HS2 property Consultation Response


The Consultation & response forms can be found at :

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/hs2-crewe-to-manchester-west-midlands-to-leeds-route-refinement-consultation-2016

 

Please respond to HS2 by using one of the methods below:

Online property2b.dialoguebydesign.net

By email property2b@dialoguebydesign.co.uk

By post FREEPOST HS2 PHASE 2B PROPERTY CONSULTATION

 

You can fill in every part of the form if you like, but the parts that are important for NWL are:   

PART ONE

  • Fill in your contact details
  • Remember, you are NOT responding on behalf of an organisation or group

 

PART TWO

Complete Question 1 - why the proposed compensation is not comprehensive or adequate  

 

Some suggested reasons for NOT supporting:

  • The measures proposed fail to provide a mechanism for allowing property owners that would lose their homes the opportunity to buy another property in their area. Given the comparatively low value of some of the homes that would be demolished, there is a risk that some owners (in particular those that bought their homes through ‘right to buy’) may not be able to purchase another property in the area. This could have significant negative impacts on those affected, as well as threatening the breakup of local communities if large numbers of people are required to move away.
  • The proposed scheme would also have a significant impact on other sectors including the Council as social housing provider, Council tenants and local businesses, who could experience significant disruption as a result of the proposed scheme.
  • In respect of Council tenants, and all other occupants who would not have to move as a result of the line but whose quiet enjoyment of their home would be detrimentally affected by the construction and operation of HS2, a package of financial compensation and physical compensatory measures should be included in the scheme to mitigate the effects.
  • The use of an arbitrary geographic distance to set the limit of compensation is questionable - distance alone does not determine the magnitude of the impacts of HS2
  • Compensation should depend on loss in market value FOR ALL AREAS due to HS2 having occurred, which is how the blight actually manifests itself.  This is fairer, simpler and would apply equally across rural, urban and tunnelled areas, according to the nature and degree of loss.
  • The Government’s view is that properties will largely recover their loss in value after the railway is running. Blight is (on this view) a transitional problem, but due to the extended period before HS2 is running, current property owners cannot sell at unblighted values if the Government (or promoter) do not intervene. This is totally unfair and compensation for this loss especially in rural settings must be afforded.
  • The effect of blight is to impose large losses on current owners who sell before the railway is operational (other than those covered by statutory arrangements). The years between the announcement and running is too long for the great majority of current owners to endure AND MUST BE COMPENSATED FOR.
  • For rural areas the impact of HS2 on blight is averaged over properties ranging from being on the line to those 12.5km away.  The average overall reduction in price will be more like 12.1% for rural postcode sectors. CBRE’s ‘Blight Study’ Analysis confirms that on the assumption that blight is more intensive relatively near to the line, the results imply both high levels of blight and blight impacting on properties several kilometres from the line.  This equates to 27.7% reduction if all losses were sustained within 1km of the line. Unfair and compensation to recognise this loss should be part of the compensation scheme.

 

Locals in Leicestershire MUST now ensure that the compensation consultation is completed as as a minimum identify and request that compensation be made for:

  1. full disturbance allowance
  2. enforced moves,
  3. loss of house value,
  4. business plans being disrupted or failing due to no support (all of which is currently being experienced),
  5. stress and
  6. loss of amenities

All of the above should be inflation proofed and backdated to the notification and publication of this preferred route – not Royal Assent.

Question 2 & 3

You do not need to answer Questions 2 & 3 (unless of course you have an opinion).