Minutes of Oral Evidence
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PUBLIC SESSION MINUTES OF ORAL EVIDENCE taken before HIGH SPEED RAIL COMMITTEE On the HIGH SPEED RAIL (LONDON – WEST MIDLANDS) BILL Tuesday 3 February 2015 (Morning) In Committee Room 5 PRESENT: Mr Robert Syms (Chair) Sir Peter Bottomley Mr Henry Bellingham Mr Ian Mearns ____________ IN ATTENDANCE Mr James Strachan QC, Counsel, Department for Transport Ms Melissa Murphy, Francis Taylor Building WITN ESSES Mr Geoffrey Wilson and Mrs Caroline Wilson Mr John Dunlop and Mrs Hazel Dunlop Mr Ed Green, Chief Executive, Warwickshire Wildlife Trust Mr Adrian Colwell, Head of Strategic Planning and the Economy, South Northamptonshire Council Mr Peter Miller, Head of Environment and Planning, HS2 Ltd _____________ IN PUBLIC SESSION INDEX Subject Page David Wilson and Others Submissions from Mr Geoffrey Wilson 3 Submissions from Mr Strachan 17 John and Hazel Dunlop Submissions from Mr Dunlop 38 Submissions from Mr Strachan 43 Questions from the Committee 45 Warwickshire Wildlife Trust Submissions from Mr Green 48 Mr Miller, examined by Mr Mould 63 Mr Miller, cross-examined by Mr Green 76 South Northamptonshire Council Submissions from Ms Murphy 79 Submissions from Ms Colwell 87 2 (At 09.30) 1. CHAIR: Order, order. Welcome, good morning everybody to the HS2 Committee. We start off with Mr David Wilson and others, represented by – 2. MR WILSON: No, no. 3. CHAIR: No. By himself. It’s cheaper. Okay. Right. That’s where you are. Okay. 4. MR WILSON : Let’s go. 5. CHAIR: Do you want to kick off? David Wilson and others 6. MR WILSON: Yes, that’s fine, yes. Thank you. Good morning everybody. Thank you for your time this morning. My name’s Geoffrey Wilson and attending with me today is my wife, Caroline. I farm in partnership with my parents, David and Patricia, as the farming business of R A Wilson & Son, and we are your petitioners. We own and occupy the holding known as Cedars Farm, Lower Boddington and I’d quite like P3940 up please, and that’s edged red on the exhibit. This extends to 375 acres, approximately 151 hectares. We’re a mixed family farm, running approximately 1,000 breeding ewes, 450 head of cattle to include a suckler herd, and an arable operation growing predominantly wheat, barley and oats. We farm on a rotational basis, with around 80% of the land within the rotation and the rest being permanent pasture. Our farm buildings are located in the centre of the holding, you can probably see the buildings right in the middle of the holding there. That’s it, yes and together with the farmhouse which is located slightly to the north of the holding. 7. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Just on the line – just there. 8. MR WILSON: Just across a bit. That’s it there. Yes. So that’s the farmhouse for the holding, and the access, our access drive currently is from the Lower Boddington to Wormleighton Road. Be quite useful, on my petitions… 9. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: There… 3 10. MR WILSON: Yes, can you see it on there? Yes. It’s underneath the – so that’s our current access. So the current access is severed by the line of the new railway. A large percentage of the farm can be seen from the farmhouse, and all movements to and from the farm are controlled by access past the farmhouse, where my parents currently reside. Just to summarise the effects on the holding, the holding known as Cedars Farm is severed east-west by the proposed HS2 rail link, with approximately 50% to each side of the line. Our existing access is taken as part of the scheme – is there the aerial photograph of the exhibits? I think at – my own exhibits I think… Just clear it to see because it’s – we’ve had the…so you can quite clearly see on that our drive running from the north to the farmhouse. Farmhouse just to the east of the drive, and then on into the farm buildings. Obviously the… 11. MR BELLINGHAM: Is tha t a so lar fa r m? 12. MR WILSON: No, that’s greenhouses. 13. MR BELLINGHAM: Glasshouses. Yes. Are they your glasshouses? 14. MR WILSON: Sorry? 15. MR BELLINGHAM: Are they your glasshouses? 16. MR WILSON: No, they’re not ours, no. They’re… 17. MR BELLINGHAM: Next door holding. 18. MR WILSON: Next door holding, yes. 19. MR BELLINGHAM: Yes. 20. MR WILSON: Yes, thank you. Our existing access is taken as part of the Scheme, and HS2 propose a new access to be constructed from the west, the Claydon Road. If we go back to P3940. 21. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: That green…? 