Berkswell Society

081S IN PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS SESSION 2013-2014 High Speed Rail (London - West Midlands) Bill Against the Bill - On Merits - Praying to be heard by counsel, &c. To the Honourable the Comrnons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northem Ireland in Pariiament Assembled THE HUMBLE PETITION of THE BERKSWELL SOCIETY SHEWETH as follows:- 1. A Bill (hereinafter called "the Bill") has been introduced into and is now pending in your honourable House intituled "A Bill to make provision for a railway between Euston in London and a junction with the West Coast Main Line at Handsacre In Staffordshire, 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 Secretary Patrick 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 Davey, and Mr Robert Goodwill. 3. Clauses 1 to 18 set out the Bill's objectives in relation to the authorisation of works and the acquisition of land and rights over land. Clauses 19 to 36 make provision for the deeming of planning permission and the disapplication of powers contained in other legislation on matters such as heritage issues, trees, traffic, and noise. Clauses 37 to 42 set out the regulatory regime for the railway. Clauses 43 to 56 establish further powers relating to the nominated undertaker, additional related works, and the Crown. Clauses 57 to 65 of the Bill deal with miscellaneous and general provisions. 4. The works proposed to be authorised by the Bill are specifled in clauses 1 and 2 of and Schedules 1, 2 and 3 to the Bill. They consist of scheduled works, which are described in Schedule 1 to the Bill and other works, which are described in clause 2 of and Schedules 2 and 3 to the Bill, and which are works authorised to be constructed by the nominated undertaker (deflned in the Bill and hereinafter referred to as "the nominated undertaker"). Your Petitioners 5. Your Petitioner is the Berkswell Society 6. The Society was formed in 1973 and is the residents association for the Parish of Berkswell. it represents residents in matters impacting the Parish but is also, actively engaged in enhancing the environment within the Parish through the undertaking of practical wdrk such a litter'picking, the mowing and planting of flowers in verges, the provision and planting of flower troughs and the maintenance of heritage assets. We were awarded a silver-gilt.a.ward bythe Royal Horticultural Society in 2013. The area whose residents are represented by your Petitioners 7. The Parish of Berkswell comprising of over 3,000 residents forms part of the large settlement of Balsall Common, the village of Berkswell plus several small settlements and hamlets. The Society has some common membership and works with the Balsall Common Village Residents Association which focuses its activities on the settlement of Balsall Comhrion part of which is in another Parish. 8. The Parish of Berkswell forms a signiflcant part ofthe Meriden Gap which separates Coventry from Solihull/Birmingham. The portion of the Parish outside of Balsall Common, through which the proposed new rail line will be built, is designated as "greenbelt" and provides an invaluable role in preventing Coventry and Solihull/Birmingham joining up through development of the countryside. It offers a valuable recreational and healthy exercise area for the residents of Balsall Common, Coventry and Solihull/Birmingham through the Greenway linear park, the Millennium and Coventry long distance footpaths and other local footpaths. The country lanes, which are generally quiet, also provide opportunities for recreational cycling for those from the locality and the surrounding cities. 9. The new rail line splits the Parish in two. 10. Your Petitioners take objection to the part ofthe works and the provisions of the Bill that are injurious to our residents, as set out in the paragraphs following these introductory remarks. Petitioners' proposal for a tunnel at Balsall Common 11. It is generally accepted that placing the proposed railway in a tunnel would reduce many harms ofthe kinds detailed in this Petition, but that the construction costs would be Increased. However, the cost-benefit balance may be favourable when the harms are very large, there are surface features that would otherwise demand route deviations, and there is high ground that would have needed a deep cutting anyway. Your Petitioners believe a cost-benefit analysis would favour a deep-bored tunnel starting to the south of our area at Burton Green in Warwickshire, and continuing through the high ground at Balsall Common to avoid the viaduct across the existing Rugby and Birmingham Railway line and the many injurious affects in Balsall Common and the wider parish of Berkswell. Your Petitioners