On Merits - Praying to Be Heard by Counsel

1793 In Padiament House of Commons Session (2013-2014) ^~ - -~ _ HIGH SPEED RAIL (London - West Midlands) BILL AGAINST- on Merits - Praying to be heard By Counsel. &c. To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled The Humble Petition of DAVID AND MARY ANNE STEWART OF CROWN COTTAGE, LITTLE MISSENDEN, AMERSHAM, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE. Shewith as follows:- 1 a Bill(herein after referred to as "the bill") has been introduced and is now pending in your honourable House instituted "A Bill to make provision for a railway between Euston in London and a junction with the West Coast Mail Line at Handsacre in Staffordhire, with a spur from Old Oak Common in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham to a junction with the Channel Tunnel Rail Link at York Way in the London Borough of Islington and a spur from Water Orton in Warwickshire to Curzon Street in Birmingham; and for connected purposes." 2.The Bill is presented by Mr Secretary McLoughlin, supported by The Prime Minister, The Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary Theresa May, Secretary Vince Cable, Secretary lain Duncan Smith, Secretary Eric Pickles, Secretary Owen Paterson, Secretary Edward Davet, and Mr Robert Goodwill. 3 Clauses 1 to 36 set out the Bill's objectives in relation tothe construction and operation of the railway mentioned in paragraph 1 above . they include provision for the construction of works, highways, works, highways and road traffic matters, the compulsory acquisition of Land and other provisions relating to the use of land, planning permission, heritage issues, trees and noise. They include clauses which would misapply and modify various enactnients relating to special categories of land including burial grounds, consecrated land, commons and open spaces, and other matters, including overhead lines,water, building regulationsand party walls, street works and the use of lorries. 4 Clauses 37 to 42 of the Bill deal with the regulatory framework for the railway. 5 Clauses 43 to 65 of the Bill set out a number of miscellaneousand general provisions including provisionfor the appointment of a nominated undertaker ('the Nominated Undertaker') to exercise the powers under the Bill, transfer schemes, provision relating to statutory undertakers and The Crown, provision about further high speed railway works. Provision is also made about the application of Environmental impact Assessment Regulations. 6 the works proposed to be authorised by the Bill (the Authorised Works') are specified in clauses 1 and 2 of andSchedule 1 to the Bill. They consist of scheduled works, which are described in clause 2 of the Bill. " 7 Your petitioners rights, and interests and property are injurious lay affected by the Bill, to which your Petitioner objects for reasons amongst others herein after appearing. 9 Yourpetitioners reside at the above property which is situated in the MisbGurne valley. The fiver is a chalk stream and as such is a rare habitat with its own micro Eco system. The waters are; clean and unpolluted as shown by the fish which breed in the river. 10 The Petitioners are aware that the Select Committee of you Honourable House is unable to consider case which objectin principle of the Bill, your petitioners nevertheless wish to object the principle of the Bill. Your petitioners do not perceive that the business case for the project has sufficiently been proved. The case for the project is made by the industry sectors which stand to gain most by the project and therefore have a conflict of interest. Your petitioner supports the a lternative proposal supported by 51M . A weakness of the project is the lack of the link to Heathrow airport. 11 The proposed route is unacceptable in the Chilterns AONB. Although your petitioners are aware that the Select Committee of yoUr honourable House is unable to consider cases which object to the principle of the Bill, your petitioners wish to express its objection to the route chosen for HS2. Your petitioners are seriously concerned over the damage to the Chilterns AONB and the fact that HS2 Ltd,in proposing this route appear to have ignored the statutory duty of protection of an AONB as set out in Section 85 of the CROW Act. Your petitioner requests that the route of HS2 be realigned in order that it should avoid the Chilterns AONB. • The area of the Chilterns is indeed special - it provides for an environment where partly due to the Green Belt policy it has been largely protected from damaging development, therefore ancient woodland , rivers and wildlife have all been largely untouched by development. With one sweep of the pen a decision seems to have been made which will render a beautiful area changed forever. Your petitioners respectfully requests that your honourable House should pay special attention to the proposals in the Bill so far as they affect the AONB in orderto determine whether due regard has been paid to this highly sensitive area and