objective values.

4.4.5 There is one continuous AURN monitoring site in Coventry, which is located at the memorial park south-east of Coventry city centre. This is over 4.5km north-east of the route. The reported concentrations of NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 were below the relevant national objective values.

4.4.6 WDC also measures annual mean NO2 concentrations using passive diffusion tubes located across its administrative area. There are 57 diffusion tubes covering the urban areas of Warwick, Leamington Spa and Kenilworth. The nearest diffusion tubes to the route, of which there are four, are all in Kenilworth along New Street and Fieldgate Lane, approximately 1.8km north-west of the route. The reported concentrations of NO2 were below the national objective value apart from at Field Gate Lane in 2010. Other diffusion tube sites are at a greater distance from the route and are not considered relevant for the assessment.

4.4.7 Diffusion tube monitoring is also undertaken by SMBC at five different locations. All the sites are 10km or more from the route. The reported concentrations of NO2 at these sites were below the national objective value in 2011. The 96 diffusion tube monitoring locations within CCC area are mainly within the city centre, the nearest site being 4.2km north of the route. These sites are within an urban area and are therefore not considered to be representative of the predominantly rural area in which the route is situated.

4.4.8 Instead, the background air quality maps produced by Defra are considered to be a more suitable source for determining background pollutants concentrations in the immediate vicinity of the Proposed Scheme in the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area.

4.4.9 WDC has declared five AQMAs. Two of these are in Warwick, one is in Leamington and two are in Kenilworth. The two AQMAs in Kenilworth, Warwick Road and New Street, are closest to

45 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Air quality

the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area. The New Street AQMA is located 2km south-west of the Proposed Scheme at Crackley, whilst the Warwick Road AQMA is 3km south-west of the Proposed Scheme at Kingswood Farm. The Warwick Road AQMA does not encompass any major roads whilst the New Street AQMA includes a section of the A429.

4.4.10 The AQAP that has been developed by WDC aims to improve local air quality in the designated AQMAs. It includes actions that are aimed at reducing vehicle-derived emissions from local journeys within the AQMAs.

4.4.11 Currently there are no AQMAs within the SMBC administrative area. The single city-wide AQMA that has been declared by CCC is for annual mean nitrogen dioxide. The south-western boundary of the city-wide AQMA is approximately 400m north-east of the route.

4.4.12 Several locations have been identified in the study area, which are considered to be susceptible to changes in air quality and are in close proximity to roads that would be subject to realignments or used by construction traffic. These are: • Properties along A445 Leicester Lane, owing to the proximity to dust generating construction activities and permanent realignment of A445 Leicester Lane associated with the Proposed Scheme; • Properties along B4113 Stoneleigh Road, Stoneleigh Park, owing to the proximity of dust generating construction activities and permanent realignment of B4113 Stoneleigh Road associated with the Proposed Scheme; • Properties along Dalehouse Lane, Kenilworth, owing to the proximity to dust generating construction activities associated with the Proposed Scheme; • Properties along A429 Kenilworth Road, Crackley, owing to the proximity to dust generating construction activities and permanent realignment of A429 Kenilworth Road associated with the Proposed Scheme; • Properties at Birches Wood Farm, Crackley Lane, Kenilworth owing to the proximity to dust generating earthworks and construction, and permanent realignment of Crackley Lane associated with the Proposed Scheme; • Properties in Burton Green along Red Lane, Cromwell Lane and Hodgetts Lane, owing to the proximity to dust generating construction activities associated with the Proposed Scheme; and • Properties along B4101 Waste Lane, Balsall Common owing to the proximity to dust generating construction activities during the construction phase of the Proposed Scheme.

4.4.13 No statutory designated ecological receptors have been identified within the study area. 4.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

4.5.1 Impacts from the construction of the Proposed Scheme could arise from dust generating activities and emissions from construction traffic. As such, the assessment of construction impacts has been undertaken for human receptors sensitive to dust and exposure to NO2 and PM10, as well as ecological receptors sensitive to dust and nitrogen deposition.

4.5.2 Air quality would be controlled and managed during construction through the route-wide implementation of the draft CoCP, where appropriate. Specific measures would include: • Contractors being required to control dust, air pollution, odour and exhaust emissions during construction works;

46 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Air quality

• Inspecting and monitoring undertaken after consultation with WDC, SMBC and CCC to assess the effectiveness of the measures taken to prevent dust and air pollutant emissions during construction; • Cleaning (including watering) of haul routes and designated vehicle waiting areas to suppress dust; • Keeping soil stockpiles away from sensitive receptors (including historical features), watercourses and surface drains where reasonably practicable, also taking into account the prevailing wind direction relative to sensitive receptors; • Using enclosures to contain dust emitted from construction activities; and • Undertaking soil spreading, seeding and planting of completed earthworks.

4.5.3 In the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area, dust generating activities would comprise the demolition of buildings at Stoneleigh Park; New Kingswood Farm, Dalehouse Lane, Kenilworth; and at Cromwell Lane, Burton Green; and the construction of new structures and earthworks, as well as dust and mud from vehicles carried onto public highways from vehicles departing from construction areas.

4.5.4 Traffic data for the area have been screened to identify roads that require further assessment and to confirm the likely effect of the change in emissions from vehicles using those roads during the construction phase. In addition the locations of temporary road realignments for the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area have been screened to identify roads that required further assessment owing to alignment changes.

4.5.5 A construction dust assessment was undertaken for receptors at the seven worst case sensitive locations where human receptors are present, owing to their close proximity to the dust generating activities identified above. These included residential properties on A445 Leicester Lane; on B4113 Stoneleigh Road, Stoneleigh Park; on Dalehouse Lane, Kenilworth; on A429 Kenilworth Road, Crackley; on Crackley Lane, Kenilworth; in Burton Green; and on Waste Lane, Balsall Common.

4.5.6 The construction dust assessment determined that of the seven worst case sensitive locations where residential properties were present, the impact at A445 Leicester Lane; at B4113 Stoneleigh Road, Stoneleigh Park; in Burton Green and at Waste Lane, Balsall Common would be slight adverse due to the presence of residential properties within 20 metres of the dust generating construction activities. The impact would be negligible at the other identified residential locations. Overall the construction dust assessment determined that the air quality effects at the identified seven sensitive locations would not be significant.

4.5.7 No locations within the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area met the criteria for further assessment for construction traffic emissions or temporary road realignments during the construction phase. Therefore, the effect of construction traffic emissions or temporary road realignments during the construction phase would not be significant.

4.5.8 Construction of the Proposed Scheme is not expected to have an effect on the AQMAs or the implementation of the actions listed in the AQAP. Likely residual significant effects

4.5.9 The methods outlined within the draft CoCP to control and manage potential air quality effects are considered effective in this location. Hence, no residual effects are considered likely.

47 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Air quality

4.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

4.6.1 Impacts from the operation of the Proposed Scheme relate mainly to changes in the nature of traffic. There are no direct atmospheric emissions from the operation of trains that would cause an impact on air quality.

4.6.2 Traffic data in the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area has been screened to identify roads that require further assessment and to confirm the likely effect of the change in emissions from vehicles using those roads in 2026. In addition, the locations of permanent road realignments were screened to identify roads that require further assessment owing to alignment changes

4.6.3 No locations were identified as requiring further assessment owing to changes in traffic flows. However, four locations were identified as requiring further assessment: A445 Leicester Lane; B4113 Stoneleigh Road, Stoneleigh Park; A429 Kenilworth Road, Crackley; and Crackley Lane, Kenilworth owing to the permanent realignment of these roads. Changes in concentrations were determined at human receptors at these locations.

4.6.4 The results of the assessment show that annual mean concentrations of both NO2 and PM10 would be below the relevant national air quality objectives for identified human receptors in these four locations. There would be a negligible change in concentrations of NO2 and PM10 at all the identified human receptors and the effects at all receptors would not be significant.

4.6.5 Operation of the Proposed Scheme is not expected to have an effect on the AQMAs or the implementation of the actions listed in the AQAP. Likely residual significant effects

4.6.6 No residual effects would be anticipated for air quality in this area during operation of the Proposed Scheme.

48 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Community 5 Community 5.1 Introduction 5.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of impacts and likely significant effects on local communities resulting from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. 5.2 Policy framework 5.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to this area are described in Section 2.1. Policies of relevance to community are set out below. 5.2.2 Saved policies in the adopted Warwickshire Structure Plan and WDLP generally seek to resist the loss of existing community facilities, open space and formal sports and recreation provision, except where they are shown to be surplus to requirements and/or would be re- provided to at least equivalent quality and quantity as part of development proposals.

5.2.3 Other key policy themes in the WDLP relate to: • Rural Area Policies which seek to restrict development only to that necessary to support the rural economy, tourism and the vitality of rural communities (Policies RAP1-4 and RAP6-16); • The restrictive policies applying to the area designated as greenbelt between Kenilworth and Coventry (Policy DP3 and Rural Area Policies); • Designation of the University of Warwick campus and Stoneleigh Park as “Major Developed Sites in the Green Belt” where the principle of minor infilling and redevelopment is established (Policy SSP2 and, for Stoneleigh Park, Local Plan Policy SSP3); • Development restraint and protection associated with the Stoneleigh Abbey grounds and Stoneleigh Abbey Deer Park, both of which are listed as Grade II in the English Heritage Register of Historic Parks and Gardens (Policy DAP11); and • Protecting existing pedestrian and cycle routes and the improvement of walking and cycling networks throughout Warwick District (Policies DP6 and SC4).

5.2.4 Many of the policy themes of the development plan carry through into the policy options of the emerging WDLP Preferred Options. The principal exception is the proposed amendments to the greenbelt at Kenilworth and Burton Green to facilitate development (Policy Option PO3 and PO4).

5.2.5 The SUDP policies relate primarily to the development and use of land within the borough, although they also require developers to consider cross-boundary implications of development proposals. The Proposed Scheme requires land north of Burton Green – this land forms part of the greenbelt, which is protected from inappropriate development by Policy C2. There are no other specific SUDP policies relating to this area.

5.2.6 Other potential impacts of the Proposed Scheme relate to development and land uses that cross the boundary between Solihull and Warwick District, such as PRoW and areas of nature conservation value. Policies T16 and T17 promote the maintenance and improvement of the walking and cycling network, including the co-ordination of route planning across borough boundaries. Nature conservation assets are protected by Policies ENV11, ENV13 and ENV14.

5.2.7 In relation to the Proposed Scheme, the emerging SMBC Local Plan does not contain policies that represent a significant departure from SUDP and key themes relating to environmental protection are retained, including the greenbelt.

49 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Community

5.2.8 The City of Coventry UDP policies include the following of relevance to the Proposed Scheme: • A number of open spaces within the urban area, including Tocil Wood (at Gibbet Hill) and Park Wood (at Westwood Heath) are designated as LNRs and afforded protection from development that could adversely affect their nature conservation value (Policies GE3, GE11, GE12 and GE15); • Development is supported on a number of sites on and around the University of Warwick campus to support expansion of the University in accordance with the University Development Plan (Policy SCL9: University of Warwick); and • The central boulevard through Gibbet Hill is allocated as a Bus Showcase Route (Policy AM4: Bus Priority Measures) and Cycle Route (AM13: Cycle Routes), designed to enable multi-modal connections to the centre of Coventry.

5.2.9 The emerging Core Strategy, in respect of the Proposed Scheme within this area, does not propose any significant departures from the City of Coventry UDP and key themes relating to environmental protection are retained. Further expansion of the University of Warwick Campus is also supported. 5.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 5.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the community assessment are set out in Volume 1. 5.4 Environmental baseline 5.4.1 The study area includes the area of land within the construction boundary (comprising the temporary and permanent land take), as well as a suitable additional area as relevant to inform the respective environmental topics upon which the assessment is based.

5.4.2 The baseline study area and baseline data will be further refined in light of ongoing assessment work as part of the formal ES process.

5.4.3 Within the study area, the main settlements are Stoneleigh (map CT‑03-48, I9) in the south and Burton Green (map CT‑03-50, I5) in the north. In the centre of the study area, the outer edges of Kenilworth (map CT‑03-49, J2) and Coventry (map CT‑03-49, B10) extend to within about 350m of the Proposed Scheme at Crackley and at Gibbet Hill. Whilst Kenilworth and Coventry are the focus for shopping, education, health care, employment and recreational activities in the area, most of the facilities in these urban areas are some distance away from the Proposed Scheme and fall outside of the study area for this assessment. Stoneleigh area

5.4.4 Stoneleigh is the main settlement in the southern part of the study area and is situated about 1km north-east of the Proposed Scheme. The village has a small range of facilities, including a village hall, recreation ground, sports pavilion, church and a social club. Stoneleigh has no shop, school or GP surgery. The village falls within the catchment area for primary and secondary schools at Kenilworth and for GP surgeries at both Coventry and Kenilworth. The small residential hamlet of Stareton (map CT‑03-47, E9), lies about 500m north-east of the Proposed Scheme and has no facilities.

5.4.5 Stoneleigh Park (map CT‑03-47, B4), formerly known as the NAC, lies directly on the line of the route for the Proposed Scheme. The site is used for a variety of conferences and events, with the Kenilworth Show being the most notable, attracting up to about 8,000 visitors in a single day. There is also the Wren Day Nursery (map CT‑03-47, B2) situated within the grounds of

50 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Community

Stoneleigh Park and there are a number of residential properties close to the entrances to the site.

5.4.6 There are a number of open spaces and recreational facilities in the southern part of the study area around Stoneleigh. Much of the estate parkland, which wraps around the eastern edge of Stoneleigh Park, is publicly accessible. It comprises a mix of natural and semi-natural green spaces, crossed by a number of public footpaths and other established walking routes. The parkland extends to both sides of the B4113 Stoneleigh Road, with a small section falling within the proposed area of permanent land take for the Proposed Scheme.

5.4.7 Stoneleigh Abbey (map CT‑03-47, B1), which is situated about 750m to the south of the Proposed Scheme is an historic house and park, and has become a major visitor attraction, hosting a number of events throughout the year. Stoneleigh Deer Park Golf Club (map CT‑03‑47, C8, C9, D8 ad D9) is situated about 800m to the north of the route for the Proposed Scheme.

5.4.8 The Centenary Way long-distance footpath and Coventry Way long-distance paths cross through the southern part of the study area. The Centenary Way long-distance footpath is a 158km route, which runs from Shipston-on-Stour in the south, to Kingsbury in the north, and was opened in 1991 to mark the centenary year of WCC. The Coventry Way is a 64km circular route around the outskirts of the city, passing through a number of villages including Stoneleigh and Kenilworth. The two trails share the same route from Stareton, passing through the estate parkland, which lies to the south and west of Stoneleigh village, before heading north towards Kenilworth, where they would be crossed by the Proposed Scheme. Kenilworth-Coventry area

5.4.9 The route for the Proposed Scheme passes between the northern edge of Kenilworth, at Crackley and the southern edge of Coventry at Gibbet Hill. Crackley comprises a mix of post- war housing, together with industrial estates at Princes Drive and Common Lane. Given the lack of facilities, Crackley residents travel to Kenilworth for most of their day-to-day needs. There is an independent school, Crackley Hall School, located to the south of Crackley, close to Kenilworth Common.

5.4.10 Gibbet Hill (map CT‑03-48, B9) comprises a mix of post-war housing, typically set in spacious landscaped grounds. The University of Warwick (map CT‑03-49, F10) is a major educational centre about 1km to the north-east of the Proposed Scheme. The University’s sports fields are located on the south side of the campus and Cryfield Grange, which is situated just west of Gibbet Hill, is used to accommodate visiting academics and researchers. These are both within about 700m of the route of the Proposed Scheme.

5.4.11 There are a number of other public open spaces in the countryside separating Kenilworth from Coventry, the most notable being Kenilworth Golf Course and Crackley Wood. The Kenilworth Golf Club (map CT‑03-48, F4) is immediately west of the route of the Proposed Scheme and the proposed area of temporary and permanent land take encroaches into the northern edge of the course along its boundary with Dalehouse Lane. Crackley Wood, which is located about 370m south of the Proposed Scheme, is designated as a local nature reserve and has a number of trails or walks that are accessible to the public.

5.4.12 The Kenilworth Greenway (map CT‑03-49, C3), which runs along the route of the disused Berkswell to Kenilworth railway, is a well-used and valued recreational route in the centre and north of the study area, connecting Crackley with Burton Green and onwards to Berkswell. The route serves as a public footpath, cycleway and horse-riding route and is managed by WCC as a country park. A bridge to carry the Kenilworth Greenway over the A429 Kenilworth Road has also been built recently. The Coventry Way follows the route of the Kenilworth

51 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Community

Greenway northwards from Crackley and the Kenilworth Greenway also forms part of the Sustrans National Cycle Route No. 52. In the centre of the study area, the route of the Proposed Scheme runs approximately 450m north and east of the Kenilworth Greenway, becoming closer further north.

5.4.13 In 2012, a new footpath and cycleway was opened near Crackley, linking the University with the Kenilworth Greenway. This link, which is known as the “Connect2 Kenilworth project” now forms part of the Sustrans National Cycle Network, route number 52. It would be crossed by the Proposed Scheme at a point midway between the Kenilworth Greenway and Cryfield Grange Road to the north.

5.4.14 The shared route of the Coventry Way and Centenary Way long-distance paths also passes through the centre of the study area, linking Stoneleigh with Kenilworth. The route would be crossed by the Proposed Scheme, just east of Kenilworth Golf Course. Burton Green

5.4.15 Burton Green has a limited range of community facilities, notably a primary school on the south side of the village, two day care nurseries (one on either side of the village); a community hall on the west side of the village; and a public house to the north. There is no shop, church or GP surgery in the village and no public open space, with the exception of a small children’s play area off Red Lane. The village falls within the catchment for the secondary school at Kenilworth, although children are also eligible for places at a school at Balsall Common (map CT‑03-50, A2). The nearest GP surgeries are at Balsall Common to the north-west and at Tile Hill on the south-west edge of Coventry.

5.4.16 The Burton Green Village Hall (map CT‑03-50, G5) lies immediately adjacent to the route and the area of temporary and permanent land take for the Proposed Scheme. The hall is used on a daily basis, by the residents of Burton Green and by people travelling from Kenilworth, Coventry and Balsall Common. It is used for a range of activities, including sports and craft classes, Women’s Institute meetings, local organisation meetings, Parish Council and residents’ association meetings and as a place of worship by the Burton Green Congregation.

5.4.17 Burton Green Primary School (map CT‑03-49, A2) is situated about 500m south of the route of the Proposed Scheme. The school has capacity for about 105 pupils and whilst its catchment is focused mainly of the village itself, a number of pupils travel from further afield including from Balsall Common, Kenilworth and Coventry.

5.4.18 The area of temporary and permanent land take for the Proposed Scheme runs along the boundary of the Two Oaks Day Nursery site at Red Lane (map CT‑03-49, B3), on the south side of the village. The Hedgerow Nursery at Cromwell Lane and the Peeping Tom public house are about 750m to the north of the Proposed Scheme.

5.4.19 The Kenilworth Greenway passes through the centre of the village and there is a pedestrian access point to the Kenilworth Greenway from the east side of Cromwell Lane. The Proposed Scheme runs directly along a section of the Kenilworth Greenway from a point just south of the village to a point just north of the B4101 Waste Lane, near Berkswell. This section of the Kenilworth Greenway also forms part of the Coventry Way long distance path and part of the Sustrans National Cycle Network (route number 52). The entire length of the Kenilworth Greenway is classified as a permissive bridleway, which means that it can be used by pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders with a valid permit.

5.4.20 The Millennium Way long distance footpath passes through the study area to the north of Burton Green and the B4101 Waste Lane. This footpath (PRoW M198) forms part of a 160km long distance trail that runs through Kenilworth and Leamington Spa, crossing the Kenilworth

52 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Community

Greenway and joining with a section of the Coventry Way, heading north through the gap of countryside between Balsall Common and Coventry. This route would be crossed by the Proposed Scheme, just north of Waste Lane. 5.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation Residential property

5.5.1 A total of ten residential properties, located mostly at Stoneleigh Park and Burton Green, would need to be demolished to facilitate construction of the Proposed Scheme: • Six dwellings at the East Gate entrance to Stoneleigh Park, including Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 East Gate together with Stare Lodge and one further unnamed property (map CT‑03-47, D5); • Three dwellings at Cromwell Lane, Burton Green being Nos. 303, 305 and the property known as Morvah at No. 404 (map CT‑03-50, I5); and • One dwelling at New Kingswood Farm, off Dalehouse Lane, Stoneleigh (map CT‑03-48, E).

