Solihull Friends of the Earth is opposing HS2 as the trains will not take passengers off planes or out of their cars; most will be new journeys which would not otherwise have taken place. The sheer cost of the project is huge, and we believe that HS2 provides little gain, with even the claimed figures being speculative. The ticket prices will be high, which will make it a railway for the affluent rather than everybody and it will not improve local travel for the majority at all.
Other countries with similar links have found that rather than jobs spreading out from a larger place (London) to the satellite cities (Birmingham), the larger conurbation tends to gain even more jobs at the expense of the smaller place, thus working against the stated aim of distributing economic gains around evenly.
We are happy to provide the full responses we have submitted below;
Question 1:
This question is about the strategy and wider context (Chapter 1 of the main consultation document)
Do you agree that there is a strong case for enhancing the capacity and performance of Britain’s inter-city rail network to support economic growth over the coming decades?
Our Response: Solihull Friends of the Earth believes that increasing the capacity of rail by encouraging a shift away from cars is very important in the quest for a low carbon economy. However cutting journey times at the total cost of 38.2 billion pounds does not provide economic and energy benefits. The recent Oxera report to the Transport Select Committee states that most jobs created will be short term and in London. HS2 also jeopardises investment in local transport schemes in Solihull where local schemes linking Solihull and Birmingham, and North Solihull and Birmingham International train station are a much higher priority. Improvements to local transport systems would do much to support economic growth.
Solihull Friends of the Earth believes that instead rail coverage, reliability and punctuality has to be enhanced. Higher speeds don't necessarily mean increased reliability; this can be achieved by upgrading existing infrastructure such as train stock and platforms rather than spending huge amounts of money on an entirely new line, where the claimed benefits are speculative. The evidence provided in the consultation document is of a poor standard. The estimates are based on figures that are dependant on economic factors that the Government can't predict anywhere near accurately. We believe that the country cannot afford this project.
Our Response: No. Solihull Friends of the Earth believe there is no gain for communities along the route since they are not served by the HS2 rail service. All they gain is the detrimental effects of the HS2 line passing straight through them. The Oxera report to the Transport Select Committee queried the benefit of the speed of the line; reduced speeds would offer flexibility to allow the line to follow the contours of the land, thus avoiding the need for a destructive route. With respect to Birmingham Interchange Station, we don't believe HS2 encourages inner city regeneration in Solihull where any activity is restricted to outer Solihull which increases the factors threatening the surrounding Green Belt.
Question 3
Our Response: No. HS2 on its own doesn't represent a Transport Strategy. As already stated, a huge amount of resources are being put into HS2 yet the suggested benefits are dubious. There is no integrated thinking of creating, enhancing and linking local with national infrastructure in order to come up with a credible strategic plan. This is needed in order to meet all the environmental and possible economic challenges that are faced in the short, medium and long term.
Question 4
Our Response: No. The withholding of important information by HS2 Ltd has to be noted here. It needed Berkswell Parish Council to make a Freedom of Information request for it to become known that in addition to the 22m maximum width of the line, there is going to be in addition 25m either side of the line of what is described as managed vegetation. This in practice means that an even greater amount mature trees or plant species will be lost than it first appeared, and a total of potentially a 72m strip of vegetation being lost along the route of the line.
Question 5
Our Response: No. The route will have a significant negative impact on Solihull. The proposed route passes onto a viaduct in close proximity to Berkswell Station, with historic buildings and green belt land likely to be threatened. The proposed route also impacts on Chelmsley Wood, in particular the Bluebell Recreation Ground and Yorkminster Drive, where residential dwellings will be approximately 70 metres west of the route.
Question 6
Our Response: Solihull Friends of the Earth believes that no account is being taken of the need for sustainability especially in the knowledge of peak oil. This HS2 project cannot be considered to be sustainable when done at the expense of the natural environment. There has been no environmental impact assessment done on a local level.We believe that as transport links are concentrated near Birmingham Airport, it is bound to encourage an increase of long haul flights which will increase greenhouse emissions and pressure on the surrounding green belt. The increased travel generated by people in their cars who travel to Birmingham Interchange station will also increase carbon emissions. This again comes back to the point above concerning creating an integrated Transport strategy which is non-existent (the LTP3 itself just exposes how confused the thinking really is) which does not encourage a shift away from cars and hence enhance social mobility.