22. MR WILSON: That’s it, yes. That’s it. So not quite from the west, but it’s coming in from the Claydon Road to the west to service the house and buildings. To date, HS2 have given no provision for access to the severed land to the north of the rail 4 line. Landtake is in excess of 100 acres, 40 hectares, being approximately 30% of this holding. The majority of which is temporary la nd take for the period of the Scheme, which we understand is proposed to be returned as graded grassland following completion of the construction. If we could just have a look at P3944. Eventually that’s what we understand comes back, with the green areas running up to it being graded following the construction of the embankment. 100 – just over 100 acres temporary landtake. 22 acres permanent landtake. So there’s quite a big temporary landtake to construct the embankment. If I come on to – so that’s just set the scene a little bit. If I come on to the specific points of the petition. 23. Our points of petition are driven by the need to have assurances for the ability to farm the holding during the construction phase, and the desire to secure the long term viability of the unit going forward. 24. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Can I just – sorry to interrupt you. 25. MR WILSON: Yes. 26. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Clear why – going back to what you said just now. You’ve told us about how much it’s taken for the works, and you’ve told us that a lot of it will come back as graded farming land. 27. MR WILSON: Yes. 28. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: How much do you lose altogether permanently? Roughly. 29. MR WILSON: Roughly we think just under 25 acres. In broad terms. 30. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Sorry to interrupt. 31. MR WILSON: That’s alright, no, that’s fine. We would draw your attention to the specific points of petition. Land taken: The draft Environmental Statement incorrectly identifies details and size of the subject holding being Cedars Farm with the knock-on effect that the percentages of la nd tak e n are now considerably higher and, by definition, the impact on the farming business. The Promoter’s response to petition did not adequately deal with this error, maintaining additional farmland as part of its 5 calculations. Including land farmed some distance away and on short term rental agreements. The subject holding, as edged red on the plan – if we could go back to P394 – should stand alone for the purposes of these discussions as it is the viability of this unit which is in question. 32. Following on from recent discussions with HS2 agents, which have proved constructive, this point has been accepted and the areas agreed, although nothing in writing has been received to date. The details of this are significant as, depending on the outcome of this petition and ongoing negotiations with HS2 on various matters, the issue of blight on the holding may result in your petitioners considering a blight notice. 33. MR THORNTON: Which would be requiring them to buy everything? 34. MR WILSON: Yes. Because of the amount of la nd take, so it is significant. If we move on to temporary la ndtak e. Due to the embankment construction on our property and the large amount of spoil to be imported, this is – there is a disproportionate te mpo rar y la nd take in our opinion. In order to construct the embankments, spoil is being brought, we understand, off – from off our holding and deposited on our land. Whilst we can see some need for mitigation to the north of the railway line for the villages of Upper and Lower Boddington, we question the large area of landtake to the south. The Promoter’s response does nothing to deal with the points raised. We do understand that the lands – the temporary la nd take may now be addressed under Schedule 15, although we have not had time to digest the detail on the implications of that. 35. We have an additional issue; you’ll see that there’s an area of land to the north of the Boddington to Wormleighton Road which we believe is flood plain replacement. A significant area of land in the scheme of our holding, but we’re not really sure on the detail and whether or not that couldn’t be better incorporated within some of the land to be taken. 36. MR THORNTON: Can you point on yours, and perhaps Mr S trachan can… 37. MR WILSON: Yes. That field there. 38. MR THORNTON: F ine. 6 39. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Do you want to… 40. MR WILSON: It seems a bit odd. It’s on the other side of the road… 41. MRS WILSON: And the canal feeder.