5.5.2 The demolition of six properties at a single location at Stoneleigh Park is assessed as a significant adverse effect on the local community of that area. At Burton Green, whilst the demolition of properties at the centre of the village would affect the street scene at this location, the loss of three dwellings would not be significant having regard to the overall community of the area. The loss of a single dwelling off Dalehouse Lane, near Kenilworth would not have a significant adverse community effect.

5.5.3 A total of 25 residential properties would be affected by either permanent or temporary loss of land from their property boundaries. Eleven of these are located at Cromwell Lane, Burton Green: No. 301 and Nos. 307-327 (odd nos.). Although affected mostly by temporary land take, in view of the number of properties affected, this would give rise to a significant adverse effect on the community.

5.5.4 The remaining 14 residential properties are scattered along the route of the Proposed Scheme and the effects associated with land take are assessed as not significant in the context of the overall community. These are: • Heathfield, Leicester Lane; • 1 Stareton Road, Stareton; • East Lodge, Stoneleigh Park; • 1-3 Rectory Cottages, Grovehurst Park and Mary Lodge, Stoneleigh Park; • Dale House and Four Winds, Dalehouse Lane, Kenilworth; • Brookview, near Millburn Grange, Crackley; • 170 Kenilworth Road, Gibbet Hill; • Birches Wood Farm, Crackley Lane; • The dwelling at Odnaull End Farm, Waste Lane, near Berkswell; and • The dwelling at Little Beanit Farm, Waste Lane.

5.5.5 A total of 27 residential properties in this area would be situated adjacent to substantial engineering or demolition works or would be surrounded by land required temporarily for the construction of the Proposed Scheme. It is assumed that the occupiers of these properties would need to be rehoused temporarily for the duration of any construction activities likely to

53 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Community

cause significant noise and disturbance, but could then return to their homes upon completion of the works. Properties that could be affected are as follows: • Four dwellings at Nos. 1-4 Furzen Hill Cottages (map CT‑03-47, G5), Leicester Lane that would be almost entirely surrounded by construction works. Given the potential for significant disruption the occupiers of these properties may need to be re-housed during the construction period, returning to their homes upon completion of the works. Given the small number of properties affected, the adverse effects on the community overall would not be significant; • Two properties at East Gate, Stoneleigh Park, namely No.5 and East Lodge (which is also within the area of temporary land take), are situated close to the proposed works area to form a cutting for the new railway and adjacent to demolition works. Taken along with the demolition of the six adjacent residential properties, the Proposed Scheme would have a significant adverse effect on the community due to a combination of the displacement and demolition of dwellings in this location; and • At Burton Green, there would be significant construction work involved in the building of the cut-and-cover tunnel through the village. This would involve piling works and earth moving operations for the tunnel structure. Recognising the potential for significant disruption caused by these works, the occupiers of the properties immediately adjacent to the route of the tunnel, notably the thirteen residential properties on the west side of Hodgetts Lane (Nos. 1–25 odd) together with Nos. 301, 307 and 402 Cromwell Lane (and potentially Nos. 408 and 410 Cromwell Lane which are adjacent to properties being demolished) may need to be re-housed temporarily during the construction period. The displacement of 18 households, if necessary, would have a significant adverse effect on the community of Burton Green.

5.5.6 Of the properties at risk of temporary displacement, three of the 26 affected would also be impacted by temporary land take, namely East Lodge at Stoneleigh Park and No.s 301 and 307 Cromwell Lane at Burton Green.

5.5.7 Disruption to local roads during construction of the Proposed Scheme would affect access to day-to-day services for some communities. Access to primary and secondary schools at Kenilworth from Stoneleigh village would be disrupted by works to the B4113 and B4115 roads and Dalehouse Lane. Given the extended period of time over which all of these roads are likely to be affected, this could give rise to a significant adverse effect on the community of Stoneleigh, having regard to the lack of suitable alternatives on the edge of the school catchment area.

5.5.8 The temporary closure of Dalehouse Lane would have a significant adverse effect on residents occupying properties to the east of the route. Potentially long diversions via the B4115 and Crewe Lane or via Gibbet Hill and the A429 Kenilworth Road would be necessary for accessing schools and other day-to-day services in Kenilworth, whilst the road is closed for up to 12 months.

5.5.9 At Burton Green, works to Cromwell Lane during construction of the cut-and-cover tunnel, would cause disruption to day-to-day journeys across the village. Whilst the works would be managed in such a way as to avoid lengthy road closures at this location, the construction period could last about 12 months. In view of the sensitivity of construction in the centre of the village, this would give rise to significant effects on the community. Residents on the north side of the village, who would need to cross through the worksite each day to access the primary school to the south, would be particularly affected. Access to the day care nurseries on either side of the village, and to the village hall, would also be affected by disruption to Cromwell Lane. Overall, the temporary disruption to Cromwell Lane would have a significant

54 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Community

adverse effect on residents in the community of Burton Green, affecting much of the village and their access to services and facilities they use regularly and their connections with other local residents.

5.5.10 Residents at Waste Lane in the north of the study area would also be affected by closure of the road during the construction period. The temporary closure could necessitate lengthy diversions for some journeys and would isolate some residential properties from each other. This would give rise to a significant adverse effect on the local community in this area.

5.5.11 The implications for access to community facilities due to works to local roads are being considered further. Assessments will be updated in the light of ongoing transport studies and will be provided in the formal ES. Community infrastructure

5.5.12 The Proposed Scheme would impact upon community facilities at Burton Green and at Stoneleigh Park.

5.5.13 At Burton Green, the village hall is situated immediately adjacent to the worksite required to construct the cut-and-cover tunnel through the village. Given the proximity of the hall to the construction works, particularly disruptive works such as piling could necessitate temporary closure of the hall for the duration of those activities. Whilst the duration of the closure is likely to be limited, the village hall is well used and valued by the community and there are no comparable alternatives locally. The nearest alternative hall is located at Westwood Heath on the edge of Coventry, more than 2km away. Any short term temporary closure of the hall would, therefore, have a significant adverse effect on the local community.

5.5.14 At Stoneleigh Park, the Proposed Scheme would require the permanent loss of land from the eastern edge of the showground and events site. The permanent land take also includes land to the south of the B4113 Stoneleigh Road, which is used to provide additional car parking for large events at the site. The loss of this car parking area could prejudice the ability to accommodate larger events at the site in the future, such as the Kenilworth Show, which would give rise to a significant adverse effect on the local community.

5.5.15 Disruption to travel along Cromwell Lane at Burton Green could also impact on access to the primary school and nurseries in the village. The significance of these effects will be addressed in the formal ES. Public rights of way and open space

5.5.16 The Proposed Scheme would impact directly on two public open spaces within the area, notably at Stoneleigh and at Kenilworth.

5.5.17 At Stoneleigh, the Proposed Scheme would result in the permanent loss of publicly accessible parkland from the Stoneleigh Estate. This land is required to facilitate realignment of the B4113 Stoneleigh Road and Stareton Road junction and to accommodate earthworks for the Proposed Scheme. Whilst the area affected represents only a small proportion of the total estate, this particular section is well used by walkers. It includes a pathway connecting the open space back to the Stoneleigh Road and appears to be used as part of an informal circular walk around the estate, via the historic Stare Bridge area to the north. This loss of land would, therefore, result in a significant adverse effect on recreational users.

5.5.18 At Kenilworth, the Proposed Scheme would result in the temporary loss of land from the edge of Kenilworth Golf Course, during works to realign Dalehouse Lane. Whilst this would primarily involve the clearance of trees and the hedgerow along the northern boundary of the course, the area of temporary land take required also extends to the edge of the 16th fairway and

55 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Community

would encroach onto the 16th green. This would partially impair use of the course for the duration of the works (about 12 months) and during any subsequent time necessary to reinstate the green to an acceptable playing standard. Whilst there is the potential to shorten the 16th hole temporarily, this could also affect the overall par value of the course. On this basis, the temporary loss of land would result in a significant adverse effect on users of the golf course.

5.5.19 The Proposed Scheme would also cross the Centenary Way, Coventry Way and Millennium Way long distance footpaths and both the Kenilworth Greenway and the Connect2 Kenilworth footpath/cycleway.

5.5.20 Just north of Kenilworth, the construction of the Proposed Scheme would require a temporary closure of the recently completed Connect2 Kenilworth public footpath, bridleway and cycleway, which also forms part of the Sustrans National Cycle Network (route No. 52). Given the extensive nature of works in this area associated with the realignment of Canley Brook, a 6-12 month closure could be necessary. This would result in a significant adverse effect on users, particularly having regard to its value as a commuter link between Kenilworth and the University area to the north. The Proposed Scheme makes provision for a permanent diversion of the route to bridge over the new rail line.

5.5.21 At Burton Green, the construction of the Proposed Scheme would necessitate a temporary closure of the Kenilworth Greenway for a period of up to two years, giving rise to a significant adverse effect on the local community and on recreational users of the enilworthK Greenway (which also forms part of the Coventry Way between Crackley and Berkswell). Access to the Kenilworth Greenway from Cromwell Lane would also be lost during the construction period with limited suitable alternative access points in the area. The Proposed Scheme makes provision to divert the Kenilworth Greenway permanently over the line of the cut-and-cover tunnel through Burton Green and then alongside the route of the new rail line to the north. Recognising the importance of the Kenilworth Greenway for Burton Green residents, particularly in view of the lack of other public open space in the area, further consideration is being given to whether a suitable temporary diversion route can be found during the construction period to mitigate these adverse effects. This will be addressed further in the formal ES.

5.5.22 To the north of Burton Green, the construction of the Proposed Scheme would require the temporary closure of the Millennium Way public footpath, to the north of the B4101 Waste Lane. This closure could last for about 6-12 months, giving rise to a significant adverse effect on recreational users. The Proposed Scheme makes provision for a permanent diversion of the route to cross the railway via the Waste Lane overbridge, but given that the existing Waste Lane Bridge would need to be demolished and rebuilt, this diversion would not be available during the construction period.

5.5.23 A temporary diversion would be provided for the route of the Coventry Way/Centenary Way long distance footpath, where it is crossed by the Proposed Scheme, just east of Kenilworth Golf Course. On this basis, it is assumed that there would be no loss of use or closure of this route during construction. The Proposed Scheme makes provision for a permanent footbridge to carry this route over the new rail line. Amenity

5.5.24 The formal ES will assess the incidence of significant effects, including in-combination effects, on community amenity.

56 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Community

Likely residual significant effects

5.5.25 The significant residual effects of the scheme would be as follows: • The adverse effect on the community of Stoneleigh Park due to the demolition of six residential properties in-combination with the temporary displacement of an additional two households from this location during the construction period; • The adverse effect on the community of Burton Green from the temporary displacement of up to about 18 households during the construction period in combination with the demolition of a further three residential properties in the village; • The loss of land (mostly temporary land take) from 11 residential properties in Burton Green; • The adverse effect on residents in Stoneleigh and Burton Green and at Dalehouse Lane and Waste Lane, during the construction period, due to disruption to journeys necessary for accessing local community facilities and other day to day services; • The adverse effect on the community arising from any possible temporary closure of Burton Green Village Hall during construction works; • The permanent loss of land from Stoneleigh Park showground; • The permanent loss of publicly accessible open space on the Stoneleigh Estate; • Temporary loss of land from Kenilworth Golf Course; • Temporary closure of the Kenilworth Greenway at Burton Green, during construction; • Temporary closure of the Connect2 Kenilworth footpath/cycleway, during construction at Crackley; and • Temporary closure of the Millennium Way public footpath during construction, north of the B4101 Waste Lane.

5.5.26 Multiple (in-combination) community effects will be considered and, where significant, reported for the formal ES. Further mitigation

5.5.27 Consultation will inform the development of specific mitigation measures where required, which could include improvement or provision of community resources as appropriate. These mitigation measures will be reported in the formal ES. 5.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

5.6.1 Within this area, effects on the community resulting from the operation of the Proposed Scheme could potentially arise from changes to amenity. These effects will be addressed in the formal ES.

5.6.2 The assessment of effects on amenity will draw upon other technical disciplines e.g.( air quality, noise and vibration, visual, transport and traffic) findings to inform the amenity assessment. The presence of in-combination impacts from these other disciplines could result in significant amenity effects on a number of community facilities and resources in the area. This will be reported in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

5.6.3 Multiple (in-combination) community effects will be identified as part of the formal ES.

57 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Community

Further mitigation

5.6.4 The development of specific mitigation measures where required, which could include improvement or provision of community resources as appropriate, will be reported in the formal ES.

58 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Cultural heritage 6 Cultural heritage 6.1 Introduction 6.1.1 This section of the report presents a summary of the impacts and likely significant effects on heritage assets and the historic environment as a result of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. Heritage assets comprise: • Archaeological and palaeo-environmental remains; • Historic landscapes; and • Historic buildings and the built environment. 6.2 Policy framework 6.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to this area are described in Section 2.1. Policies of relevance to cultural heritage are set out below.

6.2.2 The WDLP contains polices related to the protection, enhancement and management of the natural and historic environment, including archaeology, listed buildings, conservation areas, and historic parks and gardens. For archaeology, DP4 includes a presumption in favour of the preservation of regionally and locally (as well as nationally) important sites, except where the benefits of development outweigh harm to archaeological remains. This policy also states that the council would require that remains be properly evaluated prior to determination of a planning application.

6.2.3 Many of the policy themes of the development plan carry through into the WDLP Preferred Options, expressed in PO11: Historic Environment.

6.2.4 The SUDP contains policies seeking the protection and enhancement of heritage assets across the borough, including conservation areas (ENV5), listed buildings (ENV6), locally listed buildings (ENV7) and scheduled monuments and archaeological sites (ENV8). For archaeological assets, as with Warwick District, in the case of remains of regional or local importance the case for preservation would be assessed against factors including the importance of the remains and the need for the new development. Where preservation of such remains is not merited, a programme of archaeological works is required.

6.2.5 The emerging SMBC Local Plan Policy P16: Conservation of Heritage Assets and Local Distinctiveness identifies key characteristics that make a significant contribution to the local character and distinctiveness of the borough, including listed buildings and the network of parks, common, woodland and heathland. The policy expects developers to preserve or enhance such assets. The emerging SMBC Local Plan maintains the provisions of the adopted Solihull UDP (SUDP) in respect of archaeological assets.

6.2.6 The Proposed Scheme does not require any land within Solihull, therefore the key considerations relate to interactions between the urban edge of Coventry and the railway. The City of Coventry UDP designates the central boulevard of Gibbet Hill a Conservation Area where policies seek to preserve or enhance the special architectural and historic interest, character and appearance, including important views into and out of it (Policies BE8 – BE10). There are no other policies of direct relevance to cultural heritage in the context of this area.

6.2.7 The emerging Core Strategy does not propose any significant departures from the adopted City of Coventry UDP and the Gibbet Hill Conservation Area designation is retained.

59 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Cultural heritage

6.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 6.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the cultural heritage assessment are set out in Volume 1. 6.4 Environmental baseline 6.4.1 The Proposed Scheme would pass through a predominantly rural area, crossing agricultural land and avoiding the main areas of modern and historic settlements at Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and the edges of Coventry. The south and eastern part of the study area comprises the glacial deposits of Dunsmore, with its open flat landscapes giving rise to fertile soils with large fields. To the north and west are mudstones with smaller fields set within a landscape of low rounded hills and incised river valleys. There are pockets of woodland, spinneys and coppices. The historic landscape includes the medieval monastic landscape associated with Stoneleigh Abbey, the 17th Century deer park, the 18th Century Repton-designed landscape of Stoneleigh Park, and the later extractive landscape comprising quarries, pits and brick kilns. There are isolated farmsteads and larger settlements many of which would have origins in the medieval period or earlier but are now largely post-medieval or modern in form.

6.4.2 There are few known archaeological sites from the prehistoric periods but there are a few Roman sites e.g. the Romano-British settlement near Crewe Farm. The most visible archaeological period in the study area, in terms of known survivals, is the later medieval period seen in the development of Stoneleigh Abbey and its associated granges and the remains of deserted or shrunken medieval settlements and field systems. It is possible that hitherto unidentified buried archaeological sites of all periods may also be discovered along the Proposed Scheme. Designated assets

6.4.3 There are no scheduled monuments within the area of permanent or temporary land take. Six scheduled monuments lie within the area of the draft Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) (see section 9.3) and of these, those at Stare Bridge and Glasshouse Wood are located within the 500m of the Proposed Scheme: • Deserted medieval village at King’s Hill, approximately 1.4km from the area of temporary and permanent land take; • Stare Bridge (Grade II* listed), approximately 30m from the area of temporary and permanent land take; • Stoneleigh Bridge, approximately 600m from the area of temporary and permanent land take; • Roman settlement at Glasshouse Wood, approximately 240m from the area of temporary and permanent land take; • Kenilworth Abbey, approximately 1.6km from the area of temporary and permanent land take; and • Moated site at Bishops Ullathorne School, approximately 1.9km from the area of temporary and permanent land take.

6.4.4 The majority of listed buildings are located in the centres of Stoneleigh, Stareton and Kenilworth or are associated with Stoneleigh Abbey and Park. There are also some isolated listed farm buildings in the draft ZTV.

60 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Cultural heritage

6.4.5 The following listed Grade II buildings lie within the area of temporary and permanent land take: • Stonehouse Farmhouse; • Dale House Farmhouse; • Mary Lodge, Stoneleigh Park; • East Lodge, Stoneleigh Park; and • South Hurst Farm and cottages.

6.4.6 The Kenilworth Road conservation area abuts the area of temporary and permanent land take.

6.4.7 Stoneleigh Abbey, a Grade II* registered park, is partly located within the area of temporary and permanent land take.

6.4.8 Kenilworth Common, a registered common, lies within approximately 750m from the area of temporary and permanent land take.

6.4.9 Four areas of ancient woodland are wholly or partially located within the area of temporary and permanent land take: • Roughknowles Wood; • Crackley Wood; • Black Waste Wood (CT‑01-49, A5); and • Broadwells Wood.

6.4.10 Three lengths of important hedgerow (as defined by criteria 1 to 5 ofSchedule One, Part II of the Hedgerow Regulations 1997) lie within the area of temporary and permanent land take: • One length along the historic boundary between the parishes of Stoneleigh and Cubbington; • One length along the alignment of Stare Bridge in Stoneleigh Park; and • One length forms part of the parish boundary between Burton Green and Stoneleigh. Non‑designated assets

6.4.11 Forty-nine known non-designated archaeological assets lie wholly or partially within the area of temporary and permanent land take, these have been identified from the historic environment record (HER) as well as surveys undertaken to inform this draft ES. The majority of these are of negligible heritage value. The following have been identified as being of low, moderate or high value: • Archaeological deposits associated with Millburn Grange farmstead; • A linear cropmark at Kenilworth Road; • A cropmark site adjacent to Crackley Wood; • Cropmarks at Odnaull End; • Deserted medieval settlement at Hurst; • A possible early castle site at Crewe Farm; and • A former windmill and earthworks at Dalehouse Farm.

61 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Cultural heritage

6.4.12 The following non-designated buildings and structures of local historic interest are located within or close to the area of permanent and temporary land take: • Farmstead ranges west of Gilbert Spinney; • Leicester Lane cottages; • Kingswood Farmhouse; and • Milburn Grange. 6.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

6.5.1 The construction works have the potential to affect heritage assets. Impacts would occur to assets within the construction boundary, as well as the settings of heritage assets within the ZTV.

