Agenda item

Report of the Director of Services.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration presented the report to Members.  He reported that expert consultants, SLC Rail, had been engaged to provide advice and assistance in narrowing down the council’s options.  He highlighted the proposed strategy which included both proactive and reactive elements, as well at the council’s role regarding business focus and public protection.

The Chairman referred to a particular housing development on Burton Road which had been permitted with conditions to reinstate a section of the canal as part of the ongoing canal project.  He asked that if the development was affected by the proposed HS2 route and the improvements were not made to the canal, could compensation be sought.  The Head of Planning and Regeneration agreed to investigate and confirm with the Chairman after the meeting.

Regarding the visual impact as detailed within the report, Councillor N Smith did not believe that everyone would object as a large number of people enjoyed seeing trains.  He also commented that when he attended a meeting with HS2 Ltd he had asked about the impact on the canal in Measham if the A42 was moved and they had replied that the cost of providing a tunnel over the canal was insignificant and therefore would automatically provide it.  He had also heard rumours that HS2 Ltd was avoiding Measham entirely because of the disruption to the plastics factory.  He concluded by asking if it was still possible to request a station at East Midlands Airport as he felt it was a logical place and a great advantage for the District.

Councillor T Eynon felt that the impact of HS2 would mean a lot of pain for not much gain.  She commented that there was very poor interconnectivity within the midlands and she felt that the Council should be pushing for more compensation that could be used towards connecting with other areas of the midlands.

The Chairman did not feel that the comparative journey times to London as detailed in appendix 1 of the report were realistic.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration explained East Midlands Airport was owned by the Manchester Airport Group and it was their opinion that the airport’s primary use was for freight business. Therefore they were not in support of having a station at East Midlands Airport and were unlikely to put a bid forward to HS2 Ltd.

Councillor N Smith concurred with Councillor T Eynon in that the Council should try and gain as much as possible as the District would be massively inconvenienced by HS2.  Therefore he felt very strongly that a station at East Midlands Airport be pursued.  The Chairman asked Councillor N Smith if he felt strongly enough to continue even if the airport owners were not interested and he confirmed that he did.

Councillor D Harrison felt that HS2 was good for the future and a station in the District was crucial, it was an important opportunity for future generations that should not be missed.  He believed the possibility of a station should be pursued.

Councillor A C Saffell commented that a station at East Midlands Airport was unlikely as it was too close to the already approved station at Toton.  He referred to a meeting he had attended with HS2 Ltd where a discussion was had regarding putting money aside to build a tunnel to avoid the Hilton hotel which would end nearto Toton station.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration stated that there was a lot of speculation about the possible route and there would be no details available until the route had been finalised.

By affirmation of the meeting it was

RESOLVED THAT:

The report be endorsed for consideration by Cabinet on 15 November 2016.