HS2 Route Consultation

HS2 Route Consultation

Freepost RTEL-YAZX-HAZT
Phase Two Route Consultation
PO Box 1152
HARROW
HA1 9LH

Dear Sirs,

I am responding to your consultation on the proposed route for HS2. This response is in addition to any other response I may make or may have made.

I oppose HS2 as it is poor value for money, will devastate Culcheth and other communities and the environment across England, will provide no benefit for Warrington, and is not the best way to spend such a large amount of taxpayers’ money. HS2 will impose loss of jobs, environmental damage, and loss of property value on people who will see neither economic benefit nor compensation for financial losses

My detailed responses to the questions are appended. Supporting information can be found in:

CADRAG R1 “Analysis of the Proposed HS2 Route from London to Glasgow and Edinburgh, Western Leg, Golborne Connection, near Culcheth” available at: http://www.warringtonstophs2.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/CADRAG-R1-Golborne-Connection-Analysis.pdf

I have added my general comments below.

Signed:

Name:

Address:

Postcode:

Detailed Responses:

Question 1

The Route and Supporting Infrastructure

Do you agree or disagree with the Government’s proposed route between the west Midlands and Manchester as described in Chapter 7?

This includes the proposed route alignment, the location of tunnels, ventilation shaft, cuttings, viaducts and depots as well as how the high speed line will connect with the West Coast Main Line.

I strongly disagree with the route proposed, in particular the line from the junction near Lymm to the connection with the West Coast Main Line at Golborne, including the viaduct over the Manchester Ship Canal and the line through Culcheth.

HS2 will impose loss of jobs, environmental damage, and loss of amenity, and loss of property value on the people of Culcheth, who will see neither economic benefit nor compensation for financial losses.

There is no evidence that alternative routes to that currently proposed, passing through Culcheth, have been considered other than the upgrading of the West Coast Main line. The documents showing various options for the route from Crewe to Wigan only show the currently proposed route for this section, with no alternatives.

If HS2 uses this route, it will result in a worse train service for Warrington Bank Quay. The current service of two trains per hour to and from Scotland will be replaced by one terminating at Preston.

I reject the valuation of the times saved for Glasgow trains used to justify the building of the Golborne connection. The Government has abandoned this argument. The current justification for HS2 is on increased capacity not time saved. The Golborne connection will not improve capacity on the West Coast Main Line. The route should be revised to focus on capacity issues.

The costs of the Golborne connection will outweigh the benefits.

The HS2 Proposed Golborne Connection to the West Coast Main Line should not be built. It will devastate Culcheth and other nearby villages.

·  It will cost Culcheth over 500 jobs, 497 at the Taylor Business Park, which lies directly on the route, and more in the village due to the traffic disruption caused by the construction.

·  It will destroy Culcheth Linear Park, a key local amenity, also directly on the route.

·  There are 947 Culcheth properties within 500m of the route.

·  These and other local properties will suffer noise and environmental degradation during construction and operation, affecting quality of life and property values.

·  Several homes will be demolished including a listed building.

·  There will be no compensation for these losses in the vast majority of cases.

·  The proposed route runs through the green belt between major local conurbations, including the local mossland areas which make construction very difficult, and the local environment and birdlife will be severely affected. A previous proposed motorway link through this area was cancelled for these reasons, which are still valid today.

Upgrading the West Coast Main Line is much better value for money.

·  Upgrading the West Coast Main Line will cost much less than building the HS2 Golborne Connection.

·  Upgrading the West Coast Main Line will be more useful overall, improving capacity for local and regional services as well as long distance travellers.

·  It will provide better rail services to Warrington and the region whereas HS2’s proposal will reduce them.

·  Upgrading the West Coast Main Line will bring economic benefits to Warrington and the region. HS2 will damage the local economy.

Question 2

Proposals for Stations

Do you agree or disagree with the Government’s proposals for:

a)  A Manchester station at Manchester Piccadilly as described in Chapter 7?

b)  An additional station near Manchester Airport as described in Chapter 7?

The stations at Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Airport are too far away, and too difficult to get to, to be of use to people in the Warrington area. The proposed Golborne Connection will in fact make access to the Manchester Airport station more difficult as it will disrupt a key local route to the Airport.

Question 3

Additional Stations

Do you think that there should be any additional stations on the western leg between the West Midlands and Manchester?

The West Coast Main line between Crewe and Golborne should be upgraded instead of building the proposed Golborne connection. This will allow Classic Compatible services to serve Warrington Bank Quay at least as frequently as the current services.

Page 26 of the Consultation Summary says “additional services could be provided between Birmingham, Wolverhampton and Warrington ….” This is, to say the least, misleading. The “additional” service per hour proposed from Birmingham to Preston stopping at Warrington replaces two current services per hour from London and Birmingham to Scotland stopping at Warrington. It is in fact a reduction in services for Warrington.

Upgrading the West Coast Main Line will allow improved services at lower cost than building the Golborne Connection.

Question 7

Appraisal of Sustainability

Please let us know your comments on the Apraisal of Sustainability of the Government’s proposed Phase two route, including the alternatives to the proposed route as described in Chapter 9.

The Appraisal of Sustainability does not consider the very significant negative impacts on Culcheth including:

·  Loss of over 500 jobs, including 497 at the Taylor Business Park, which lies directly on the route, and more in the village itself due to the disruption to traffic caused by the construction of three bridges on the three main roads into the village from the main local centres of Warrington and Birchwood.

·  Destruction of the Culcheth Linear Park, a major local amenity, which also lies directly on the route.

·  Demolition of 14 homes and a Grade II Listed building.

·  Noise and other impacts on the village including the 947 dwellings within 500m of the route

·  Negative impact, including noise, pollution and disruption, from construction, including building new bridges on the three roads linking the village to the main local centres of Warrington and Birchwood.

·  There is no evidence that the devastating impact on Culcheth has been considered in proposing the current route.

·  The settlements along the route, including Culcheth, which will be devastated by the proposed route, seem to have been given no priority.

This is contrary to the requirement to consider the impact on communities.

Question 8

Freed Capacity

Please let us know your comments on how the capacity that would be freed up on the existing rail network by the introduction of the proposed Phase two route could be used as described in Chapter 10?

The proposed HS2 route including the Golborne Connection does not free up capacity on the West Coast Main Line between Crewe and Golborne. In fact the proposal to increase the frequency of trains to Liverpool will actually reduce the service frequency to Warrington.

Instead the WCML should be upgraded to provide additional capacity for HS2 trains and other services. This will cost less, provide more benefits locally, regionally and nationally, and represent much better value for money.