6.5.2 The draft CoCP sets out the provisions that would be adopted to control effects on cultural heritage assets. The provisions include: • Management measures to control damage to assets that are to be retained within the area of temporary land take and the preparation of project wide principles, standards and techniques for works affecting heritage assets; • A programme of archaeological investigation and recording to be undertaken prior to construction works affecting the assets; and • A programme of historic building investigation and recording to be undertaken prior to modification or demolition of the assets.

6.5.3 In addition the following measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme and to avoid or reduce impacts on heritage assets: • Alignment of route designed to avoid key areas of Registered Park and Garden; • Planting in historic landscape to south of Stoneleigh Park designed to respond to landscape structure; • Construction compound moved eastwards away from scheduled Roman site and potential remains; and • Landscape design integrated into the Proposed Scheme, including provision of earthworks and planting. 6.5.4 Assets that would experience a significant physical effect in this area are: • A portion of ancient woodland at Broadwells Wood would be removed, as would smaller parts of ancient woodland at Roughknowles Wood, Crackley Wood and Black Waste Wood. These are all assets of high heritage value; • Part of three lengths of important hedgerow, assets of moderate heritage value, would be recorded and removed; • Archaeological deposits associated with Millburn Grange farmstead; linear cropmark at Kenilworth Road; a cropmark site adjacent to Crackley Wood; cropmarks at Odnaull End Farm, all assets of low heritage value, would be recorded and removed; • Archaeological deposits associated with the deserted medieval settlement at Hurst, and a possible early castle site, all assets of moderate heritage value, would be recorded and removed or partially removed;

62 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Cultural heritage

• Archaeological deposits associated with a former windmill and earthworks at Dalehouse Farm, assets of low heritage value, would be recorded and removed; • Farmstead buildings west of Gilbert Spinney, assets of low heritage value, would be recorded and demolished; and • Part of Stoneleigh Park, an asset of high heritage value, would be recorded and removed and there would be changes to the setting of part of the park.

6.5.5 The settings of the following specific heritage assets would experience significant effects: • The setting of Stare Bridge, an asset of high heritage value, would be altered; • The setting of Dale House Farmhouse, East Lodge and South Hurst Farm and cottages, assets of moderate heritage value, would be altered; • The setting of the Grade II listed buildings Stonehouse Farmhouse, historic buildings at Stareton village, and Crabmill Farmhouse, assets of moderate heritage value, would be altered; • The setting of the non-designated Leicester Lane cottages, Kingswood Farmhouse, and Milburn Grange, assets of low heritage value, would be altered; and • The setting of Kenilworth Road Conservation Area, an asset of moderate heritage value, would be altered.

6.5.6 Proposed mitigation in respect of the specific affected assets consists of: • Farmstead buildings west of Gilbert Spinney; part of Stoneleigh Park; Millburn Grange farmstead; a linear cropmark at Kenilworth Road; a cropmark site adjacent to Crackley Wood; cropmarks at Odnaull End Farm; deserted medieval settlement at Hurst; possible early castle site near Crewe Farm; and former windmill and earthworks at Dalehouse Farm – a programme of archaeological investigation and recording would be undertaken.

6.5.7 The construction of the Proposed Scheme would not have an impact on any other identified heritage asset within the permanent and temporary land take and would not have an impact on the setting of any other designated asset identified within theZTV. Likely residual significant effects

6.5.8 Although a programme of archaeological and historic building investigation and recording contributes to knowledge gain, such works would not fully mitigate the effect or reduce the impact on heritage assets. The following specific heritage assets would be likely to experience residual significant effects: • Parts of ancient woodland at Roughknowles Wood, Crackley Wood and Black Waste Wood – a low impact rating on a high value heritage asset gives rise to a moderate effect; • Parts of ancient woodland at Broadwells Wood – a moderate impact rating on an asset of high heritage value gives rise to a major effect; • Part of three lengths of important hedgerow – a medium impact rating on assets of moderate heritage value gives rise to a moderate effect; • Archaeological deposits associated with a former windmill and earthworks at Dalehouse Farm – a high impact on assets of low heritage value gives rise to a moderate adverse effect; • Archaeological deposits associated with Millburn Grange farmstead – a high impact on assets of low heritage value gives rise to a moderate adverse effect;

63 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Cultural heritage

• Linear cropmark at Kenilworth Road – a high impact on assets of low heritage value gives rise to a moderate adverse effect; • A cropmark site adjacent to Crackley Wood – a high impact on assets of low heritage value gives rise to a moderate adverse effect; • Cropmarks at Odnaull End Farm – a high impact on assets of low heritage value gives rise to a moderate adverse effect; • Archaeological deposits associated with deserted medieval settlement at Hurst – a medium impact on assets of moderate heritage value gives rise to a moderate adverse effect; • A possible early castle site near Crewe Farm – a medium impact on assets of moderate heritage value gives rise to a moderate adverse effect; • Farmstead buildings west of Gilbert Spinney – a high impact on assets of low heritage value gives rise to a moderate effect; • Part of Stoneleigh Park – a medium impact rating on an asset of high heritage value gives rise to a major effect.

6.5.9 Some construction phase impacts on heritage assets through changes to settings are temporary and would not result in residual significant effects. However, the following specific heritage assets would be likely to experience residual significant effects through changes to their setting: • Stare Bridge – a medium impact rating on an asset of high heritage value gives rise to a major effect; • Dale House Farmhouse, East Lodge and South Hurst Farm and cottages – a high impact rating on assets of moderate heritage value, gives rise to a major effect; • Stonehouse Farmhouse, historic buildings at Stareton village, and Crabmill Farmhouse – a medium impact rating on assets of moderate heritage value gives rise to a moderate effect; • Leicester Lane cottages, Kingswood Farmhouse, and Milburn Grange – a high impact rating on assets of low heritage value gives rise to a moderate effect; and • Kenilworth Road Conservation Area – a medium impact rating on an asset of moderate heritage value, gives rise to a moderate effect. Further mitigation

6.5.10 No further mitigation measures have been identified at this time. 6.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

6.6.1 There would be no effects on buried archaeological remains arising from operation.

6.6.2 The introduction of the Proposed Scheme has the potential to introduce impacts on the setting of heritage assets. The specific assets that would be significantly affected are: • Stoneleigh Park, Registered Park and Garden, an asset of high heritage value, would have approaches to it and its setting altered; • Stare Bridge, a Scheduled Monument and Grade II* listed bridge, would have its relationship with the wider landscape altered by the Proposed Scheme;

64 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Cultural heritage

• Dale House Farmhouse, a listed building of moderate value, would have its setting altered by the Proposed Scheme, which would run at ground level close to the building and associated curtilage structures; • East Lodge, a Grade II listed building of moderate value, would have its immediate setting changed and its surviving links to the former parkland that it served would be severed; • Stonehouse Farmhouse, a Grade II listed building of moderate value, would have its rural setting altered by the Proposed Scheme which would lie approximately 150m away; • South Hurst Farm and cottages, a Grade II listed building of moderate heritage value, would have its rural setting altered by the Proposed Scheme; and • Leicester Lane cottages, non-designated historic buildings of low value, would have their setting altered by a major new elevated roadway to the south with further embankments to the east.

6.6.3 The provision of earthworks and planting as part of the Proposed Scheme design provides an effective means of mitigation to reduce the effects of the ProposedScheme on the historic landscape and specific heritage assets within it. However, mitigation would not be fully effective until planting has matured. Likely residual significant effects

6.6.4 Despite the implementation of the mitigation measures, the following specific heritage assets would experience significant effects through changes to their setting: • Grade II listed Dale House Farmhouse – a high impact on an asset of moderate heritage value gives rise to a moderate effect; • Grade II listed East Lodge – a medium impact on an asset of moderate heritage value gives rise to a moderate effect; • Scheduled Stare Bridge – a low impact on an asset of high heritage value gives rise to a moderate effect; • Stoneleigh Registered Park and Garden – a medium impact on an asset of high heritage value gives rise to a moderate effect; • Grade II listed South Hurst Farm and cottages – a medium impact on an asset of moderate heritage value gives rise to a moderate effect; • Grade II listed Stonehouse Farmhouse – a medium impact on an asset of moderate heritage value gives rise to a moderate effect; and • The non-designated Leicester Lane cottages – a high impact on an asset of low heritage value gives rise to a moderate effect.

6.6.5 There are no other significant residual effects associated with the operation of the Proposed Scheme. Further mitigation

6.6.6 No further mitigation measures have been identified at this time.

65 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Ecology 7 Ecology 7.1 Introduction 7.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of the predicted impacts and significant effects upon species and habitats as a consequence of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. This includes effects upon sites recognised or designated on the basis of their importance for nature conservation. 7.2 Policy framework 7.2.1 The WDLP includes the following policies of relevance to ecology: • Policy DP3 seeks to protect and/or enhance local ecology, including existing features of nature conservation value; and • Policy DAP3 requires detailed assessment of development sites and does not permit any which adversely affect Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs). Appropriate mitigation is required where development affects ancient woodland, local nature reserves (LNRs) and notable species.

7.2.2 The emerging WDLP Preferred Options includes a number of similar policies to the adopted WDLP and gives further emphasis on permitting development proposals only if they protect and enhance green infrastructure assets and provide positive planning for biodiversity including habitat connectivity.

7.2.3 The SUDP contains four policies that are relevant to ecology: • Policy ENV10 provides the context for the allocation, protection and enhancement of national and local sites of importance for nature conservation; • Policy ENV11 relates to the conservation and enhancement of biodiversity within Solihull; • Policy ENV12 seeks to conserve and enhance the River Blythe catchment both in terms of the natural environment and its role as a source of drinking water; and • Policy ENV14 seeks to safeguard important trees, hedgerows and woodland whilst encouraging new habitats of this type, where possible.

7.2.4 The emerging SMBC Local Plan retains the environmental designations of the SUDP and has similar policies relating to environmental protection and nature conservation (Policies P10, P15 and P17).

7.2.5 In addition, the following local and regional guidance is relevant to the assessment: • Warwickshire County Council (WCC) Biodiversity Strategy28; • Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull Biodiversity Action Plan; • Solihull Nature Conservation Strategy; and • Solihull Green Infrastructure Study. 7.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 7.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the ecological assessment are set out in Volume 1.

28 Warwickshire County Council; Biodiversity Strategy “Working for Warwickshire’s Wildlife”; http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/Web/corporate/ wccweb.nsf/Links/154325E68157188D8025785100693463/$file/WCC+Biodiversity+Strategy.pdf; Accessed: 31 October 2012.

66 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Ecology

7.3.2 The current assessment draws on existing information gathered from national organisations and from regional and local sources including WCC, Warwickshire Wildlife Trust, Environment Agency (Central Area Office), Butterfly Conservation (Warwickshire branch) and local wildlife recorders.

7.3.3 Field surveys undertaken to date have been limited to locations where landowner permission has been obtained or areas accessible to the public. They include (but are not limited to): botanical surveys at Stareton and Stoneleigh Woodlands, Greens Wood, Birches Wood, Roughknowles Wood and part of Black Waste Wood. Bat roost and activity surveys have been undertaken and water vole surveys of many potential sites on the River Avon, Finham Brook, Canley Brook and their tributaries have also been undertaken. In addition, small numbers of sites were subject to breeding birds, reptile, amphibian and terrestrial invertebrate survey.

7.3.4 There have been no deviations from the standard ecological survey methodologies.

7.3.5 Surveys will continue during 2013 and will include (but are not limited to) the following, subject to access: • Bat surveys of buildings and trees to identify roosts and surveys to identify foraging and commuting routes; • Hazel dormouse surveys within Stoneleigh Estate, Green Wood, Roughknowles Wood, Black Waste Wood and Little Poors Wood; • Breeding bird surveys within Park Farm, Stoneleigh Park, Milburn Grange, Crackley farm, Roughknowles Wood, Broadwells Wood; and • Amphibian surveys of approximately 98 ponds and 38 ditches. 7.4 Environmental baseline 7.4.1 This section presents the environmental baseline that is relevant to the consideration of impacts and effects reported in Sections 7.5 and 7.6.

7.4.2 Land within or adjacent to the Proposed Scheme in this area consists mainly of arable agriculture, bounded by hedgerows and tree lines. There are areas of improved and amenity grassland, with blocks of woodlands ranging from semi-natural ancient woodland to conifer plantations. There is a large area of parkland associated with Stoneleigh and Stareton, which is part of the Stoneleigh Abbey Deer Park. The River Avon and associated watercourses are characteristic of nutrient-rich (eutrophic) lowland conditions.

7.4.3 Statutory and non-statutory designated sites are shown on maps CT‑01-47 to CT‑01-50 and CT‑02-17.

7.4.4 There are no SSSIs located within 500m of the Proposed Scheme.

7.4.5 Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) which are located within the extent of or adjacent to the Proposed Scheme or are considered potentially subject to significant effects are relevant to the assessment. There are six LWS which meet these criteria and each is considered to be of county/metropolitan value: • Broadwells Wood LWS is within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. It is ancient semi‑natural and replanted woodland with 108 species of vascular plants. Most of these are characteristic of lowland damp oak-birch woodland, and six are characteristic of ancient woodland; • Black Waste Wood LWS lies partially within the extent of the Proposed Scheme adjacent to Burton Green. It is ancient semi-natural woodland which was first mentioned in documents as ”Blakewaste” in 1542, when it was heathland;

67 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Ecology

• Big Poors and Little Poors Wood LWS is located at Burton Green, in a rural area of Solihull to the south-east of Balsall Common. The Little Poors Wood element of the LWS is adjacent to the Proposed Scheme; • The River Avon LWS is crossed by the route. This section of the river retains many natural features, including several islands, remnant channels and abundant diverse bankside vegetation. There are various habitats associated with the LWS, including woodland, meadows, scrub and ruderal areas; • Wainbody Wood LWS and LNR is a large, mature semi-natural woodland, part of which is ancient woodland. The elongated extension of the site along the A429 is adjacent to the Proposed Scheme; and • Crackley Wood Nature Reserve LWS (also designated as Crackley Wood LNR) is located 250m to the south of the Proposed Scheme containing ancient semi-natural and replanted, mixed and coniferous woodland.

7.4.6 In addition to the areas of ancient woodland which fall within designated sites, a further two areas of ancient semi-natural broadleaved woodland occur within the extent of or adjacent to the Proposed Scheme. These include the area of Crackley Wood North lying to the north of the Coventry Way and outside the boundary of Crackley Wood LNR, and Roughknowles Wood, an area of ancient replanted woodland. These ancient woodlands represent an irreplaceable resource and each is considered to be of county/metropolitan value.

7.4.7 Other habitats located outside of the designated sites identified above and which are relevant to the assessment include the following: • Woodland – secondary woodland at Greens Wood and woodland along the dismantled Kenilworth to Balsall Line (the Kenilworth Greenway) are considered to be of district/ borough value; • Parkland – the large area associated with Stoneleigh and Stareton which is part of the Stoneleigh Abbey Deer Park possesses diverse habitats which include woodland blocks and scattered parkland trees, some of which are veteran. The site is considered to be of district/ borough value; • Hedgerows – three of those surveyed meet wildlife and landscape criteria specified in the Hedgerows Regulations 199729. The majority of the remaining hedgerows surveyed to date appear to be species-poor, but at this stage, due to the green corridors that they create, the hedgerow network is considered to be up to district/borough value; • Watercourses – in addition to the River Avon LWS, Finham Brook, Canley Brook and three minor tributaries are crossed by the Proposed Scheme. These watercourses support typical riverine and bankside vegetation, showing eutrophic (nutrient-rich) lowland river characteristics. From existing information, the sites are considered to be of no more than district/borough value; and • Water bodies – 14 ponds and 13 ditches are within the Proposed Scheme, only two of which were surveyed in 2012. It is unlikely that these features would be more than of district/ borough value.

7.4.8 A summary of the likely value of species located outside of the designated sites identified and covered by the assessment is provided in Table 9.

29 The Hedgerows Regulations 1997 (1997 No. 1160). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

68 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Ecology

Resource/Receptor Value Rationale

Bats Up to county/ A minimum of eight bat species, including county rare Leisler’s bat (noted during metropolitan survey, but further survey required to confirm status), have been recorded during surveys within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. To date only a Daubenton’s maternity roost has been identified.

Hazel dormouse Up to county/ Uncommon in the county and restricted to suitable habitat types (such as metropolitan broad-leaved woodland which is also scarce within Warwickshire). No confirmed observations to date but suitable habitat is present.

Water vole Up to county/ Limited data, species declining nationally and within the county with few remnant metropolitan populations remaining. No confirmed observations to date but suitable habitat is present.

Terrestrial Up to county/ Invertebrate assemblage in Stoneleigh Park is likely to be of county/metropolitan invertebrates metropolitan value due to large number of mature and veteran aged oak trees that could attract scarce flies and beetles. Other woodlands have lesser diversity and are considered only of local/parish value.

White clawed Up to county/ Limited data but no confirmed observations. Signal crayfish found in crayfish metropolitan watercourses with direct connection to the River Avon and Finham Brook. Considered unlikely to be present.

Aquatic macro- Unlikely to be Environment Agency data indicate a community of “moderate” to “fairly high” invertebrates more than county/ conservation importance on the River Avon, as assessed by the Environment metropolitan Agency’s Community Conservation Index (CCI). No CCI data exist with which to characterise the Finham Brook. Awaiting detailed survey data.

Amphibians Up to district/ Of the two ponds surveyed within the extent of the Proposed Scheme in 2012, borough one contained common amphibians but no great crested newt have been observed to date.

Otter Up to district/ Populations increasing nationally and in the county. Evidence of breeding on River borough Avon.

Breeding birds Unlikely to be more The majority of the land within the Proposed Scheme is arable and grass than local/parish farmland, from which no species or large numbers of particular note have been identified to date.

Wintering birds Unlikely to be more No habitats identified of particular importance to wintering birds and no than local/parish particularly notable species or large numbers observed.

Reptiles Unlikely to be more Limited habitat suitable for common species of reptile, based on restricted than local/parish surveys.

Badgers Unlikely to be more Species common and widespread in the UK. than local/parish

Fish Unlikely to be more Available species records indicate common species in watercourses. River Avon is than of local/parish predominantly a mixed coarse fishery. Fish of conservation interest (bullhead and European eel) recorded.

Table 9: Preliminary evaluation of likely value of protected and/or notable species occurring within this section of the route 7.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

7.5.1 The following section considers the impacts and effects on ecological receptors as a consequence of construction of the Proposed Scheme. All assessments made are provisional, based on the preliminary assessment of baseline value as presented in Section 7.4 of this report.

69 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Ecology

7.5.2 The following measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme and avoid or reduce impacts on features of ecological value: • Minimising land take through Stoneleigh Park to minimise loss of woodland and avoid impacts on the River Avon; • Minimising land take and realigning the design of local road diversions to reduce land take in ancient woodlands, including Roughknowles Wood; • Proposals to mitigate for the direct impact on Broadwells Wood and Black Waste Wood LWS are presently being developed and are likely to include: ȃȃ Translocation of ancient woodland soil and the associated seed bank, together with coppice stumps, to an area adjacent to a retained section of Broadwells Wood to try and allow natural regeneration of woodland; ȃȃ Additional planting on existing soils, including a large area of woodland planting adjacent to a retained section of Broadwells Wood and extending up to Burton Green. This large mitigation area would also include other habitat types as replacement for those lost, including ponds; ȃȃ Collection of seeds from existing woodland to ensure local provenance and trialling of seed material to confirm seed viability; and ȃȃ Long-term management for newly created woodland; • Provision of a bat house within Stoneleigh Estate adjacent to the River Avon to mitigate for bat roost lost within Stoneleigh Park and provision of terrestrial habitat for otter at the same location to reduce the effects of disturbance on otter; • Provision of habitat replacement either side of Dalehouse Lane, including replacement ponds and terrestrial habitat for amphibians and improvements of Finham Brook to reduce the effects of shading from the Finham Brook viaduct; • Woodland planting between Canley Brook and footpath W167 to replace woodland habitat lost and to reduce fragmentation of remaining woodland; • Replacement planting of temporary construction areas within Black Waste Wood and on the opposite side of the route adjacent to Burton Green; and • Provision of planting over the Burton Green tunnel to provide a continuation of habitat along the disused Kenilworth to Balsall line and reduce the effects of habitat severance.