whether the proposed railway is appropriate in light of its adverse impact on the area and its residents and businesses. Your petitioners support the Chiltern District Council's proposals for a revision of the horizontal alignment andan extended bored tunnel throughout the AONB, which in your Petitioner's opinion would alleviate the detrimental impactthatthe proposed railway will otherwise have on the AONB. If a revised route (horizontal realignment) for HS2 is deemed unacceptable, then your petitioner requests that that the present proposed route through the Chilterns AONB be amended so that the present so called 'Chilterns tunnel' be extended to a point North of Wendover, as detailed in the CRAG-T2 mitigation proposal, which was deemed environmentally beneficial in the Environmental Statement. This mitigation would not avoid all the damage to the Chilterns AONB (for example: Ventilations shafts would still be required), however it would massively reduce the damage to the heart of the AONB at Manties Wood and much of the mitigation to minimise the impacts, such as those exemplified below, of both the construction and operation of HS2 would not be required. Should neither the route be amended nor an extended Chilterns tunnel be acceptable then your petitioners are particularly concerned about the of the construction and long term Irreversible damage to the environment. 12 Your petitioners are concerned about the impacts of the loss of ancient woodland, vegetation, specific habitat in the Misbourne Valley on the wildlife that use this site/barn owls/bats, birds etc. The loss of any wildlife habitat affects yOur petitioners, who regularly walk in and around the countryside in which they live near to home and in the wider area of the Ghilterns AONB to appreciate the countryside and variety of wildlife in this area. 13 In particular we are concerned with the lack of information in the environmental statement - all of which is causing a great concern to the residents of Little Missenden and the residents of the Other areas which will be directly affected. Your petitioners wish to express concern regarding the poor provision of information supplied by the promoter, both prior to the deposit of the Bill, and since the Bill has been deposited. HS2 Ltd has continually failed to {provide necessary paperwork prior to meetings as requested, and information presented has often been inadequate and conflicting. Plan and Profile maps and GIS layers were requested by Buckinghamshire Councils and others early on in consultation, as it was felt that these were necessary tools to inform their response. HS2 Ltd responded that the GIS layers were likely to be available mid/late December. It was not until the 24th lanuary that these were made available, ironically, on the day that consultation was due to end. Plan and profile maps remain unavailable, and furthermore, supplementary information such as the Code of Construction Practise has remained in draft form}. The ongoing lack of information has made it particularly difficult to understand the full impacts of HS2, and therefore commenting on the project has been particularly difficult. It also raises the question asto why this information is being withheld when it has been produced. Your petitioners expect to be able to consult on the final version of the CoCP and any other relevant documents that are produced, prior to construction taking place. We also request thatin future, all information is made available in a timely manner. A number of specific grievance and concerned were set out in response to the Draft Environmental statement - to which not response or even acknowledgement has been forthcoming . We respectfully request that in order to mitigate the effects of the construction and subsequent operation of the line that the following measures should be agreed to be undertaken during the construction/operation phase of the railway. Local Level - Little Missenden We the petitioners understand that the findings and recommendations from the Environmental Impact Assessment, including impacts on wildlife, ancient woodland, and the potential for subsidence of listed buildings have not been addressed inthe bill thus far. The petitioners propose that these issues must be addressed and a specific plan for mitigation must be agreed prior to construction; Your petitioner believes that there is potential for damage to property and land. Your petitioners propose that all houses and buildings which will be at risk in any way from construction, disturbance, pollution, vibration or tunnelling must have a government funded survey carried out before work starts and after Completion. Tbelieve thatthere will be a riskfrom vibration to the buildings within the village. This wi|l ensure that disputes arising can be fairly dealt with. Your petitioners believe thatthere will be impact of construction on the Chilterns aquifer and the river Misbourne, local water tables, flood plains and the risk of flooding arid pollution due to water runoffs.

Load more