understand that the residents of Burton Green enjoy the full support of their District and County Councils in petitioning for such a change to the construction ofthe scheme, and would respectfully point out that a tunnel on the alignment proposed by the Promoter would relieve one-third of the injuries to residents and the environment identified in this Petition, and would create the opportunity for achieving greater benefits in Hampton-in-Arden, Bickenhill and Chelmsley Wood. Accordingly, your Petitioners seek an undertaking from the Promoter that the railway, comprising Work No. 2/146 and Work No. 3/1, will be placed in a tunnel from Burton Green to a northern portal in a location chosen to minimise the local environmental impact, that corresponding changes will be made to all the subsidiary Works, and that the relevant Plans and Sections will be amended accordingly, 12. The Proposed Tunnel would substantially mitigate the impacts of High Speed 2 on the small rural community of the Parish, as well as the green belt land that falls within the alignment of High Speed 2. Whilst your Petitioner appreciates that the Proposed Tunnel may impose an additional cost on the Promoter, it is the view of your Petitioner that any cost to the Promoter ought properly to be balanced against the cost to the community and regional and national economic interest. 13. As part of this cost equation is the opportunity to make provision now for the best opportunity to maximise community and economic benefits. Protection of the green belt, particularly in this sensitive area, would provide far greater community, ecological and landscape benefits in the long term than the additional costs of providing the Proposed Tunnel now. Furthermore, prevention of a substantial visually intrusive development in this sensitive landscape will prevent the 'slippery slope' of development and the urbanisation ofthe Meriden Gap, an important rural area that protects community individuality and prevents urban sprawl. 14. Your Petitioner also considers that when a change to the scheme in the Bill is justified on the merits, it is no answer for the Promoters to say that such a changes should be resisted because it goes beyond what is provided for in the Bill. It is the Promoters, not those affected, who have chosen what to put in the Bill and, if they have gotthat wrong, they should now accept the change. In addition, given that the Promoters have already indicated that changes to the scheme will be necessary, your Promoters consider that the Proposed Tunnel could also be put forward as a change. 15. Your Petitioner therefore seeks: a. a commitment that a full peer reviewed assessment of options for a tunnel extending from north of Balsall Common to south of Burton Green be undertaken, including a full cost benefit analysis and consideration ofthe environmental impacts; b. a commitment that the results ofthe full assessment shall be made available to your Petitioner and that the Promoter will work with your Petitioner in so far as is reasonably practicable to undertake the construction of a tunnel if the peer reviewed assessment concludes that it would be beneficial; c. subject to the results of the assessment, that an appropriate tunnel option be implemented to reduce the environmental impacts of the scheme to an acceptable level; and d. If the assessment does not show that the construction of a tunnel should be implemented, the Promoter shall work with your Petitioner to consider alternative means of mitigating the impacts of High Speed 2 on the Parish. Concerns in the Beonit area 16. The Promoter proposes to construct Work No. 2/184 as an overbridge across the railway for agricultural access and to carry Public Footpath M186. In the Promoter's drawings, the bridge is shown as flat, and it is likely to be surfaced with concrete in order to be durable when used by cattle. At present, there is no public right of access between the Kenilworth Greenway and footpath M186 that crosses it, and your Petitioners welcome the connection that would be provided by the realigned Greenway, Work No. 2/182, through its use as part of the diversion of footpath M186. However, your Petitioners are concerned that the surface may become inconvenient for walkers unless the bridge has an arched or cambered proflle to promote drainage, and seek an undertaking from the Promoter that Work No. 2/184 will be constructed to ensure a convenient well-drained surface is kept available for walkers. 17. It is understood that the Burton Green Auto-transformer Feeder Station is an essential part ofthe proposed railway scheme, but the Promoter has given no details other than the allocation of a site between Hodgetts Lane, the proposed railway.

Load more