7.5.3 The assessment assumes implementation of the measures set out within the CoCP, which includes translocation of protected species where appropriate. The following measures are considered of particular relevance to proposed works in this section of the route: control of run-off adjacent to all watercourses (notably for River Avon, Finham Brook and Canley Brook; restricting vehicle movements and adherence to designated routes to limit adverse effects within Broadwells Wood LWS, Black Waste Wood LWS, and Big Poors and Little Poors Wood LWS.

7.5.4 Approximately 3.6ha (21%) of the 17.4ha of Broadwells Wood LWS, which consists of a combination of ancient semi-natural and replanted woodland would be lost and the retained parts of the woodland would be severed. This would result in a permanent adverse effect on the integrity of the site, which would be significant at a county/metropolitan level. The main effects would include: • Direct habitat loss of irreplaceable ancient woodland resource; • Reduced size of remnant blocks causing vulnerability to edge effects, including encroachment of scrub and wind-blow; and

70 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Ecology

• Long term indirect effects of reduced habitat resource, disturbance and population severance for animal populations associated with the woodland sensitive to these impacts.

7.5.5 The western edge of Black Waste Wood LWS is within the construction area and the Proposed Scheme would result in temporary loss of 1.5ha (15%) of the LWS. The ancient woodland within the LWS would not be affected through habitat loss. The effects on the remaining woodland would be similar to those on Broadwells Wood LWS. This could result in a temporary adverse effect on the integrity of the LWS which would be significant at a county/metropolitan level. Once woodland replacement planting, outlined above in paragraph 7.5.2, has become established (15-20 years) the permanent residual effect could reduce to a level where it is not significant.

7.5.6 Approximately 15ha of secondary broadleaved woodland would be directly lost between the non-designated areas at Stareton and Stoneleigh Park, Roughknowles Wood, Greens Wood, Birches Wood and along the Kenilworth Greenway. In addition severance, fragmentation and indirect edge effects are anticipated to further affect the remaining habitats atGreens Wood, Birches Wood and the Kenilworth Greenway. Due to loss of habitat in the years immediately after construction (no less than 20 years), it is considered likely that there would be a temporary adverse effect on the conservation status of secondary woodlands, which would be significant at up to the district/borough level. However mitigation planting, as described above, would include a diverse mix of woodland and scrub habitats and new woodland creation areas would be located adjacent to retained woodlands to try and avoid reduction in the size of woodland blocks and to try and reduce edge effects. Eventually these mitigation measures could have a corresponding beneficial effect on secondary woodland habitats significant at up to a district/borough level.

7.5.7 Loss of water bodies and terrestrial habitat within the Proposed Scheme has the potential to result in adverse effects on amphibian populations. The current mitigation included within the Proposed Scheme is considered sufficient to mitigate effects on known amphibian populations, therefore there is currently no significant effect anticipated.The mitigation could benefit some amphibian populations which are in poorly managed ponds within arable habitats. Depending on the results of amphibian surveys in 2013, further mitigation could be required.

7.5.8 The main construction impact on bats would include: • Possible loss of tree-roosts within the land take of the Proposed Scheme, arising from vegetation clearance; • Possible loss of at least four building roosts, arising from demolitions; • Severance of commuting and foraging routes; and • Displacement due to habitat disruption.

7.5.9 Based on known distribution of bat species within this section of the route (eight of the 10 county species, including the county rare Leisler’s bat are present within or adjacent to the Proposed Scheme), together with the results from scoping surveys and professional judgement, there is considered to be the potential for a permanent adverse effect on conservation status that could be significant at up to a county/metropolitan level.

7.5.10 Based on current data both hazel dormouse and white-clawed crayfish are considered unlikely to be present; therefore no effects on these species are anticipated.

7.5.11 Otter is considered likely to be present within the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme. However, following implementation of the CoCP it is considered unlikely that any adverse effects significant at above the local/parish level would occur.

71 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Ecology

Likely residual significant effects

7.5.12 Taking into account mitigation included in the design of the Proposed Scheme, anticipated significant residual ecological effects during construction are detailed inTable 10. Local/parish effects, which in combination may be significant, will be described in the formal ES.

Resource/Receptor Residual effect Level of significance

Broadwells Wood LWS Permanent adverse effect on site integrity due to loss of 3.6ha ancient County/metropolitan broadleaved woodland and permanent severance of retained woodland.

Black Waste Wood LWS Temporary adverse effect on site integrity due to loss of 1.5ha broadleaved County/metropolitan woodland and temporary severance from adjacent woodland/scrub habitats until replacement planting becomes established (15-20 years).

Bats Potential for permanent adverse effect on conservation status due to Up to county/ loss of roosts; severance of commuting and foraging routes; and habitat metropolitan displacement.

Secondary woodland Permanent beneficial effect due to creation of broadleaved woodland to Up to district/borough address losses of ancient woodland. Following establishment of mitigation planting (at least 20 years), this could lead to benefits for woodland habitats and associated species.

Table 10: Significant residual construction effects on ecological receptors within this section of the route Further mitigation

7.5.13 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include: • Improvements to retained areas of woodland and LWS including increasing woodland connectivity through new areas of planting; • Offsite improvement of riverine habitats to address impacts to Canley Brook; • Provision of measures to facilitate the passage of species across the route where significant foraging or commuting routes would be disturbed; • Provision of bat roosting features within new structures and in other suitable areas to mitigate for loss of roosts and potential roosts, as required based on further survey results; • Watercourse enhancement adjacent to culvert and viaduct crossing points to address loss of natural bank habitat and effects from shading; • Reducing impacts on aquatic invertebrate and fish communities through appropriate culvert design, in part to allow fish passage by maintaining adequate flow depth and velocity; • Additional replacement ponds at suitable locations, as required based on further survey results; and • Creation of species-rich grassland on the cutting and embankment slopes of the Proposed Scheme which could benefit reptile and invertebrates by providing foraging and basking habitat. 7.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

7.6.1 The following section considers the potential effects on ecological receptors during operation of the Proposed Scheme. Assessments made are provisional, based on the preliminary assessments of baseline value presented in Section 7.4 of this report.

72 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Ecology

7.6.2 The following measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme and avoid or reduce impacts on features of ecological value: • Provision of a cut-and-cover tunnel in Burton Green that would reduce habitat severance in the long term along the disused Kenilworth to Balsall Line (the Kenilworth Greenway).

7.6.3 Bats and breeding birds, such as barn owl, could be subject to impacts such as train strike, the risks of which could be increased by air turbulence from passing trains, disturbance from noise, vibration, lighting and visual cues. The risk to bats of train strike is likely to be higher for bats where the route passes through woodland habitat or linear features such as hedgerows which bats could use as commuting or foraging habitat. Disturbance could also lead to displacement (i.e. animals avoiding the area which receives high levels of disturbance and possibly abandoning roosts).

7.6.4 Potential impacts on bats, including the county rare Leisler’s bat, could result in a permanent adverse effect on the conservation status of the species concerned, which would be significant at up to the county/metropolitan level. Potential impacts on birds could result in an adverse effect on the conservation status that would be significant up to a local/parish vel.le

7.6.5 Further work will be carried out for the formal ES to assess the impacts of the Proposed Scheme on bats and birds. Likely residual significant effects

7.6.6 Taking into account mitigation included as part of the Proposed Scheme design anticipated significant residual ecological effects during operation are detailed inTable 11. Local/parish effects, which in combination may be significant, will be described in the formal ES.

Resource/Receptor Residual effect Level of significance

Bats Potential permanent adverse effect on conservation status due to mortality Up to county/ through train strike and disturbance metropolitan

Table 11: Significant residual operational effects on ecological receptors within this section of the route Further mitigation

7.6.7 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include: • A programme of monitoring the movement of bats and birds would be considered further to monitor the operational effect of the Proposed Scheme; and • Provision of measures to facilitate the passage of species across the route where significant foraging or commuting routes would be disturbed.

73 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Land quality 8 Land quality 8.1 Introduction 8.1.1 This section provides a summary of the likely impacts and significant effects to land quality and geology, as a result of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. Consideration is given to land that contains contamination and land that has special geological significance, either from a scientific, mining or mineral resources point of view, including: geological sites of special scientific interest (SSSI), local geological sites (LGS), areas of current underground or opencast mining, and areas of designated mineral resources.

8.1.2 Areas of land have been identified, both within and adjacent to construction areas, that could affect or be affected by the construction of the route because they are contaminated (for example contaminated soils may need to be removed or the construction may alter existing contamination pathways). Each of these areas has been studied in order to determine the scale of any potential impacts caused by existing contamination and what needs to be done to avoid significant consequences to people and the wider environment. In addition, a review has been undertaken to establish whether the operation of the Proposed Scheme would lead to contamination of its surroundings and what needs to be done to prevent such contamination. This process is known as a contamination risk assessment. 8.2 Policy framework 8.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to this area are described in Section 2.1. Policies of relevance to land quality are set out below.

8.2.2 The Minerals Local Plan for Warwickshire30 aims to safeguard parcels of land where there are mineral resources of economic or conservation value (Policies M1 and M5).

8.2.3 The WDLP includes a policy (DP9) on pollution control, including soil contamination, which requires developers to ensure that land is made fit and does not pose an unacceptable risk of contamination. Policy DP3 and the linked Policy DAP3 include provisions to protect features of geological and geomorphological value, requiring developers to consider mitigation measures if adverse impacts are predicted to arise from development.

8.2.4 The emerging WDLP Preferred Options does not contain any preferred options that relate specifically to land quality matters.

8.2.5 The SUDP Policy ENV16: Contaminated Land requires developers of sites known or suspected to be contaminated to include appropriate information within their applications to enable the potential implications to be assessed and remediated, if necessary. Policy ENV10 conveys protection to nature conservation sites, including LGS and SSSIs. There are three minerals policies in the SUDP, relating to mineral working and the protection of sand and gravel resources. Policy M2: Protection of Sand and Gravel Resources is linked to areas of search identified in the Proposals Map – one of these areas covers a large amount of land that includes the area through which the Proposed Scheme passes, to the north of Burton Green.

8.2.6 The emerging SMBC Local Plan Policy P10: Natural Environment maintains similar protection of geological assets as the SUDP. Policy P13 identifies and protects Minerals Safeguarding Areas (MSA), including the land to the north of Burton Green, which falls into a large MSA for underground coal resources (Policy P13). Within this MSA, the policy indicates that proposals for non-mineral development will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the development will not result in the sterilisation of mineral resources or the loss of important

30 Warwickshire County Council (1995), Minerals Local Plan for Warwickshire Written Statement.

74 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Land quality

infrastructure or sites for potential infrastructure needs in the areas. There are no proposed policies that relate directly to contamination.

8.2.7 The Proposed Scheme does not require any land within this authority; therefore there are no City of Coventry UDP or emerging City Council Core Strategy policies of relevance. 8.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 8.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the land quality assessment are set out in Volume 1.

8.3.2 Engagement is being undertaken with Stratford-on-Avon District Council regarding land contamination and with WCC regarding mineral resources. 8.4 Environmental baseline Geology

8.4.1 There is no made ground shown on the geological mapping within this area. However, made ground is likely to be present associated with highways and the Coventry to Leamington Spa railway line which would be intersected by the Proposed Scheme and with areas of infilling located within the study area such as infilled pits, infilled ponds and infilled domestic water wells.

8.4.2 Superficial deposits, predominantly river deposits, are present sporadically along the Proposed Scheme associated with surface watercourses. River terrace deposits (sand and gravel) and river alluvium (silt and clay) surround the River Avon to the north-west of Stoneleigh Park. River alluvium and river terrace deposits surround Finham Brook to the north-west of Dalehouse Lane. River alluvium is also present in the locations of Canley Brook and one of its tributaries to the north-west of the A429 and to the east of Birches Wood Farm. A cover of the Oadby Till, a varied glacial deposit, extends from Burton Green to Little Beanit Farm.

8.4.3 The Proposed Scheme would be predominantly underlain by sandstones of the Bromsgrove Sandstone Formation and sandstones and occasional mudstones of the Kenilworth Sandstone Formation from the south of the route section as far as Gooseberry Hall, Kenilworth. Northwards from Gooseberry Hall, the route would be underlain by bedrock of the Tile Hill Mudstone Formation (mudstones with subordinate sandstones and rare lenses of conglomerate). Groundwater and surface water

8.4.4 There are three categories of aquifer identified within the study area.Groundwater is present within the bedrock which underlies the entire area and is classified as a PrincipalAquifer 31. The river deposits are water-bearing, and classified as a Secondary A Aquifer32. The Oadby Till, present in the north of the area, is classified as unproductive strata.

8.4.5 Furthermore, the Proposed Scheme would pass through a total catchment groundwater Source Protection Zone (SPZ) 3 between the south of the area and Decoy Spinney and again through a second SPZ3 between the River Avon and Broadwells Wood. These relate to abstractions in the north of Cubbington and the north of Kenilworth, respectively.

31 Layers of rock or drift deposits that have high intergranular and/or fracture permeability – meaning that they usually provide a high level of water storage. They may support water supply and/or river base flow on a strategic scale. 32 Permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale, and in some cases forming an important source of base flow to rivers.

75 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Land quality

8.4.6 There are two licensed groundwater abstractions within 250m of the study area. These are located at Furzen Hill Farm approximately 400m to the east of the Proposed Scheme and relate to use in general agriculture. There are two further licensed groundwater abstractions within 1km of the Proposed Scheme.

8.4.7 The Proposed Scheme would cross the River Avon to the north-west of Stoneleigh Park, Finham Brook to the north-west of Dalehouse Lane, and Canley Brook and two of its tributaries between the A429 and Broadwells Wood. There are also numerous ponds present within the study area.

8.4.8 Groundwater and surface water receptors are discussed further in Section 13. Current and historic land use

8.4.9 Historical land uses identified within the study area which may have caused contamination include former tanks which may have been used to store fuels or oils and areas of infilled ground which may have undergone manual infilling with a range of waste materials and could be a potential source of landfill gas.

8.4.10 Current land uses identified within the study area with the potential to have caused contamination include Stoneleigh Park, a warehouse close to Kingswood Farmhouse, a sheep dip, the Coventry to Leamington Spa line, the National Grid transformer compound to the north of Burton Green and farmsteads.

8.4.11 The higher risk sites33 (both historic and current land uses) identified by the assessment comprise: • Tanks and commercial and light industrial land uses at Stoneleigh Park (map CT‑03-47, A5, B5 and C5); • A warehouse close to Kingswood Farmhouse (map CT‑03-48. F5 and G6); • A sheep dip (map CT‑03-48, C4); • The Coventry to Leamington Spa line (map CT‑03-48, C5); and • The National Grid transformer compound (map CT‑03-50, F5 and G5). Mining/mineral resources

8.4.12 There are no active mining or minerals sites and no Preferred Areas34 in the route section.

8.4.13 Superficial sand and gravel deposits and sand and gravel derived from the bedrock within this route section form a locally important aggregate resource.

8.4.14 The Proposed Scheme would intersect three areas forming sand and gravel MSA from the south of the area as far north as Gooseberry Hall, Kenilworth. Two of the MSAs cover a large portion of the southern part of this area. The third MSA covers a localised resource immediately to the east of Gooseberry Hall.

8.4.15 A MSA for deep coal extends from Burton Green to the north of the route section. An application has been submitted to the Coal Authority by Daw Mills Colliery, located to the east of Coleshill, to extend the area covered by their extraction licence as far south as Burton Green, encompassing the northern extent of the study area.

33 The definition of ‘higher risk’ sites in this instance relates to the contamination potential of the source, the type of construction works that are proposed at that location (e.g. tunnel, cutting or embankment) and the proximity of receptors e.g. people, groundwater bodies etc. 34 Preferred Areas: where mineral deposits are known to exist and where the County Council considers there would be least planning objection to mineral extraction taking place.

76 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Land quality

8.4.16 Due to the large extent of the MSAs within the study area through Warwickshire, MSAs are not shown on the key environmental features maps (maps CT‑03-47 to CT‑03-50). Geo-conservation resources

8.4.17 There are no geological conservation resources identified within the study area. Receptors

8.4.18 Contaminated land can affect people living or working on or adjacent to the route of the Proposed Scheme, surface and groundwater in the vicinity, the nearby farmland or ecological resources and the built environment. 8.5 Construction Land contamination Assessment of impacts and mitigation

8.5.1 The Proposed Scheme would largely be set in cutting through this section of gently rolling agricultural terrain, passing through the eastern edge of Stoneleigh Park (the former NAC) before passing over the River Avon on viaduct. Viaducts would also carry the Proposed Scheme over the Finham Brook and Canley Brook immediately to the east of Kenilworth. Northwards towards Burton Green, the Proposed Scheme would enter a new green tunnel beneath Cromwell Lane before emerging in cutting.

8.5.2 The CoCP sets out the measures and standards of work that would be applied to the construction of the Proposed Scheme. The CoCP requires that a programme of further ground investigation would take place prior to construction in order to confirm areas of contamination and a risk assessment would be undertaken to determine what, if any, site-specific remediation measures would be required to allow the Proposed Scheme to be constructed safely and to prevent harmful future migration of contaminants. Any remediation scheme would be agreed with the regulatory authorities.

8.5.3 Localised mobilisation of contaminants during construction may occur and there may be increased leaching of contaminants to groundwater. This may occur at: • Tanks and commercial and industrial land uses at Stoneleigh Park; • The warehouse close to Kingswood Farmhouse; • The sheep dip; • The Coventry to Leamington Spa line; and • The National Grid transformer compound.

8.5.4 The potential mobilisation of contamination is assessed as not significant.The probability of the remobilised contamination reaching the groundwater is considered higher during construction, with a potential minor adverse effect to groundwater within the Principal Aquifer, but not significant because of the nature and localised scale of potential contamination.

8.5.5 There are not anticipated to be any significant construction effects regarding land quality and contamination within the study area.

8.5.6 Where practicable, contaminated soils excavated from the site would be treated as necessary to remove or render any contamination inactive, and reused within the Proposed Scheme where needed and suitable for use. Techniques are likely to include stabilisation methods, soil washing and bio-remediation to remove oil contaminants. Contaminated soil disposed off-site

77 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Land quality

would be taken to a soil treatment facility, another construction site (for treatment, as necessary, and re-use) or an appropriately permitted landfill site.

8.5.7 Site compounds would be located at various locations along the Proposed Scheme. The compounds would include staff welfare facilities, maintenance facilities for plant and machinery and fuel storage in bunded tanks. The construction compounds for the Proposed Scheme are listed in Table 1.

8.5.8 Whilst the construction compounds would store and use potentially contaminative materials such as fuels, oils and solvents, they would be managed in accordance with the CoCP, thus minimising the impacts of contamination from these sources.

8.5.9 It is considered unlikely that additional remediation works would be required over and above the mitigation measures contained as standard within the draft CoCP. Likely residual significant effects

8.5.10 There would be a local beneficial effect after construction in those areas where soils are excavated and treated. The beneficial effects are not considered to be significant because only very localised sources of contamination have been identified in this area and widespread contamination is not expected. Mining/mineral resources Assessment of impacts and mitigation

8.5.11 The effect of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme on the MSAs relating to large areas of sand and gravel reserves is assessed as not significant because there would be only a partial loss or severance of a large local reserve.

8.5.12 The Proposed Scheme would be constructed in cutting through the sand and gravel MSAs and it is possible that sand and gravel mineral extraction could be undertaken in advance of construction in these areas. A plan would be discussed and agreed in advance of the construction works with the landowner and WCC to ensure an effective management of minerals in this location.

8.5.13 There is currently no effect of the Proposed Scheme on the Daw Mill Colliery, because the licensed areas for coal extraction are beyond the route of the Proposed Scheme. Following announcement of the January 2012 announced route, UK Coal Ltd (the owner of Daw Mill Colliery) has applied to the Coal Authority for a licence to extend the area of working from Daw Mill to below the route of the Proposed Scheme, within the area of the deep coal MSA. To date, the Coal Authority has not determined this application. Should the licence application be granted without conditions relevant to the safeguarded route of HS2, then it is likely that for all practical purposes a pillar of support would need to be agreed below and around the route. It is also likely that any such agreement would permit the driving of a limited number of in-seam development headings through the pillar and designed to result in subsidence of the Proposed Scheme that is not significant. The effect of such a pillar would be to sterilise much of the coal below the route and some of the coal within any licensed extension area.