Question 7:
This question is about blight and compensation (Annex A of the main consultation document)
Do you agree with the options set out to assist those with whose properties lose a significant amount of value as a result of any new high speed line?
Our Response: No. The destruction along the line impacts on more than just properties which stand to lose value. There is a loss to the whole country of valuable green spaces and areas of local and historical importance. There can be no recompense for this loss, and those individuals who stand to lose access to green spaces will not be liable for financial compensation.
Are you in favour of HS2 or not ? Do you agree with Solihull FOE's position regarding HS2 ? Maybe you agree with us or alternatively you take a totally different view and believe HS2 to overall be a good thing. Please feel free to discuss further via your comments here or alternatively email us at solihullfoe@gmail.com .
Our Response: Solihull Friends of the Earth believes that increasing the capacity of rail by encouraging a shift away from cars is very important in the quest for a low carbon economy. However cutting journey times at the total cost of 38.2 billion pounds does not provide economic and energy benefits. The recent Oxera report to the Transport Select Committee states that most jobs created will be short term and in London. HS2 also jeopardises investment in local transport schemes in Solihull where local schemes linking Solihull and Birmingham, and North Solihull and Birmingham International train station are a much higher priority. Improvements to local transport systems would do much to support economic growth.
Solihull Friends of the Earth believes that instead rail coverage, reliability and punctuality has to be enhanced. Higher speeds don't necessarily mean increased reliability; this can be achieved by upgrading existing infrastructure such as train stock and platforms rather than spending huge amounts of money on an entirely new line, where the claimed benefits are speculative. The evidence provided in the consultation document is of a poor standard. The estimates are based on figures that are dependant on economic factors that the Government can't predict anywhere near accurately. We believe that the country cannot afford this project.
Question 2
This question is about the case for high speed rail (Chapter 2 of the main consultation document)
Do you agree that a national high speed rail network from London to Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester (the Y network) would provide the best value for money solution (best balance of costs and benefits) for enhancing rail capacity and performance?
Question 3
This question is about how to deliver the Government’s proposed network (Chapter 3 of the main consultation document)
Do you agree with the Government’s proposals for the phased roll-out of a national high speed rail network, and for links to Heathrow Airport and the High Speed 1 line to the Channel Tunnel?
Question 4
This question is about the specification for the line between London and the West Midlands (Chapter 4 of the main consultation document)
Do you agree with the principles and specification used by HS2 Ltd to underpin its proposals for new high speed rail lines and the route selection process HS2 Ltd undertook?
Question 5
This question is about the route for the line between London and the West Midlands (Chapter 5 and Annex B of the main consultation document)
Do you agree that the Government’s proposed route, including the approach proposed for mitigating its impacts, is the best option for a new high speed rail line between London and the West Midlands?
Question 6
This question is about the Appraisal of Sustainability (Chapter 5 of the main consultation document)
Do you wish to comment on the Appraisal of Sustainability of the Government’s proposed route between London and the West Midlands that has been published to inform this consultation?
Our Response: Solihull Friends of the Earth believes that no account is being taken of the need for sustainability especially in the knowledge of peak oil. This HS2 project cannot be considered to be sustainable when done at the expense of the natural environment. There has been no environmental impact assessment done on a local level.We believe that as transport links are concentrated near Birmingham Airport, it is bound to encourage an increase of long haul flights which will increase greenhouse emissions and pressure on the surrounding green belt. The increased travel generated by people in their cars who travel to Birmingham Interchange station will also increase carbon emissions. This again comes back to the point above concerning creating an integrated Transport strategy which is non-existent (the LTP3 itself just exposes how confused the thinking really is) which does not encourage a shift away from cars and hence enhance social mobility.
Question 7:
This question is about blight and compensation (Annex A of the main consultation document)
Do you agree with the options set out to assist those with whose properties lose a significant amount of value as a result of any new high speed line?
Our Response: No. The destruction along the line impacts on more than just properties which stand to lose value. There is a loss to the whole country of valuable green spaces and areas of local and historical importance. There can be no recompense for this loss, and those individuals who stand to lose access to green spaces will not be liable for financial compensation.
