5 Matters pending for report back
and decision
Approach to monitoring cases.
101. We have requested and obtained regular updates
from the Promoter on unresolved petitions, including reports back
on 11 Feb 2015 and on 16 March 2015. The Committee Clerk will
pass the details of pending cases and all other relevant papers
to our successor Committee so that that Committee is fully apprised
of the facts relating to pending decisions, as well as of our
views on the evidence we have heard and our reflections on other
outstanding matters.
Specific cases
102. In some 20% of cases we have undertaken some
active monitoring or requested a report back. Examples include
the negotiations between Kenilworth Golf Club (404), Otter and
Company (496) and HS2 Limited, and the petition of Silklink (Grimstock
Country Hotel) (410), whose staff deserve some certainty of outcome.
A smaller percentage are cases that we are confident will be settled
but which we suggest also be monitored.
103. We want the Promoter to provide various reports
back on Stoneleigh petitions. Proposed additional provisions will
probably solve many of the issues there. Three of the principal
petitioners—the Royal Agricultural Society (486), Grandstand
Stoneleigh (488) and Motorsport Industry (490)—have reserved
the right to return.
104. The petitions of Mr and Mrs Sadler (784) and
Doreen Round (783) and Margaret and Peter Hughes of Truggist Hill
Farm (224) illustrated a planning issue on the rebuilding of property
affected by the line which we believed needed addressing. Mr and
Mrs Sadler's farm in Staffordshire directly adjoins the location
of the proposed link between the high-speed track and the West
Coast Main Line. Whilst they do not wish to remain in their current
farmhouse, they want to remain in the area and to build a new
house on their own land, further from the line. HS2 Limited would
acquire the existing building.
105. The Sadlers' dilemma is that local green belt
planning restrictions prevent the building of a new home while
the old one remains. Demolishing the old house would be a cost
to HS2 Limited which on the face of it is both undesirable and
unnecessary as, at the right price, it may find a willing occupier.
Truggist Hill Farm (petition 22) and the petition of the Frushers
(1521) present analogous issues with commercial buildings.
106. We wrote to the Secretary of State for Communities
and Local Government requesting that such situations be examined
and that guidance be given to local authorities whereby they may
relax development rules in recognition of the exceptional circumstances
here. He responded on 12 March 2015, saying that while he believed
this was a matter best left to local authorities he would write
to such authorities along the route and encourage due weight to
be given to the railway's impact. We encourage those in a similar
position to these petitioners to prepare and submit their applications.
We recommend that our successor committee monitors progress.
| 