8.5.14 In early March 2013, UK Coal announced that it intended to close the colliery by 2014. Furthermore, the colliery has recently suffered an underground fire, which has forced the colliery to close, and UK Coal announced that it would not re-open the colliery. Therefore the future for conventional coal mining in this area of Warwickshire is doubtful. Additionally there are no current plans for unconventional deep mining, e.g. by underground coal gasification.

78 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Land quality

Likely residual significant effects

8.5.15 There is the potential for residual significant effects on the coal MSA. Further mitigation

8.5.16 No further mitigation is currently proposed. Geo-conservation resources Assessment of impacts and mitigation

8.5.17 In the location of the proposed realignment of Crackley Lane to the south of Roughknowles Wood there is potential for important geology to be exposed through construction and provide an opportunity for academic study which could be of interest to academic groups, geological institutions and local enthusiasts. The realigned highway would be cut into bedrock of the Kenilworth Sandstone Formation. Residual effects

8.5.18 No residual effects have been identified at this time. 8.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

8.6.1 Maintenance and operation of the railway would be in accordance with environmental legislation and best practice. Spillage and pollution response procedures similar to those outlined in the draft CoCP would be established for all high risk activities and employees would be trained in responding to such incidents.

8.6.2 The Furzen Hill auto-transformer station would be located east of the Proposed Scheme to the north of Leicester Lane. A substation can, in principle, be a source of contamination though accidental discharge or leaks of coolants. However, the proposed auto-transformer station, in common with other modern substations, would use secondary containment appropriate to the level of risk.

8.6.3 There exists the potential of minor leakage of hydraulic or lubricating oils from the trains. However, such leakage or spillage is expected to be very small and would not lead to any significant contamination. Likely residual significant effects

8.6.4 Residual pollution associated with the operation of the Proposed Scheme is not considered to be significant. Further mitigation

8.6.5 As no significant residual effects have been identified, no further mitigation is currently proposed.

79 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment 9 Landscape and visual assessment 9.1 Introduction 9.1.1 This section of the report presents the assessment of the likely significant landscape and visual effects. It starts by describing the current conditions found within and around the route of the Proposed Scheme, the nature and pattern of buildings, streets, open space and vegetation and their interrelationships within the rural and built environment. A summary of the significant effects that would arise from the construction and operation on landscape character areas and visual receptors is provided. 9.2 Policy framework 9.2.1 The adopted WDLP designates greenbelt, listed buildings, conservation areas, ancient woodland, sites appearing on the English Heritage Register of Historic Parks and Gardens, open space and recreational routes within the study area. Local Plan Policy DP1 sets criteria for good design and layout in new development, including a need for development to relate well to local topography, vernacular and landscape features, incorporating existing features where appropriate. Policy DP2: Amenity requires developers to consider and seek to avoid adverse impacts on amenity from noise, pollution, general disturbance and mature tree loss. The emerging WDLP carries these themes through into the policy options (Preferred Option 10) and encourages strategic development of green infrastructure (Preferred Option 15) including a green wedge between Coventry and Crackley. Amendments to the greenbelt are proposed at Kenilworth and Burton Green to facilitate limited expansion (refer to section 2.1.6)35.

9.2.2 In the north of the study area, the Proposed Scheme requires land take in Solihull Borough. This land forms part of the greenbelt, which is protected from inappropriate development by Policy C2 of the SUDP. Policies ENV11, ENV13 and ENV14 protect nature conservation and green infrastructure assets, including the Kenilworth Greenway and other PRoW, encouraging conservation, enhancement and management. Policy C8 seeks to protect the landscape quality, historic character and distinctiveness of the countryside, including dark night skies (Policy C9). The emerging SMBC Local Plan retains the environmental designations of the UDP and has similar policies relating to environmental protection (P17: Countryside and Green Belt, P15: High Quality Design). Policy P10 proposes measures to protect, enhance and restore diverse landscape features, including the creation of new woodlands and characteristic habitats and improved connectivity across the borough. Policy P18: Health and Well Being references the role of green infrastructure in supporting health; and seeks to safeguard and increase opportunities for local food production across the borough.

9.2.3 The Proposed Scheme does not require any land in Coventry; however, consideration needs to be given to interactions between the urban edge of Coventry and the railway. The adopted City of Coventry UDP designates Tocil Wood (at Gibbet Hill) and Park Wood (at Westwood Heath) as LNRs and Policies GE15 and GE3 promote integration of sites into broader green networks. Policy BE20 requires a high standard of landscape design and boundary treatment in all development; and Policy GE14 seeks to protect landscape features of amenity and/or historic value from loss to development. The emerging City of Coventry Core Strategy maintains similar landscape policies to the adopted City of Coventry UDP (Policy DE1). Policy EM1 expects developers to maintain the quantity, quality and functionality of existing green and blue infrastructure and to create and improve linkages between existing assets; Policy

35 Reference is made in adopted and emerging policy to the Warwickshire Landscape Guidelines (1993) and the Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull Sub-Regional Green Infrastructure Study (July 2011).

80 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment

GE1: Green Infrastructure provides further details on the interpretation and development of biodiversity connectivity. 9.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 9.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the landscape and visual assessment are set out in Volume 1. The extent of the landscape and visual study area, the distribution of visual receptor viewpoints and the location of verifiable photomontages has been discussed with WCC. Field surveys were undertaken from March 2012 to April 2013, including photographic studies of Landscape Character Areas (LCA) and visual assessment of viewpoints. Further surveys will be undertaken during 2013 and reported in the formal ES.

9.3.2 The study area has been informed by early drafts of the zone of theoretical visibility (ZTV), which is being prepared for inclusion in the formal ES. LCAs and visual receptors within approximately 2km of the Proposed Scheme have been assessed. The study area extends beyond all land required for the Proposed Scheme. 9.4 Environmental baseline 9.4.1 The following section sets out the baseline conditions for the landscape and visual assessment in the study area. Maps LV-11-47 to LV-11-50 show the location of landscape character areas and visual receptor viewpoints.

9.4.2 This area is located across low, gently undulating landform, with steeper banks and valley sides around the Rivers Sowe and Avon, and a predominantly flat area in the north-east. Land use includes large scale agricultural fields bounded by mature hedgerows, interspersed with small scale villages, as well as large scale uses such as the Stoneleigh and Middleton business parks, and quarrying at Over Whiteacre. Principal historic landscape features include ancient woodlands and parklands such as Stoneleigh Abbey Deer Park. The linkages to Coventry are the dominant transport pattern in the area, including the A46, A429 and A445, the London to Birmingham railway (which bisects Kenilworth) and Coventry Airport. The well-wooded disused railway embankment between Kenilworth and Balsall Common, a distinctive feature within the landscape, forms part of the Coventry Way, amongst other national routes within the PRoW network in the area. Landscape character assessment

9.4.3 LCAs are defined as areas with broadly homogenous characteristics and are influenced by national and district published character assessments. The Proposed Scheme in this area is located within national character area (NCA) 97: Arden, as defined by the Character of England mapping and Natural England36. For the purposes of this assessment the study area has been sub-divided into five discrete LCAs, of which two are most likely to be affected: Coventry Rural Fringe LCA, remnant agricultural fields in close proximity to the urban edge of Coventry; and Stoneleigh Parklands LCA, a gently rolling landscape defined by woodland edges. Both have a medium sensitivity to change. Visual baseline

9.4.4 Viewpoints, split into residential, recreational and transport have been selected to represent groups of receptors within the study area. WCC, WDC and CCC have been informed of the locations and WCC and CCC have responded. There are no known protected views within the area.

36 Natural England (1996); The Character of England 1996; http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/default.aspx; Accessed: 8 January 2013.

81 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment

9.4.5 Residential receptors (i.e. residents) have a high sensitivity to change and include scattered isolated properties across the landscape, and properties along Glasshouse Lane, Dalehouse Lane, Highland Road, Whitehead Drive, Knowle Hill (map CT‑01-48, D1), Whitemoor, Beverley Drive, Kenilworth Road, Red Lane, Cromwell Lane, Hob Lane, Westwood Heath Road and Ten Shillings Drive. Recreational receptors also have a high sensitivity to change, and are concentrated along PRoW throughout the area, including the Coventry Way along the disused railway, as well as Tainters Hill Pleasure Ground and Kenilworth Golf Club. Transport receptors (i.e. users of private or public transport) have a medium sensitivity and are located on scenic roads throughout the study area. 9.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

9.5.1 Due to the scale of the construction activities, works would be highly visible in many locations and would have the potential to give rise to significant effects which cannot be mitigated.This is commonplace with construction of major infrastructure projects, but it should be noted that these effects are temporary in nature and relate to the peak construction phase. Effects during other phases of works are likely to be less due to less construction equipment being required at the time and a reduced intensity of construction activity.

9.5.2 Measures that have been incorporated into the draft CoCP to avoid or reduce landscape and visual effects during construction include: • Maximising the retention and protection of existing trees and vegetation where reasonably practicable; • Use of well-maintained hoardings and fencing; • Replacement of any trees intended to be retained which may be accidentally felled or die as a consequence of construction works; • Early implementation of planting and other landscape measures where there is no conflict with construction activities or other requirements of the Proposed Scheme; and • Appropriate maintenance of planting and seeding works and implementation of management measures, to continue through the construction period as landscape works are completed.

9.5.3 These measures have been taken account of in the assessment of the construction effects in this section. Landscape assessment

9.5.4 The potential significant effects on the landscape during construction would relate to the presence of construction plant, development of worksites and compounds; temporary construction features such as road and utility diversions and stockpiles, construction of embankments, excavation work for cuttings and balancing ponds, and the removal of existing landscape elements.

9.5.5 Table 12 summarises the LCAs that would be significantly affected during construction of the Proposed Scheme.

82 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment

LCA Sensitivity of Magnitude of Level of effect LCA change to LCA

Stoneleigh Parklands LCA Medium Medium Moderate Construction resulting in loss of woodland, demolition of parts of adverse Stoneleigh Park and Kingswood Farm, severance of agricultural land (including diversion of Finham and Canley Brooks), PRoW diversions, highway realignment including A429 and A46, and construction of the River Avon viaduct and crossing.

Table 12: Significant landscape effects during construction Visual assessment

9.5.6 The most apparent changes to views during construction would relate to the presence of construction plant, construction activity, development of worksites and compounds, temporary construction features, such as road and utility diversions and stockpiles, construction of embankments, excavation work for cuttings and balancing ponds, and the removal of existing landscape elements.

9.5.7 Changes would be most notable where works are required to existing transport routes such as the A445, A46 and A429; where extensive earthworks such as the cutting between the A445 and Stoneleigh Park are required; and for the construction of new built elements such as the Canley Brook realignment and the River Avon and Finham Brook viaducts. The height of the construction plant and the viaducts and the closeness of construction activities to viewpoints, coupled with the absence of intervening screening (apart from the site hoardings) would result in significant visual effects during construction. The topography in certain locations and the retention of intervening hedgerows and trees would partially screen low level construction activity. In addition, temporary or permanent realignment of footpaths would affect views for users of these facilities.

9.5.8 An assessment of effects arising from lighting during construction where( required) will be prepared and included as part of the formal ES.

9.5.9 Table 13 summarises the views which would be significantly affected by the construction of the Proposed Scheme. The numbers in brackets identify the viewpoint locations which are shown on maps LV-11-47 to LV-11-50. The assessed level of effect is considered as the maximum level at the height of construction activity in the view at each location. The duration of this effect would in most instances be less than the entire construction period and will be considered in the formal ES. An indicative construction programme is set out in Section 2.3 of this report.

83 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude of Level of of visual change effect to receptors visual receptors

Residential receptors

View north-east from Stonehouse Farm, and Leigh House on Red Lane High Medium Moderate (263.2.003) adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including vegetation removal cutting and other works associated with Stoneleigh Park retaining wall.

View north-east from Little Beanit Farm (282.2.009) High Medium Moderate Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed adverse Scheme, including Burton Green retaining structure and Waste Lane overbridge.

View west from Kingswood Farmhouse (270.2.003) High Medium Moderate Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed adverse Scheme, including removal of New Kingswood Farm and implementation of mitigation works.

View south-west from residential property Four Winds and on Hodgett’s High Medium Moderate Lane adverse (270.2.005, 282.2.001) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including works to Dalehouse Lane, cutting works, and implementation of the potential ecological mitigation area.

View east from Dale House Farm High Medium Moderate (271.2.001) adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including Finham Brook viaduct, Dalehouse Lane and Dalehouse Lane overbridge and the cutting to the east of Dalehouse Lane.

View north from residential properties in Crackley Crescent High Medium Moderate (273.2.001) adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including Canley Brook viaduct, cutting and retaining walls and bridleway M164 overbridge.

View north-west from residential properties in Rye Meadow High Medium Moderate (277.2.001) adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including cutting and earthworks, Crackley Lane overbridge, vegetation removal at Broadwells Wood and accommodation access track W167.

View south from South Hurst Farmhouse, residential property South High Medium Moderate Hurst, and Bockendon Grange adverse (278.2.001, 280.2.012) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme on embankment and associated earthworks in the middle ground.

View south from residential properties adjacent to Cromwell Lane High Medium Moderate (280.2.002) adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme including closure of Cromwell Road and construction of the top down Burton Green tunnel.

84 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude of Level of of visual change effect to receptors visual receptors

View south from residential properties along B4101 Waste Lane High Medium Moderate (282.2.007) adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme including Burton Green retaining structure and Waste Lane overbridge.

View north-east from Leicester Lane Cottages (261.2.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including realignment of the A445 and its overbridge, cutting and materials treatment and transfer area 6, in the foreground and middle ground views.

View north-east from Crewe Farm High High Major adverse (267.2.005) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including realignment of the A46 and B4115 and related overbridges, cutting and materials treatment and transfer area 6, in middle ground views.

View north-east from Birches Wood Farm (275.2.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including removal of vegetation and construction of an overbridge.

View east and west from Furzen Hill Cottages adjacent the A445 High High Major adverse (262.2.004) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including the pond works, the materials treatment and transfer area 5, the A445 overbridge and the Furzen Hill auto-transformer station, in foreground and middle ground views.

View north-east from residential receptors along Cromwell Lane and High High Major adverse south-west from residential properties along Hodgett’s Lane including Burton Green Community Hall (279.2.004, 282.2.008) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including construction of the Burton Green tunnel and south portal, demolition of properties, removal of vegetation and earthworks associated with the Coventry Way, in middle ground views.

Recreational receptors

View south-west from Green Lane between Stareton and the A445 and High Medium Moderate PRoW footpath W130b adverse (262.3.001, 264.3.003) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including works to Coventry Road, cutting area, re-profiling retaining wall and vegetation loss, and the Furzen Hill auto-transformer station.

View south-west from PRoW bridleway W157a and PRoW W158 High Medium Moderate (266.3.003, 268.3.005) adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including the cutting and retaining wall at Stoneleigh Park, and the River Avon viaduct.

View north-east from the Coventry Way, PRoW footpath W168a High Medium Moderate (277.3.006) adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including materials treatment and transfer area 7, embankment earthworks and the potential ecological mitigation area.

85 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude of Level of of visual change effect to receptors visual receptors

View north-east from PRoW Coventry Way/Centenary Way long distance High High Major adverse footpath K29 (269.3.001) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including cutting, overbridge and the demolition of New Kingswood Farm, in the foreground and middle ground.

View north from PRoW footpath W164 High High Major adverse (273.3.002) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including cutting, Canley Brook realignment, Canley Brook viaduct, W164 and A429 overbridges; footpath realignment implementation of balancing pond and areas of new planting.

View north from PRoW footpath W165x (273.3.004) High High Major adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including of cutting, Canley Brook viaduct, W164 and W165x overbridges, new planting and vegetation clearance from Crackley Wood.

View north from the Coventry Way overbridge (273.3.008) High High Major adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including overbridges at Millburn Farm Grange, Coventry Kenilworth railway, A429 and Canley Brook viaduct, works and machinery associated with the extent of cutting, work compounds and realignment of the A429.

View east from PRoW footpath W165x High High Major adverse (276.3.001) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including cranes, associated with the W165x overbridge, W164 overbridge and Canley Brook viaduct, extent of cutting and planting.

View north-west from PRoW footpath W168a and the Coventry Way High High Major adverse (277.3.007, 279.3.006) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including Burton Green south porous portal, materials treatment area 7, the potential ecological mitigation areas and the earth re-profiling.

View south-west from PRoW footpath W168a, PRoW W167 High High Major adverse (280.3.001, 278.3.008) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including PRoW diversion and access to the balancing pond, earthworks, the extent of cutting and materials treatment area 7 and the cranes associated with the Burton Green South tunnel.

View south-west from PRoW M186 High High Major adverse (282.3.006) Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including realignment of the Coventry Way, retained cutting and areas of new planting.

Transport receptors

View north-east from the B4115 Medium Medium Moderate (267.4.001) adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including the new realigned road, including the earthworks associated with the embankments and cranes with the B4115 overbridge.

86 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude of Level of of visual change effect to receptors visual receptors

View south-west from the A429 Medium Medium Moderate (274.4.002) adverse Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed Scheme, including realignment of the A429 and new planting and the A429 overbridge.

View south-west from Cryfield Grange Road (274.4.005) Medium Medium Moderate Visibility of construction plant and activity associated with the Proposed adverse Scheme, including the Canley Brook viaduct and A429 overbridge and works and machinery associated with the extent of cutting.

Table 13: Significant visual effects during construction Likely residual significant effects

9.5.10 Due to the highly visible nature of the construction activities along the Proposed Scheme there would be significant residual effects, as set out in Table 12 and Table 13, although these would be temporary and reversible in nature, lasting only for the duration of the construction works. Residual effects would generally arise from the foreground visibility of construction activity and temporary construction features from residential receptors, PRoW and travellers on roads in the study area. 9.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

9.6.1 The operational assessment of impacts and mitigation measures is based on the first year of opening of the Proposed Scheme (2026). A process of iterative design and assessment has been employed to avoid or reduce adverse effects during the operation of the Proposed Scheme. Measures that have been incorporated into the design of the Proposed Scheme include: • Reinstatement of severed lengths of hedge/enclosure of fields; • Replacement of lost vegetation/woodland; • Introduction of screening through new planting where this fits into the existing landscape pattern; • Integration of embankment landforms into the natural topography; • Creation of raised earthworks on both sides of the route to screen the Proposed Scheme; and • Placement of noise barriers close to the track within cuttings – avoiding the top of the cut slope.

9.6.2 These measures have been taken account of in the assessment of the operation effects. Landscape assessment

9.6.3 The potential significant effects on the landscape in 2026 (i.e. the assumed year of opening) would arise from new engineered landforms cutting across the existing landscape including the retaining wall at Stoneleigh Park; the introduction of new bridges and viaducts and associated infrastructure including the Burton Green north porous portal and the River Avon and Finham Brook viaducts; realignments of existing transport and PRoW routes including changes to the A445, A46 and A429; alterations to watercourses including Canley Brook; loss

87 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment

of existing vegetation such as at Crackley Wood and Broadwells Wood and areas of North Wood (ancient woodland), and the introduction of high speed trains resulting in noticeable alteration to tranquillity.

9.6.4 There would be no change to the assessment during summer.

9.6.5 Table 14 summarises the LCAs that would be significantly affected by the Proposed Scheme in year one of operation (2026).

LCA Sensitivity of Magnitude of Level of LCA change effect to LCA37

Stoneleigh Parklands LCA Medium Medium Moderate Presence of the Proposed Scheme including track, bed, overhead line adverse equipment and rail traffic, vegetation removal, and the cutting betweenA445 and Stoneleigh Park, the Stoneleigh Park retaining wall, road and PRoW realignments, overbridges, and viaducts, the Crackley auto-transformer station, and the porous portal to Burton Green tunnel.

Coventry Rural Fringe LCA Medium Medium Moderate Presence of the Proposed Scheme including track, bed, overhead line adverse equipment and rail traffic, vegetation removal, property demolition at Cromwell Lane and the implementation of a linear park.

Table 14: Significant landscape effects during operation year 1 (2026) Visual assessment

9.6.6 The potential significant effects on the landscape in 2026 (i.e. the assumed year of opening) are applicable to fewer viewpoints than those considered to be affected during construction. The most apparent changes to views would be at viewpoints where the route of the Proposed Scheme is on viaduct and embankment, where the rail, infrastructure including overhead line equipment and rail traffic are visible, where vegetation is lost, and where highway diversions introduce overbridges and associated infrastructure.

9.6.7 For residential and recreational receptors, changes to views would result from changes to landform and vegetation pattern, and the introduction of built components and rail traffic. These changes would occur in the middle to foreground of several views and in longer views across the agricultural landscape. For transport, changes to views would result both from introduction of embankments and overbridges in the foreground and from new engineering elements and rail traffic of the Proposed Scheme.

9.6.8 Photomontages have been produced illustrating the view of the Proposed Scheme during operation year 1 from viewpoints 268-3-005 on PRoW W158 (maps LV-12-52), 280-3-001 on PRoW W168a (map LV-12-53) and 277-2-001 in Rye Meadow (map LV-12-54).

9.6.9 Table 15 summarises the visual receptors that would be significantly affected by the Proposed Scheme in year one of operation (2026). The numbers in brackets identify the viewpoint locations which are shown on maps LV-12-47 to LV-12-50.

37 In year one of operation, any new planting along the Proposed Scheme would be immature and therefore not help to integrate the Proposed Scheme into the landscape. As the plants mature, screening of the Proposed Scheme would improve.

88 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect of visual of change to visual receptors receptors

Residential receptors

View north-east from Leicester Lane Cottages, Stonehouse Farm High Medium Moderate (261.2.001, 263.2.003) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including the realigned A445 on embankment with new planting and overbridge, the redundant road, earthworks associated with the extent of cutting; upper section of the northern cutting and the reduction in mature vegetation.

View north-east from residential properties along Cromwell Lane High Medium Moderate (279.2.004) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including embankment and new planting associated with the diverted Coventry Way, reduction in vegetation along the Coventry Way and increased views of Black Waste Wood.

View north from Millburn Grange High Medium Moderate (271.2.002) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including the new Coventry Kenilworth railway overbridge, Milburn Grange overbridge and access track, A429 overbridge and new planting along the fence line.

View north from residential properties in Crackley Crescent High Medium Moderate (273.2.001) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including the realigned Canley Brook with associated earthworks.

View north-west from residential properties in Rye Meadow High Medium Moderate (277.2.001) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including reduction of vegetation within Broadwells Wood and along Crackley Lane and Crackley Lane overbridge.

View west from Kingswood Farmhouse High Medium Moderate (270.2.003) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including new planting within the fields and adjacent the A46; the removal of New Kingswood Farm and the fence line adjacent the extent of cutting.

View south from South Hurst Farmhouse, residential property South Hurst High Medium Moderate and Bockendon Grange adverse (278.2.001, 280.2.012) Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including new planting, earthworks, new fencing, overhead line equipment and the ceasing of usage of PRoW W167 due to it being diverted.

View south-west from residential property Four Winds High Medium Moderate (270.2.005) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including the potential ecological mitigation area, new planting, overhead line equipment, trains, the fence line adjacent the cutting and new planting.

View south-west from residential properties along Hodgett’s Lane including High Medium Moderate Burton Green Community Hall adverse (282.2.008) Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including removal of vegetation from the Coventry Way and new linear pocket park with cycle way.

View south-west from residential properties along Kenilworth Road High Medium Moderate (274.2.008) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including earthworks and realignment associated with the Canley Brook and planting.

89 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect of visual of change to visual receptors receptors

View south-west from Cryfield Grange Road High Medium Moderate (274.2.007) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including Canley Brook realignment and a small extent of the overhead line equipment and trains in cutting adjacent to the Canley Brook viaduct.

View south-west from residential properties on Hodgett’s Lane High Medium Moderate (282.2.001) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including the removal of vegetation along the Coventry Way.

View east from Dale House Farm High High Major adverse (271.2.001) Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including overhead line equipment, trains, Finham Brook viaduct, cutting and earthworks.

View east and west from Furzen Hill Cottages adjacent the A445 High Medium Moderate (262.2.004) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including planting, realigned A445 to the south-east of the receptor and overbridge, overhead line equipment, trains and earthworks and balancing pond.

View north-east from Birches Wood Farm High Medium Moderate (275.2.001) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including earthworks, new planting, fence line, W165x overbridge and reduction in vegetation from Birches Wood.

Recreational receptors

View south-west from Green Lane between Stareton and the A445, PRoW High Medium Moderate bridleway W157a adverse (264.3.003, 266.3.003) Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including the new planting, the reduction in woodland, fencing adjacent the cutting and Furzen Hill auto-transformer station.

View south-west from PRoW W158 High Medium Moderate (268.3.005) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including trains crossing the River Avon viaduct.

View south-west from PRoW footpath W168a High Medium Moderate (280.3.001) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including new surfacing associated with the track for the PRoW diversion, earthworks, fencing and the upper sections of the overhead line equipment.

View north from the Coventry Way overbridge High Medium Moderate (273.3.008) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including the realigned A429 and the upper sections of the cutting, pumping building, fence line and adjacent planting.

View north-east from the Coventry Way, PRoW footpath W168a, Coventry High Medium Moderate Way adverse (277.3.006) Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including the new planting within the potential ecological mitigation area, earthworks, fencing, trains and overhead line equipment.

View north-west from PRoW footpath W168a High Medium Moderate (277.3.007) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including the new planting within the potential ecological mitigation area, earthworks, trains and overhead line equipment.

90 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect of visual of change to visual receptors receptors

View south-west from PRoW W167 High Medium Moderate (278.3.008) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme, including the extent of cutting, fencing and new planting due to the PRoW being diverted and crossing the route.

View south-west from and PRoW M186 High Medium Moderate (282.3.006) adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including new planting in the foreground, the removal of vegetation from along the Coventry Way and its realignment in the middle ground and background views of fields and woodland at Beanit Spinney.

Transport receptors

View south-west from Cryfield Grange Road (274.4.005) Medium Medium Moderate Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including the earthworks, Crackley adverse auto‑transformer station, fencing and vegetation removal.

Table 15: Significant visual effects during operation year 1 (2026)

9.6.10 Where planting has been proposed, effects in year 15 (2041) and 60 (2086) of operation would be reduced compared to year one (2026), due to the increased height and maturity of trees. An assessment of effects for these assessment years will be prepared and presented within the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

9.6.11 Due to the highly sensitive nature of the landscape and visible nature of the Proposed Scheme, significant residual effects would remain as set out in Table 14 and Table 15 above. Residual effects would arise from the presence of large scale earthworks, road realignments and overbridges, overhead line equipment, trains and new fencing, visible from residences, users of PRoW and travellers on roads in the study area. Further mitigation

9.6.12 Further mitigation measures that could be incorporated and are under consideration include: • Additional planting south of the Proposed Scheme to aid in screening views from receptors 261.2.001, 263.2.003, and 271.2.001; • Adjustment of the A445 realignment to reduce land take and additional planting around the balancing pond; • Increased planting through Stoneleigh Park to increase visual screening; • Realignment of road and drainage pond proposals to aid landscape integration and reduce the extent of new road surface; • Refining the design of the Canley Brook diversion to better integrate with the landscape; • Additional planting to link woodlands; and • Refine mitigation areas to better integrate with the local pattern of landform and vegetation.

9.6.13 These will be discussed in the formal ES should they be incorporated into the Proposed Scheme.

91 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Socio-economics 10 Socio-economics 10.1 Introduction 10.1.1 This section provides a summary of the assessment methodology and scope, environmental baseline, and likely significant economic and employment effects during construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme.

10.1.2 The need generally for a socio-economic assessment results from the potential for the Proposed Scheme to affect: • Existing businesses and community organisations and thus the amount of local employment; • Local and sub-regional economies, including employment; and • Planned growth and development.

10.1.3 The beneficial and adverse socio-economic effects of the ProposedScheme are reported at two different levels: route-wide and CFA. Effects on levels of employment are reported at a route-wide and sub-regional level within Report 27 (Route-wide effects). Localised effects on businesses and observations on potential local economic effects are described within each CFA report. 10.2 Policy framework 10.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to the area are described in Sections 2.1. Policies of relevance to the socio-economic assessment are set out below: 10.2.2 In the specific context of this area it is noted that the ProposedScheme affects Stoneleigh Park which is classified as a “Major Developed Sites in the Green Belt” in WDLP. Development will only be permitted at Stoneleigh Park where it consists of uses related to the promotion of agriculture and associated activities, equestrianism and the well-being of the countryside and its inhabitants.

10.2.3 Stoneleigh Park accommodates the headquarters of the Royal Agricultural Society for England (RASE) and a number of other agricultural and countryside organisations, supporting 1,100 jobs. A master plan has been set out to improve on, and expand existing activities, and develop the site as a rural innovation science park, with the capacity to support an additional 1,500 jobs through development of vacant land38. 10.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 10.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the socio-economic assessment are set out in Volume 1. 10.4 Environmental baseline 10.4.1 Section 2.1 provides a general overview of the area which includes data of specific relevance to socio-economics, notably demographic data. The following provides a brief overview in terms of employment, economic structure, labour market and business premises available within the area.

38 Warwick District Council (2013); Office to Residential Permitted Development Rights – Exemption Requests: Stoneleigh Park;http://www. warwickdc.gov.uk/WDC/Planning/Planning+policy/Office+to+Residential+Permitted+Development+Rights.htm; Accessed: 28 March 2013.

92 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Socio-economics

10.4.2 The Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green CFA lies mostly within the Warwick District, although some parts of the area lie within Solihull Borough and CCC. For comparative purposes Warwick District has been used to assess the baseline characteristics.

10.4.3 In 2011 83,000 people worked in Warwick District39. The employment rate40 within the district in 2011 was 68% which is higher than that recorded for both the West Midlands (62%) and England (65%)41. As of September 2012 the unemployment rate for Warwick District area stood at 5% compared to the England average of 8%42.

10.4.4 In 2011 Warwick District area had a larger proportion (at 19%) of professional, scientific and technical services businesses than Coventry (12%), and was above both the West Midlands regional average (12%) and the English average (14%). Similarly at 7% arts, entertainment and recreation account for a greater proportion of businesses in Warwick District area than regionally at 6%. This is shown below in Figure 443.

Professional, scientific & technical

Retail

Business administration and support services

Construction

Information & communication

Arts, entertainment, recreation and other services

Accommodation & food services

Health

Production

Wholesale

Property Warwick Other West Midlands 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Figure 4: Business Sector Composition in Warwick District and the West Midlands

Source: Office for National Statistics (2011), UK Business: Activity, Size and Location44 10.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

10.5.1 No significant direct effects on non-agricultural employment have been identified within the area. Construction of the Proposed Scheme would encroach on some businesses such as at Stoneleigh Park where acquisition of land would require the demolition of one business property and the permanent loss of land which is used for overflow car parking when hosting events such as the Kenilworth Show.

39 Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2012), Business Register and Employment Survey 2011. 40 The proportion of working age (16-74 year olds) residents who are in employment. 41 ONS (2012), Census 2011. 42 ONS (2012), Annual Population Survey. 43 Figure 4 presents the proportion of businesses within each business sector in the district/borough but not the proportion of employment by sector. 44 ’Other’ includes Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing; Motor Trades; Transport and Storage; Finance and Insurance; Public Administration and Defence; and Education sectors.

93 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Socio-economics

10.5.2 It is estimated the Proposed Scheme would result in the displacement or possible loss of around 30 jobs45 within this area. Taking into account the availability of alternative premises and the relatively healthy local economy, the displacement or possible loss of jobs is considered to be relatively modest compared to the scale of economic activity and opportunity in the area.

10.5.3 Construction compounds would consist of one main site off the Coventry Road and 20 satellite sites (See Table 1). This could result in the creation of 1,690 person years of construction employment46 that, depending on skill levels required and the skills of local people, are potentially accessible to residents in the locality and to others living further afield. It could also lead to opportunities for local businesses to supply the project or to benefit from expenditure of construction workers. Direct and wider construction employment effects are quantified at a route-wide level (see Report 27 Route-wide effects).

10.5.4 It is intended that discretionary enhancement measures, such as business support, supply chain engagement and local construction skills development initiatives to enhance local business performance will be included as appropriate in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

10.5.5 The likely residual significant socio-economic effects are currently being assessed and will be reported in the formal ES. 10.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

10.6.1 The Proposed Scheme would create direct and wider operational employment opportunities at locations along the route including stations, train crew facilities and infrastructure/ maintenance depots. Although no plans exist to locate these facilities within this area, it is considered possible that wider operational employment opportunities could be accessed by residents of the area. Operational effects are captured and assessed at a route-wide level (see Report 27 (route-wide effects)). Likely residual significant effects

10.6.2 The likely residual significant socio-economic effects are currently being assessed and will be reported in the formal ES.

45 Employment within businesses has been estimated through a combination of sources – for example, surveys of businesses, the Experian employment dataset, employment floor space and the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) Employment Density Guide (2010). The estimate is calculated using standard employment density ratios and estimates of floor areas and may vary significantly from actual employment at the sites. 46 Construction labour is reported in construction person years, where one construction person year represents the work done by one person in a year composed of a standard number of working days.

94 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Sound, noise and vibration 11 Sound, noise and vibration 11.1 Introduction 11.1.1 This chapter provides a summary of the likely noise and vibration significant effects associated with the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme for the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth & Burton Green CFA. This chapter should be read in conjunction with Volume 1. 11.2 Policy framework 11.2.1 The policy framework for sound, noise and vibration is set out in Volume 1. 11.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 11.3.1 The approach to the assessment of sound, noise and vibration and the related key assumptions are set out in Volume 1, with local variations as described below. A summary of the operating assumptions is given in section 2.4 of this report. Assumptions

11.3.2 There are no local assumptions additional to those given in Volume 1 and section 2.4 of this report. 11.4 Environmental baseline 11.4.1 The baseline sound environment for this area is significantly influenced by the major roads passing through it. The A46 is located within cutting through a significant part of this area and sound from this road does not affect locations at a great distance.Overflying aircraft from Birmingham International Airport also contribute to the existing sound levels as do occasional trains using the Coventry to Leamington Spa rail line.

11.4.2 It is likely that the majority of receptors adjacent to the line of route are not currently subject to appreciable vibration. Baseline monitoring to be undertaken for the formal ES will confirm as necessary whether this is the case for receptors close to existing railways. For the draft ES, vibration at all receptors has been assessed using the absolute vibration criteria as described in Volume 1. 11.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

11.5.1 This initial assessment has considered the potential effects on community receptors within the study area, their occupants and their use (including annoyance and activity disturbance) arising from construction noise and/or vibration.

11.5.2 The mitigation measures specified within the draft CoCP have been included within the assessment of construction noise and vibration.

11.5.3 Potential construction noise or vibration effects could occur on the receptors closest to the construction areas in the following communities: • Burton Green – arising from construction activities such as green tunnel construction and line of route activities, including site clearance, earthworks and track base installation (refer to Section 2.2/2.3 and to maps CT‑05: Construction features);

95 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Sound, noise and vibration

• Crackley – arising from construction activities such as line of route activities including site clearance, earthworks and track base installation (refer to Section 2.2/2.3 and to maps CT‑05: Construction features); • Gibbet Hill – arising from construction activities such as line of route activities including site clearance, earthworks and track base installation (refer to Section 2.2/2.3 and to maps CT‑05: Construction features); and • Stoneleigh – arising from construction activities such as line of route activities including site clearance, earthworks and track base installation (refer to Section 2.2/2.3 of this Community Forum Report and to maps CT‑05: Construction features).

11.5.4 Track laying, power system and signalling installation works along the line of route are unlikely to result in significant construction noise effects, given the short duration close to any communities and the presence of the permanent noise barriers. Likely residual significant effects

11.5.5 Further work is being undertaken to confirm significant construction noise and vibration effects, including any temporary effects from construction traffic. Non-residential receptors identified at this stage as potentially subject to construction noise or vibration effects will be further considered, where necessary, on a receptor-by-receptor basis. Any further assessment will be reported in the formal ES. Further mitigation

11.5.6 Further work is being undertaken to confirm the likely significant effects and identify any site‑specific mitigation considered necessary in addition to the general measures set out in the draft CoCP. Any site-specific mitigation will be presented in the formal ES and will include an estimate of the number of properties that may qualify for noise insulation or temporary re‑housing under provisions set out in the draft CoCP. 11.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

11.6.1 This initial assessment has considered the potential effects on community receptors within the study area, their occupants and their use (including annoyance, activity and sleep disturbance) arising from operational noise and/or vibration. Further assessment will be undertaken for the formal ES.

11.6.2 The ongoing development of the Proposed Scheme includes noise barriers in the form of landscape earthworks, noise (fence) barriers and/or low level barriers on viaducts. The envisaged noise barrier locations are shown on the Operational Sound Contour and Potential Significant Effect Maps SV-01.

11.6.3 The Operational Sound Contour and Potential Significant Effect Maps SV-01 indicate the likely long term daytime sound level (defined as the equivalent continuous sound level from 07:00 to

23:00 or LpAeq,day) from HS2 operations alone. The contours are shown in 5dB steps from 50dB to 70dB. With the train flows described in Volume 1, the night-time sound level (defined as the

equivalent continuous sound level from 23:00 to 07:00 or LpAeq,night) from the Proposed Scheme would be approximately 10dB lower than the daytime sound level. The 50dB contour therefore indicates the distance from the Proposed Scheme at which the night-time sound level would be 40dB. This contour represents where the lowest observed community noise effects would be expected to occur during the day (with respect to annoyance) and night (with respect to sleep disturbance). It is generally unlikely that there will be any adverse noise effects outside

96 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Sound, noise and vibration

of this contour. With regard to sleep disturbance the assessment has also taken account the maximum sound levels generated by each train pass by.

11.6.4 Residential receptors within the daytime 65dB contour, and therefore the night-time 55dB contour, have been identified as being likely to experience a significant adverse effect from HS2 noise alone. This is in line with the daytime threshold for in the Noise Insulation Regulations 199647 and the interim target defined in the World Health Organization’s Night Noise Guidelines48.

11.6.5 The potential for significant noise effects on communities in areas between the0dB 5 and 65dB daytime sound contours, or 40dB and 55dB night-time contours, will be dependent on the baseline in that area and the change in sound level brought about by the Proposed Scheme.

11.6.6 For the draft ES, the criteria used in assessing whether an effect is potentially significant includes factors such as the number and magnitude of impacts in a community as well as the existing sound environment. The further significance criteria set out in Volume 1, including the character of the existing sound environment, any unique features of the Proposed Scheme’s sound or impacts, and the potential combined impacts of sound and vibration will be taken into account in the formal ES.

11.6.7 This initial assessment has identified potential airborne noise effects on the following non- residential receptors and land uses (e.g. schools, hospitals, hotels): • Stoneleigh Park (identified by SV18-No1 on maps SV-01).

11.6.8 Rights of way are by their nature transitory routes, with users not staying in any one location for long periods. Train sound from the Proposed Scheme is intermittent and its level will vary as the right of way moves closer to and further from the Proposed Scheme. Noise effects would generally be reduced by the landscape earthworks envisaged to reduce visual impact of the scheme and envisaged noise mitigation to protect other receptors. No significant noise effects have therefore been identified on public rights of way within this area.

11.6.9 A number of potential minor ground-borne noise and vibration impacts have been forecast at a small number of properties very close to the alignment/tunnels. Taking account of the number and minor magnitude of the impacts, and the experience of HS1, no significant effects have been identified. Further assessment will be undertaken for the formal ES to confirm whether the impacts currently forecast are likely to occur. Vibration from the operation of the Proposed Scheme will present no risk of any building damage.

11.6.10 No potentially significant noise or vibration effects arising from changes to existing roads are anticipated at this stage. This will be confirmed in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

11.6.11 The envisaged mitigation (especially landscape earthworks and noise barriers) described in this chapter substantially reduces the potential airborne sound impacts and noise effects that would otherwise arise from the Proposed Scheme. Nonetheless, potential significant adverse airborne noise effects have been identified for residential receptors in the following communities: • The eastern side of Stoneleigh Park in the general vicinity of East Gate (identified by SV18-C01 on maps SV-01);

47 Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996. London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 48 World Health Organization (2009), Night Noise Guidelines for Europe.

97 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Sound, noise and vibration

• The eastern edge of Crackley in the general vicinity of Highland Road (identified by SV18-C02 on maps SV-01); • The western edge of Burton Green in the general vicinity of Cromwell Lane and Red Lane (identified by SV18-C03 on maps SV-01); • Beechwood in the general vicinity of Waste Lane and Hodgetts Lane (identified by SV18-C04 on maps SV-01); and • Approximately five individual receptors in the vicinity of Stoneleigh Park and South Hurst Farm that are closest to the Proposed Scheme (identified by SV18-D01 and Sv18-D02 on maps SV-01). At these receptors, the forecast noise from long term railway operation may exceed the daytime threshold set by the Noise Insulation Regulations 1996 and the night- time Interim Target identified in the World Health Organization Guidelines.

11.6.12 Further assessment work is being undertaken to confirm operational sound and vibration significant effects, especially those at non-residential receptors and quiet areas (as necessary on a receptor-by-receptor basis). This will be reported in the formal ES which will present baseline levels, forecasts for the Proposed Scheme and the change in sound levels brought about by the Proposed Scheme both as impact plans and tables. Vibration from the operation of the Proposed Scheme will present no risk of any building damage. Further mitigation

11.6.13 Improvements in the performance of mitigation that may further reduce or avoid the potential significant airborne noise effects are being considered for the formal ES.otential P options are included in Table 16.

Potential significant effect Further mitigation option

Stoneleigh Park (SV18-C01) Mitigation options to be developed with the site developer

Crackley (SV18-C02) Increase the mitigation to 4m/5m noise (fence) barrier or equivalent, for example by landscape earthworks or combination of barrier and earthworks

Burton Green (SV18-C03) Move green tunnel further south. Increase the mitigation to 4m/5m noise (fence) barrier or equivalent around the tunnel southern portal, for example by landscape earthworks or combination of barrier and earthworks

Beechwood (Sv18-C04) Increase the mitigation to 4m/5m noise (fence) barrier or equivalent, for example by landscape earthworks or combination of barrier and earthworks

Table 16: Options for further mitigation

11.6.14 The suggested further mitigation options would reduce or avoid the potential significant airborne noise effect at these locations.

11.6.15 Noise insulation would be offered following the principles of the Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996 where, taking account of the mitigation incorporated into the Proposed Scheme, the long-term operational noise level

exceeds 68dBLpAeq,18 hour. It is estimated that five dwellings – marked as SV18-D01 and SV18-D02 on Maps SV-01 – would potentially experience noise levels higher than the insulation trigger level.

98 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Traffic and transport 12 Traffic and transport 12.1 Introduction 12.1.1 This traffic and transport section describes the likely impacts and effects arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme within the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area on all forms of transport. 12.2 Policy framework 12.2.1 WCC’s49 Passenger Rail Strategy vision is to have “an affordable, accessible, safe, convenient, environmentally friendly and integrated network of rail services, capable of attracting an increasing market share for rail thereby contributing to the achievement of the objectives in Warwickshire’s Local Transport Plan 2011”.

12.2.2 WCC’s Policy PTPR4: Rail network capacity and infrastructure improvements, states: ”The County Council will encourage the provision of improvements to the capacity of the infrastructure of the rail network to increase capacity to enable improved performance and to provide additional services and stations.”

12.2.3 Chapter 5, Paragraph SC3 of WDLP: Supporting Public Transport Interchanges, outlines that a “development will not be permitted which would have an unacceptable adverse impact upon public transport interchanges”. However, a “development of public transport interchanges will be permitted provided the benefits in terms of encouraging public transport outweigh any adverse impacts”. 12.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 12.3.1 The scope and methodology of the traffic and transport assessment are set out inVolume 1.

12.3.2 It should be noted that the transport and passenger modelling of HS2 is continuing to be developed and therefore the assessment will be updated for the formal ES.

12.3.3 The impact of construction traffic has been assessed on the assumption that all excavated material from the worksites would be removed by road, although investigation will continue to establish the possibility of movement by rail. The construction traffic assessment will be updated for the formal ES.

12.3.4 There have been certain scheme design changes following the initial transport assessment work. The assessment that follows in this section will therefore change once the revised scheme has been assessed and this will be reported in the formal ES. These include: • Potentially revised satellite compound locations; and • Potentially revised construction routes.

12.3.5 The scope of this assessment has been discussed and agreed with the relevant highway authority and discussions are ongoing.

12.3.6 The current baseline forecast traffic flows for the future years of assessment have been derived using Department for Transport’s (DfT’s) traffic forecasting tool, Trip End Model Presentation Program (TEMPRO). The current traffic forecasts take account of traffic generation likely to arise from planned and committed developments in the area. Where necessary the assessment has been supported by local traffic modelling.

49 Warwickshire County Council (2011), Warwickshire Local Transport Plan 2011 – 2026.

99 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Traffic and transport

12.3.7 Future assessment work to be undertaken includes committed developments over and above those included within TEMPRO.

12.3.8 TEMPRO growth rates have been obtained for each area specific to the location of a junction under consideration. These have each been considered individually due to the limited interaction they have with each other.

12.3.9 Although future transport baseline scenario assessments have been made, as of yet no assessments of the future baseline with the Proposed Scheme have been undertaken. Therefore, analyses of junction impacts during construction are not yet known. These will be assessed in the formal ES.

12.3.10 The following key limitations exist in the reporting of significant effects: • As yet only limited assessment has been made of the impacts on public transport, although at this stage it is not expected that demand generated by the operation of the Proposed Scheme would be sufficient to have a significant impact on existing public transport services in the area; and • The following Volume 1 criteria for construction and operational scenarios have not yet been assessed at this stage: ȃȃ Public transport delay; ȃȃ Traffic flows and delays to vehicle occupants; and ȃȃ Vulnerable road user delays, amenity and ambience.

12.3.11 Future year traffic flows are based on an approach that does not etak account of wider effects, e.g. redistribution and reassignment of traffic, modal shift and peak spreading.As a consequence, local transport effects may be over-estimated.

12.3.12 The assessment is based on the Proposed Scheme construction and operation assumptions, as shown in Figure 3, with the following exceptions: • The current forecast construction traffic flows, temporary diversions, traffic management arrangements and phasing of construction interventions are indicative. They will be subject to revision and update. Further revisions to this would inform the formal ES; • Construction traffic volumes, assumptions for truck capacities and periods of movement of excavated materials, construction materials and staff numbers are indicative and will be subject to revision and update in the formal ES; and • The assessment assumes that construction traffic for the main site compound would follow the route of Coventry Road Compound as described in section 2.3.

12.3.13 Engineering and construction details associated with required service diversion works have still to be confirmed, and will be assessed in the formal ES. 12.4 Environmental baseline 12.4.1 Comprehensive traffic surveys were undertaken between 18 June 2012 and 12 July 2012 and additional sites were surveyed in November 2012. Traffic flow data have been collected through manual classified counts, automatic traffic counts and queue length surveys.

12.4.2 There are no motorways which intersect with the route in the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area; however the following three A-roads would intersect. The A445 (Leicester Lane) would intersect with the route to the north of the Kenilworth Road/Westhill Road junction and the A445, north of Cubbington. The A46 would intersect to the south-west of the Stoneleigh Road/A46 junction, to the east of Kenilworth Golf Club. The A429 (Coventry Road)

100 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Traffic and transport

would intersect with the route between the Stoneleigh Road/A429 and Common Lane/A429 junctions, to the north-east of Kenilworth.

12.4.3 None of the relevant roads that would be affected by the Proposed Scheme currently experience any noteworthy demand for on-street parking and/or loading.

12.4.4 Bus services currently operating along the A46, A429 Kenilworth Road, B4101 Waste Lane, B4115, Cromwell Lane and Dalehouse Lane are in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme.

12.4.5 The route would cross the existing rail services between Coventry and Leamington Spa, operated by CrossCountry. This service runs with an average off peak frequency of one service per hour and a total of 17 services per day.

12.4.6 All PRoW which would be intersected by the route have been surveyed in August and September 2012, taking account of the nature of the PRoW and their levels of utilisation. As appropriate, these covered weekday and weekend use. A total of 26 PRoW have been identified consisting of public footpaths, bridleways and cycleways.The surveys indicate that none of the roads, footpaths, bridleways and cycleways that would cross the route, are used by more than 200 people per day walking, cycling or riding.

12.4.7 Accident data have been obtained from WCC, for a three-year period until 7 June 2012. Analysis shows that there were a total of 20 accidents over the three year period, of which 19 (95%) were recorded as slight, one (5%) as serious and no fatal accidents were recorded; the maximum number occurring on the B4113 Stoneleigh Road, with seven during the three year period.

12.4.8 There are four waterways situated within the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area; River Avon, River Sowe, Finham Brook and Canley Brook. River Avon and Finham Brook would intersect with the Proposed Scheme. The impact on the usage of the waterways has not yet been assessed; this will be included in the formal ES.

12.4.9 The future baseline traffic volumes have been calculated by applying growth factors derived from TEMPRO for the future years of 2021, 2026 and 2041. The factors have been derived for the individual road types and relevant wards. No other changes to the traffic and transport baseline are anticipated in the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area.

12.4.10 The roads which would intersect with the route operate with sufficient spare capacity to accommodate additional traffic generated by the Proposed Scheme’s construction traffic. The maximum traffic flow has been identified on the B4113 Stoneleigh Road northbound with a one way flow of approximately 750 vehicle movements during the morning peak hour (08:00-09:00). The maximum traffic flow in the evening peak (17:00-18:00) was approximately 550 vehicle movements on the B4113 southbound.

12.4.11 The following 14 junctions have been assessed in terms of their capacity50 for 2021, 2026 and 2041 baseline scenarios; these junctions are either close to the alignment of the Proposed Scheme or are likely to be affected by the Proposed Scheme either by alignment or as a result of changes to traffic volumes: • B4101 Waste Lane/Hodgett’s Lane; • B4101 Kelsey Lane/Windmill Lane; • Cromwell Lane/Hodgett’s Lane; • A46/Warwick By-Pass/A452;

50 A junction operates with spare capacity when traffic demand is below the maximum volume of traffic this junction can accommodate at any one time. A junction operates at capacity when traffic demand is equal to the maximum volume of traffic this junction can accommodate at any one time before congestion is likely to occur. A junction operates over capacity when traffic demand exceeds the maximum volume of traffic this junction can accommodate at any point and thus congestion is likely to occur.

101 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Traffic and transport

• A46 Warwick By-Pass/Warwick Road/Coventry Road; • A46/Birmingham Road; • A45/A46/London Road; • A45/A452 Kenilworth Road; • Spencer’s Lane/Coventry Road/Lavender Hall Lane/Meriden Road; • Meriden Lane/Back Lane/Berkswell Road/Cornets End Lane; • Cornets End Lane/B4102/A452; • A445/Heemstede Lane/Clarendon Street; • A429 Stratford Road/Princes Close/Edgehill Lane; and • A452 Kenilworth Road/B4113 Stoneleigh Road/ Lane.

12.4.12 The following list shows the junctions that would operate over capacity in the morning and in the evening peak hour in the 2041 baseline scenario: • Morning peak hour: ȃȃ Cromwell Lane/Hodgett’s Lane; ȃȃ A46/Warwick By-Pass/A452; ȃȃ A46/Birmingham Road; ȃȃ A45/A46/London Road; ȃȃ A45/A452 Kenilworth Road; ȃȃ A445/Heemstede Lane/Clarendon Street; and ȃȃ A452 Kenilworth Road/B4113 Stoneleigh Road/Old Milverton Lane; • Evening peak hour: ȃȃ B4101 Waste Lane/Hodgett’s Lane; ȃȃ 46/Warwick By-Pass/A452; ȃȃ A46/Birmingham Road; ȃȃ A45/A46/London Road; ȃȃ A45/A452 Kenilworth Road; ȃȃ Cornets End Lane/B4102/A452; and ȃȃ A452 Kenilworth Road/B4113 Stoneleigh Road/Old Milverton Lane.

12.4.13 All other junctions tested in this area, would operate with spare, or at, capacity.

12.4.14 A number of additional junctions along the construction route between the A46 and M40 via the A425 will be assessed for existing, baseline and baseline with construction scenarios. 12.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

12.5.1 The following section considers the impacts on traffic and transport and the consequential effects resulting from construction of the Proposed Scheme. It is assumed that the measures outlined in the draft CoCP are implemented in order to avoid or reduce impacts on travellers.

102 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Traffic and transport

12.5.2 Table 17 shows the number of compounds and satellite compounds in the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area and their associated number of workers, average duration of use and trip generation.

Number of Number of Average Likely vehicular compounds workers duration (year) two-way peak hour trips

Small satellite compound 8 480 1 500

Medium satellite compound 10 240 1.5 220

Large satellite compound 2 780 2.5 710

Main site compound 1 220 5 560

Total 21 1,720 1,990

Table 17: Construction site compounds and workforce numbers, average duration of use and peak hour trips51

12.5.3 It has been assumed that during the compounds’ peak time of operation, one-third of satellite compounds would also be in operation at their peak at the same time.

12.5.4 Assessment has not yet taken any detailed phasing implications or capacity assessments at individual junctions into account, as the construction strategy is still developing. These will be assessed in the formal ES.

12.5.5 Temporary road closures and diversions would be required; as shown on plans CT‑05-093 to CT‑05-100, to tie-in new highway diversions of the Proposed Scheme with the existing highways: • A445 Leicester Lane (half day/overnight closures); • Stareton Road (temporary diversion); • B4113 Stoneleigh Road (half day/overnight closures); • B4115 Coventry Road (half day/overnight closures); • A46 (online diversion, traffic management to avoid closures); • Dalehouse Lane (online diversion, potentially closed for 12 months); • A429 Kenilworth Road (half day/overnight closures); • Crackley Lane (half day/overnight closures); and • Cromwell Lane (options under consideration, more detail in formal ES).

12.5.6 Due to the temporary nature and very short nature of most of these diversions, they are deemed not to be significant. More detail will be provided in the formal ES regarding Dalehouse Lane, the B4101 Waste Lane and Cromwell Lane.

12.5.7 In addition to the temporary closures and diversions above it is proposed to close the B4101 Waste Lane.

12.5.8 A number of access points to the construction sites would be required, therefore the construction vehicle movements would be spread over a number of roads. Access points are shown on maps CT‑05-093 to CT‑05-100 and will be reported in the formal ES.

12.5.9 The general principle that has been adopted in this area is that replacement road bridges and underbridges across the route would be constructed early in the programme prior to construction of the haul road along the route to avoid conflict between construction traffic

51 Construction traffic volumes, assumptions for truck capacities and periods of movement of excavated materials, construction materials and staff numbers are indicative and will be subject to revision and update in the formal ES.

103 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Traffic and transport

travelling along the haul road and traffic on public highways. It is also assumed that the majority of excavated material would be reused within the Proposed Scheme.

12.5.10 Transport related impacts of the Proposed Scheme during construction would arise from traffic generated by construction activities as well as temporary diversions of roads and PRoW.

12.5.11 Construction vehicle movements related to the building of the Proposed Scheme have been calculated based on the quantity of materials required to construct the Proposed Scheme with a plus 10% allowance for ancillary delivery vehicles.

12.5.12 The average levels of traffic generated by construction activities at the main site compound throughout the construction period would be approximately 550 (total two-way flow) vehicles per day. However in the first three years of construction, traffic levels could be up to 20% higher than this, on two or three days a week. The split of construction vehicles is expected to be on average 65% HGVs and 35% light goods vehicles (LGV), however this excludes workforce arrival/departure trips, and when related to the overall traffic flows, the percentage split of HGVs in these flows during the morning and evening peaks would therefore be lower.

12.5.13 The CoCP would seek to maximise consolidation of construction materials and equipment thus minimising construction lorry trip generation and minimising deliveries of construction materials and equipment during peak traffic periods. The levels of traffic and the access arrangements, together with the controls imposed by the CoCP means that construction traffic would not be expected to have a significant impact on trafficvels le on roads around the construction site.

12.5.14 The measures in the CoCP would include HGV management and control measures. A construction workforce travel plan would be put into operation with the aim of reducing workforce commuting by private car, especially sole occupancy car travel. The combined effect of the CoCP and the construction workforce travel plan is anticipated to reduce construction traffic generation by a minimum of 7% overall and 15% during the peak periods.

12.5.15 A total of 12 PRoW would either be diverted or temporarily closed during the construction period (subject to consultation with Local Authority). The numbers of users have been identified during surveys undertaken in August and September 2012 as mentioned in paragraph 12.4.6. Of the 12 PRoW, seven have been identified with user numbers below 10 per day. The remaining five which are used more frequently are detailed below: • K29 – Link Parallel to Dalehouse Lane with two pedestrian and 86 cycle users; • W164 – Link from Cryfield Grange Road South Bound (Connect to Kenilworth) with 115 pedestrian, one disabled and 40 cycle users; • W165x – Link from Cryfield Grange Road South Bound (Opposite Birches Wood Farm) with 124 pedestrian and 74 cycle users; • W168 – West of Broadwells Wood with 18 pedestrian and 16 cycle users; and • M184 – B4101 Waste Lane with 11 pedestrian, four equestrian and 134 cycle users.

12.5.16 The length of the diversions would be kept to a minimum where practicable. The impact of all diversions is considered to be not significant or of minor significance because of the few people that would be affected (less than 200 people per day per PRoW).

12.5.17 Bus services which would be subject to temporary diversion include the following: • Bus route 548 on the B4115 Coventry Road; • Bus routes U12, 12, U2, 16, U17 and X17 on the A429 Kenilworth Road; • Bus routes 498 and 538 on the B4101 Waste Lane;

104 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Traffic and transport

• Bus routes X18, X15 and U15 on the A46; • Bus routes X17, U17 and 539 on Dalehouse Lane; and • Bus route 87 on Cromwell Lane.

12.5.18 Details of bus diversion distances and durations will be included in the formal ES.

12.5.19 No other significant transport related impacts arising from the construction of the Proposed Scheme have been identified. Likely residual significant effects

12.5.20 Construction of the Proposed Scheme is anticipated to result in significant increases in traffic flows (i.e. more than 30% for HGV or all vehicles) on some roads and junctions as a result of temporary closures/diversions. The following list details those with a temporary increase in HGV or all vehicles of 30% or above in the morning peak hour and their significance: • 30% HGV increase: ȃȃ A46 Warwick By-Pass/Warwick Road/Coventry Road junction (not significant); ȃȃ Hodgett’s Lane/Waste Lane junction (not significant); ȃȃ Hodgett’s Lane/Truggist Lane/Spencer’s Lane junction (minor effect); ȃȃ Meriden Lane/Back Lane/Berkswell Road/Cornets End Lane junction (not significant); and ȃȃ Cornets End Lane/Marsh Lane junction (minor effect).

• 30% increase in all vehicles: ȃȃ Hodgett’s Lane/Truggist Lane/Spencer’s Lane junction (minor effect); and ȃȃ Cornets End Lane/Marsh Lane junction (minor effect).

12.5.21 The effect of increased traffic on congestion and delay at the junctions mentioned would not be significant, as they are all currently forecast to have sufficient capacity to accommodate additional traffic flows.

12.5.22 Since in the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green area no roads or junctions have been identified which experienced a significant amount of accidents (defined as nine and above in a three-year period ending in 2011/12) it is not expected that the increase in traffic flows on major roads and through certain junctions is likely to increase accident risk.

12.5.23 It is unknown at present whether the Proposed Scheme would cause a reduction in the frequency of existing rail services due to shifts in patronage.

12.5.24 Resultant residual effects are to be confirmed upon assessment of the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures and will be reported in the formal ES. 12.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

12.6.1 The assessments undertaken at this stage have indicated that for this area there would be no significant transport-related impacts during operation of the Proposed Scheme that require mitigation. This is due to there being no stations or depots within this area and therefore trips generated by the Proposed Scheme are not deemed to be significant.

105 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Traffic and transport

12.6.2 However, the only exception to this, which has yet to be tested, is the additional traffic likely to be generated by the proposed Birmingham Interchange. This is discussed in further detail in the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood (CFA24) report.

12.6.3 PRoW diversions as detailed below are not deemed to be significant as the maximum number of people affected is no more than 200 per day per PRoW: • National Agricultural Centre South (W171) – minor effect; • Link Parallel to Dalehouse Lane (K29) – not significant; • Link from Cryfield Grange Road South Bound (Connect2 Kenilworth) (W164) – minor effect; • Link from Cryfield Grange Road South Bound (Opposite Birches Wood Farm) (W165x) – minor effect; • Link from Blind Lane next to Meadow Bank (W167) – minor effect; • West of Broadwells Wood (W168) – not significant; • Link from Red Lane North Bound (W169) – minor effect; • Link between Hodgett’s Lane and Hob Lane (M182) – not significant; • Nearby the Substation on Hodgetts Lane (M187) – minor effect; • South of Waste Lane (M186) – not significant; • B4101 (M184) – not significant; and • Beachwood, North of Waste Lane (M198) – minor effect. Likely residual significant effects

12.6.4 There are not considered to be any significant residual effects associated with the operation of the Proposed Scheme.

106 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Water resources and flood risk assessment 13 Water resources and flood risk assessment 13.1 Introduction 13.1.1 This section provides a summary of the likely impacts and significant effects on water resources and flood risk as a result of the construction and operation of the ProposedScheme. The assessment considers effects on surface water resources, groundwater resources and flood risk. 13.2 Policy framework 13.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to this area are described in Section 2.1. Policies of relevance to water resources and flood risk assessment are set out below.

13.2.2 There are no specific policies regarding surface water, groundwater or flood risk within the Warwickshire Structure Plan.

13.2.3 The WDLP contains two relevant policies: • Policy DP11 (Drainage) promotes the use of sustainable drainage systems in new development as a means of controlling flood risk; and • Policy DP9 (Pollution) restricts permission for new developments if unsuitable levels of pollution are produced, thus contributing to safeguarding of surface water quality.

13.2.4 The emerging WDLP Preferred Options maintain the general policy approach of the development plan in respect of flood risk and pollution control. PO18 (Flooding and Water) proposes a strengthening of controls on flood risk management, linked to the NPPF approach of avoiding new development in areas at risk of flooding. PO12 (Climate Change) sets out the intention to produce a policy on climate change adaptation to require that new development is designed to be resilient to future impacts of climate change, including flood risk.

13.2.5 The SUDP includes four policies of relevance to water resources: Policy ENV17 (Water Protection) seeks to safeguard the quality of surface and groundwater; Policy ENV20 promotes water conservation, including during large scale construction activities; Policy ENV21 sets out measures to avoid siting new development in floodplains and to manage flood risk; and Policy R6 recognises the recreational value of waterways.

13.2.6 The emerging SMBC Local Plan retains the policy themes of the SUDP. Policy P11: Water Management seeks to restrict development in areas of flood risk, promoting the sequential approach to the siting of development; and also requires developers to undertake thorough risk assessments of the impacts of proposals on surface and groundwater systems and encourages the use of sustainable drainage.

13.2.7 There are no policies in the City of Coventry UDP that directly relate to water resources or flood risk. General policies relating to environmental protection indicate that development with the potential to harm the quality of nature conservation assets would not be permitted (Policies GE1 and GE11).

13.2.8 The emerging City of Coventry Core Strategy introduces new policy themes relating to sustainability; climate change adaptation (EM4); flood risk management (EM7); the promotion of the use of sustainable drainage (EM8); protection of ecological networks (EM5); and increased water efficiency (EM6).

107 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

13.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 13.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the water resources and flood risk assessment are set out in Volume 1. The study area for water is 1km either side of the route although some water features extending beyond this have been considered.

13.3.2 The assessment of surface water resources and flood risk focuses on the RiverAvon, Finham Brook, the Canley Brook and their associated catchment areas and floodplains.

13.3.3 The groundwater resources assessment focuses on the resources that are present within bedrock and overlying deposits located within 1km of the Proposed Scheme. This is referred to as the study area. Effects on groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems GWDTEs)( and groundwater users (both licensed abstractions and private users) are also considered. 13.4 Environmental baseline 13.4.1 The topography within the study area ranges from approximately 60m above sea level near Stoneleigh Park to approximately 120m above sea level at Burton Green. The elevation increases gently as the route moves northwards, with lower elevations of around 70m above sea level in the valleys of the River Avon and Finham Brook.

13.4.2 The route is intersected by watercourses six times within the study area including the River Avon, Finham Brook and the Canley Brook (and tributaries).

13.4.3 All the watercourses are classified as being of moderate status under theWater Framework Directive (WFD)52, apart from the River Avon which is currently classified as poor. All these watercourses have an overall objective of good under the WFD, indicating they need to reach good status by 2027. There are a further 67 water features within the study area.

13.4.4 The Environment Agency has indicated that there are nine licensed surface water abstractions and 30 consented discharges within the study area. The majority of abstractions are for agricultural purposes, and the majority of discharges are sewage discharges.

13.4.5 The underlying bedrock along the route comprises, in order of increasing age which approximately equates to a north to south progression, dolomitic siltstone of the Mercia Mudstone Group (Triassic age), thin mudstones and sandstones of the Bromsgrove Sandstone Formation, interbedded bands of the sandstone and mudstone of the Permian Kenilworth Sandstone Group, mudstones and sandstones of the Early Permian Ashow Formation and mudstones and sandstones from the Tile Hill Mudstone Formation.

13.4.6 Superficial deposits are primarily confined to alluvial and river terrace sands and gravel deposits of the valleys.

13.4.7 The majority of the bedrock underlying and within the study area is classified as a Principal Aquifer indicating a high level of water storage and an ability to transmit water to be able to provide a substantial water supply. The two Principal Aquifers within the area are classed as being of poor status under the WFD. There is a Secondary Aquifer located within the Mercia Mudstone; this is classed as being of poor status.

13.4.8 There are two Secondary Aquifers located within the superficial deposits, again both are classed as being of poor status.

13.4.9 The majority of the route in this area lies within the Warwickshire Avon Coal Measures WFD groundwater body (Kenilworth Groundwater Monitoring Unit (GWMU)); only a small portion to the south-east lies within the Warwickshire Avon confined sandstone.

52 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. Strasbourg, European Parliament and European Council.

108 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

13.4.10 The Environment Agency has indicated that there are four licensed groundwater abstractions within the study area. No information on unlicensed potable supplies has yet been received. There are three existing discharges to groundwater within the study area, all sewage discharges. Twenty springs, sinks and wells have been identified within the study area.

13.4.11 British Geological Survey mapping of groundwater flood risk indicates groundwater flood risk varies from low (north of Cubbington to Stareton) to high (around the River Avon and Finham Brook). The Warwickshire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) and the Warwickshire County Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA) report that are no known major problems with flooding from groundwater53,54. This suggests there is a low risk of groundwater flooding throughout the area. The overall importance of groundwater flood risk within the study area has been assessed as medium.

13.4.12 The route within the study area lies in the Coventry Cluster sub area of the River Severn Catchment Flood Management Plan (CFMP). Throughout this sub area there is a relatively high proportion of land at risk of fluvial flooding, as it lies within flood zone 3 and is at risk of flooding from a 1 in 100 annual probability (1%) of flooding event. The route intersects with the floodplain of the River Avon (flood zone 3), the Finham Brook, and the Canley Brook in seven locations. The policy for this sub-area indicates further action will be taken to reduce the risk where the existing flood risk is high55.

13.4.13 The Environment Agency Flood Map for Surface Water (flood maps) suggests that a majority of the route within the study area is susceptible to flooding from surface water. The most vulnerable areas that are shown to be at risk of flooding to a depth greater than 10cm in the 1 in 200 annual probability (0.5%) of flooding event are: • North of Cubbington; • River Avon north of Stoneleigh; • Finham Brook, east of Kenilworth; • South Hurst Farm; and • North-west of Burton Green.

13.4.14 The route crosses the sewer network at several locations within this area. However due to the nature of the closed sewer system, the risk of flooding from this source is generally considered low.

13.4.15 There are no designated sites of international, European or national nature conservation importance within the study area. There are a number of locally designated sites; these are listed within Section 7. 13.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

13.5.1 The draft CoCP sets out the measures and standards of work that will be applied to the construction of the Proposed Scheme. It would provide effective management and control of the impacts during the construction period including those required for utility diversions, strengthening and tunnelling.

53 Warwickshire County Council (2006), Strategic Flood Risk Assessment. 54 Warwickshire County Council (2011), Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment. 55 Environment Agency (2010), River Severn Catchment Flood Management Plan Summary report.

109 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

13.5.2 The draft CoCP includes the following provisions: • Implementing, in consultation with the Environment Agency, a surface water and/or groundwater monitoring plan as required, particularly in relation to works which may affect groundwater sensitive areas; • Undertaking further risk assessments associated with excavation work and impacts on surface water; groundwater; abstractions; aquifers and private water supplies; • Preparing site-specific flood risk management plans for those areas at risk of flooding; • Avoiding the use of contaminating materials through appropriate design, construction and equipment specification and wherever possible; • Following the measures outlined for the provision of suitable site drainage, for the storage and control or oils and chemicals and to mitigate against accidental spillages; and • Undertaking, as required, further pre-construction monitoring to establish baseline water quality conditions for watercourses; groundwater and during construction works. This would enable the effectiveness of those mitigation measures introduced to limit pollution risk to be monitored and any pollution incidents to be identified.

13.5.3 Construction works have the potential to impact surface and groundwater quality, due to run- off, sediment, fuels or other construction materials entering the watercourse, or through mobilisation of contamination following disturbance of contaminated ground or groundwater, or through uncontrolled site run-off or direct discharges. Measures defined in the draftCoCP, including detailed method statements, would ensure that there would be no effect on surface water quality or flows associated with construction.

13.5.4 The route of the Proposed Scheme would cross a number of small watercourses, some of which would require permanent realignment over a short distance to a new culvert. These are moderate value receptors, and whilst diversion could have moderate potential impacts, by constructing the new channel in advance and following the measures included in the draft CoCP these would be reduced to slight. It is unlikely that there would be any significant effect during construction as a result.

13.5.5 Diversion of the Canley Brook would be required due to the vertical alignment of the route in this area. The proposed river crossing at the existing river alignment would be too close to the water level to be viable. Canley Brook would need to be diverted to the west and south of its current alignment. As far as possible the new channel would be constructed “offline” to reduce the potential for silt pollution. This together with good practice as defined within the draft CoCP would reduce the effects to not significant. The potential impacts on ecology are considered within the relevant section of this report.

13.5.6 The Proposed Scheme overlays Principal and Secondary Aquifers, and entails construction of a number of cuttings and tunnels, giving rise to the potential to affect groundwater quality. Excavations, sheet piling and dewatering could also alter the groundwater flow with potential for localised reduction in groundwater levels or increasing groundwater flood risk (cuttings and sheet piling). Measures outlined in the draft CoCP and summarised above, including the use of infiltration-based sustainable drainage where practicable would reduce the potential effects on groundwater such that they are not considered to be significant.

13.5.7 The effects of disturbing and mobilising existing poor quality ground or groundwater and of creating or altering of pathways on groundwater quality during construction would be mitigated by the following measures: • Avoid below ground construction in the saturated zone, if at all possible; • Create hydraulic barriers around excavations; and

110 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

• Implement a regime of pre-construction monitoring of groundwater quality to establish baseline conditions.

13.5.8 Locally designated wildlife sites along the route are unlikely to be affected by works following inclusion of the measures defined in the draft CoCP and implementation of sustainable drainage including infiltration measures where appropriate.

13.5.9 Three temporary bridge crossings (across the River Avon, Finham Brook and Canley Brook), an area proposed for demolition work and an area proposed for the location of a temporary stockpile are considered to be at risk from river flooding. Bridges would be designed to convey the 1 in 100 annual probability (1%) of flooding event without increasing flood risk. The impact of the temporary loss of floodplain storage due to stockpiles or temporary structures is being assessed as part of the FRA and appropriate mitigation will be provided if necessary. Mitigation measures outlined in the draft CoCP include signing up to the Environment Agency flood warning system and creation of a flood warning and evacuation plan to be used during the constructional phase of the development would manage any remaining flood risk.

13.5.10 In addition, two temporary bridge crossings (at Stoneleigh Park and east of Kenilworth), a temporary cycle track and several areas proposed for stockpiling are considered to be at possible risk from surface water flooding (based on the EnvironmentAgency’s flood maps). Measures within the draft CoCP would ensure run-off from construction areas does not increase above the existing run-off rate during the 1 in 100 annual probability (1%) of flooding event or more frequent events, as appropriate, to address this risk.

13.5.11 None of the effects likely to arise during construction has been identified as being significant after mitigation. Likely residual significant effects

13.5.12 No residual effects have been identified. 13.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

13.6.1 The Proposed Scheme has been designed to control impacts on the water environment through the following: • Drainage has been designed to reduce the rate and volume of run-off from the railway and prevent an increase in flood risk; • Sustainable drainage, where appropriate, has been included to encourage water to soak back into the ground where drainage or cuttings intercept groundwater flow; and • Sustainable drainage would also provide opportunities to reduce the effect of run-off on water quality by reducing potential contaminants through filtration, vegetative adsorption or settlement.

13.6.2 Best practice pollution control guidance would be adopted for maintenance of the Proposed Scheme.

13.6.3 All standard drainage including drainage from associated access roads and hard standings, would discharge either, under agreement, to sewer or to sustainable drainage ponds, before discharging to sewer/watercourses as appropriate. All discharges to watercourses would be conducted in accordance with Environment Agency, LLFA or other relevant consent conditions with respect to quality and flow, as appropriate.

111 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

13.6.4 It is proposed to realign the Canley Brook away from its current alignment. This is a potentially moderate impact, due to the loss of a section of the natural watercourse which has a very high value, resulting in a large effect. However, the opportunity will be taken to incorporate meanders and natural banks in the new channel. Thus, overall, the realignment, with sensitive design to the water regime and ecology is likely to have a neutral effect. There may be opportunities for enhancements to enable a slight beneficial effect by improving the habitat from its current status.

13.6.5 Some road diversions would be required as part of the Proposed Scheme. Mitigation would be selected for realignments, using the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges and Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) guidance to reduce impacts on the water environment56,57.

13.6.6 In some locations active groundwater abstraction may need to be continuous to maintain a low water table, or passive drainage into cuttings may occur. These impacts would be mitigated through the use of sustainable drainage, reinjection of water and the incorporation of low permeable barriers (e.g. cut of walls) into the ground works design. Further assessment of this impact and any additional mitigation will be detailed in the formal ES.

13.6.7 Modelling undertaken to quantify post-Scheme river flood risk is ongoing and will be reviewed within the formal ES once all modelling is complete. The vulnerability of the river flood risk receptors associated with these watercourses is low. Locally three proposed footpaths and three areas of proposed landscaping have been identified as being at possible risk from river flooding. The impact of these is being assessed and will be reported in the formal ES.

13.6.8 The overall impact on flooding from all sources during operation is therefore not significant and the effect on property and the water environment is not significant.

13.6.9 Where design elements of the route have been identified as at risk from surface water flooding (based on the Environment Agency’s flood maps), flows would be mitigated either by discharging run-off to a neighbouring watercourse, through storage or through the provision of infiltration ponds. The elements of the design that are potentially at risk from surface water flooding are: • A proposed bridleway adjacent to the Canley Brook diversion; • A proposed access road at Broadwells Wood south of Westwood Heath; • Areas of Landscape earthworks north of Cubbington, north of Kenilworth and south of Westwood Heath; • A surface water pipe adjacent to the River Avon at Stoneleigh Park; and • An auto-transformer station west of Burton Green.

13.6.10 Locally designated wildlife sites along the route are unlikely to be affected by works following inclusion of the measures above and implementation of sustainable drainage including infiltration measures where appropriate.

13.6.11 None of the effects likely to arise during operation has been identified as being significant after mitigation.

56 Highways Agency (1992 plus subsequent addenda), The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB). 57 CIRIA (2007), The SuDS manual (C697).

112 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

Likely residual significant effects

13.6.12 The diversion of Canley Brook would offer the opportunity for beneficial effects, should enhancements be identified. This will be reviewed and assessed in the formal ES. All other residual effects on the water environment or flood risk have been assessed as not significant.

113 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I References 14 References Arup/URS (2013), Phase One: Draft Code of Construction Practice, HS2 Ltd, London.

Beard, G.R. (1984), Soils in Warwickshire V – Sheet SP27/37 (Coventry South). Soil Survey Record No. 81.

Construction Industry Research and Information Association (2007), The SuDS manual (C697).

Coventry City Council (2001), Coventry Unitary Development Plan 2001.

Coventry City Council (2012), Core Strategy Proposed Submission, July 2012, with minor amendments, October 2012.

Cranfield University (2001),The National Soil Map of England and Wales 1:250,000 scale, Cranfield University, National Soil Resources Institute.

Department for Communities and Local Government (2010), Indices of Deprivation.

Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. Strasbourg, European Parliament and European Council.

Environment Agency (2010), River Severn Catchment Flood Management Plan Summary report.

Highways Agency (1992 plus subsequent addenda), The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB).

Homes and Communities Agency (2010), Employment Density Guide.

HS2 Ltd; Community forums; http://www.hs2.org.uk/have-your-say/forums/community-forums; Accessed: 11 April 2013.

Natural England (1996); The Character of England 1996; http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/ nca/default.aspx; Accessed: 8 January 2013.

Natural England (2011), Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull Sub-Regional Green Infrastructure Study.

Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996. London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

Office for National Statistics (2010),Population Projections.

Office for National Statistics (2012),Annual Population Survey.

Office for National Statistics (2012),Business Register and Employment Survey 2011.

Office for National Statistics (2012),Census 2011.

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2006), Solihull Unitary Development Plan 2006.

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2012), The Solihull Draft Local Plan: Shaping a Sustainable Future, Local Development Framework Submission Document, September 2012.

Standing Order 27A of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons relating to private business (environmental assessment), House of Commons.

The Hedgerows Regulations 1997 (1997 No. 1160). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

Warwick District Council (2007), Warwick District Local Plan 1996 – 2011.

Warwick District Council (2007), Warwick District Local Plan 2007.

114 CFA Report – Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green/No 18 I References

Warwick District Council (2012), The Warwick District Council Draft New Local Plan Preferred Options (May 2012).

Warwick District Council (2013), Office to Residential Permitted Development Rights – Exemption Requests: Stoneleigh Park; http://www.warwickdc.gov.uk/WDC/Planning/Planning+policy/ Office+to+Residential+Permitted+Development+Rights.htm; Accessed: 28 March 2013.

Warwickshire County Council (1993), Warwickshire Landscape Guidelines.

Warwickshire County Council (1995), Minerals Local Plan for Warwickshire Written Statement.

Warwickshire County Council (2001), Warwickshire Structure Plan 1996-2011.

Warwickshire County Council (2006), Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.

Warwickshire County Council (2011), Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment.

Warwickshire County Council (2011), Warwickshire Local Transport Plan 2011-2026.

Warwickshire County Council; Biodiversity Strategy “Working for Warwickshire’s Wildlife”; http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/Web/corporate/wccweb.nsf/ Links/154325E68157188D8025785100693463/$file/WCC+Biodiversity+Strategy.pdf; Accessed: 31 October 2012.

Weeds Act 1959 (7 and 8 Eliz II c. 54). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

World Health Organization (2009), Night Noise Guidelines for Europe.

115