data.parliament.ukdata.parliament.uk/depositedpapers/files/dep2013-0828/... · 2013. 5. 15. · 1...

P H A S E O N E

EnvironmEntalDraFt

StatEmEntCommunity Forum Area Report 24 | Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood

ENGINE FOR GROWTH

HS2 London-West Midlands

May 2013

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Community Forum Area Report 24 I Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley WoodENGINE FOR GROWTH

High Speed Two (HS2) Limited, 2nd Floor, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU

Telephone 020 7944 4908

General email enquiries: [email protected]

Website: www.hs2.org.uk

© Crown copyright, 2013, except where otherwise stated

Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.

You may re-use this information (not including logos or third-party material) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected].

Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

To order further copies contact: DfT Publications Tel: 0300 123 1102 Web: www.dft.gov.uk/orderingpublications

Product code: ES/21

Printed in Great Britain on paper containing at least 75% recycled fibre.

1

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Contents

Contents

Draft Volume 2: Community Forum Area Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 5

Part A: Introduction 6

1 Introduction 7

1.1 Introduction to HS2 7

1.2 Purpose of this report 7

1.3 Structure of this report 9

Part B: Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood – overview of the area and description of the Proposed Scheme 10

2 Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood 11

2.1 Overview of the area 11

2.2 Description of the Proposed Scheme 15

2.3 Construction of the Proposed Scheme 19

2.4 Operation of the Proposed Scheme 33

2.5 Community forum engagement 33

2.6 Route section main alternatives 34

2.7 Proposals for further consideration 39

Part C: Environmental topic assessments 40

3 Agriculture, forestry and soils 41

3.1 Introduction 41

3.2 Policy framework 41

3.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 41

3.4 Environmental baseline 42

3.5 Construction 44

3.6 Operation 46

2


4 Air quality 47

4.1 Introduction 47




4.5 Construction 48

4.6 Operation 49

5 Community 51

5.1 Introduction 51




5.5 Construction 54

5.6 Operation 55

6 Cultural heritage 57

6.1 Introduction 57




6.5 Construction 59

6.6 Operation 61

7 Ecology 62

7.1 Introduction 62




7.5 Construction 66

7.6 Operation 71

8 Land quality 73

8.1 Introduction 73




8.5 Construction 76

8.6 Operation 78

2 3


9 Landscape and visual assessment 79

9.1 Introduction 79




9.5 Construction 81

9.6 Operation 84

10 Socio-economics 88

10.1 Introduction 88




10.5 Construction 90

10.6 Operation 90

11 Sound, noise and vibration 92






11.6 Operation 93

12 Trafficandtransport 96






12.6 Operation 102

13 Waterresourcesandfloodriskassessment 106






13.6 Operation 111

14 References 114

4


Listoffigures

Figure 1: HS2 Phase One route and community forum areas 8

Figure 2: Area context map 12

Figure 3: Birmingham interchange station visualisation 17

Figure 4: Indicative construction programme for the area 32

Figure 5: Business Sector Composition in Solihull Borough and the West Midlands 89

List of tables

Table 1: Location of construction site compounds 21

Table 2: Location of temporary worker accommodation sites 23

Table 3: Demolition works 25

Table 4: Watercourse diversions 25

Table 5: Highway and road diversions 27

Table 6: Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions 27

Table 7: Restricted accesses 28

Table 8: Viaducts, underbridges and overbridges 29

Table 9: Holdings affected by the Proposed Scheme 43

Table 10: Preliminary evaluation of likely value of protected and/or notable species occurring within this section of the route 65

Table 11: Significant residual construction effects on ecological receptors within this section of the route 70

Table 12: Significant residual operational effects on ecological receptors within this area 72

Table 13: Significant landscape effects during construction 82

Table 14: Significant visual effects during construction 83

Table 15: Significant landscape effects during operation year 1 (2026) 85

Table 16: Significant visual effects during operation year 1 (2026) 86

Table 17: Typical vehicle trip generation for site compounds in this area 100

5


Draft Volume 2: Community Forum Area Report Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24Structure of the HS2 draft Environmental StatementThe draft ES documentation for the purpose of this consultation comprises:

• A non-technical summary (NTS) – providing a summary of the Proposed Scheme, the likely significant effects of the Proposed Scheme, both beneficial and adverse, and the means to avoid or reduce the adverse effects;

• A main report – consisting of two volumes:

ȃ Volume 1: Introduction to the Environmental Statement and Proposed Scheme which provides an introduction to HS2, an overview of the hybrid bill process and the environmental impact assessment (EIA) methodology, an introduction to consultation and engagement, the main strategic and route-wide alternatives considered; and

ȃ Volume 2: Includes 26 Community Forum Area (CFA) reports, each with a separate corresponding set of drawings, which together provide the assessment of local environmental effects. An assessment of the effects of the Proposed Scheme on a route-wide basis is presented in Report 27.

HS2 Ltd set up 26 community forums along the line of route of the Proposed Scheme, as a regular way of engaging with local communities1. Volume 2 of this draft ES supports this engagement strategy by providing a draft ES report for each CFA. This is a report for the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood.

The draft ES has been written in a clear and accessible manner, however, on occasion it has been necessary to use technical terms. Given this, a glossary of terms and list of abbreviations for all draft ES documentation is provided.

1 Details of these community forums are provided on the HS2 Ltd website at http://www.hs2.org.uk/have-your-say/forums/community-forums. Accessed 24 April 2013.

6


Part A: Introduction

6 7

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Introduction

1 Introduction1.1 Introduction to HS21.1.1 HS2 is planned to be a Y-shaped rail network with stations in London, Birmingham, Leeds,

Manchester, South Yorkshire and the East Midlands, linked by high speed trains running at speeds of up to 360 kilometres per hour (kph) (225 miles per hour (mph)).

1.1.2 HS2 is proposed to be built in two phases. Phase One (the Proposed Scheme), the subject of this draft ES, would involve the construction of a new railway line of approximately 230km (143 miles) between London and Birmingham that would become operational by 2026; with a connection to the West Coast Main Line (WCML) near Lichfield and to the existing HS1 line in London. The Phase One route and the 26 CFAs are shown in Figure 1.

1.1.3 On opening, Phase One would run up to 14 trains per hour (tph). HS2 trains would be up to 400 metres (m) long with 1,100 seats during peak hours. Beyond the dedicated high speed track, these high speed trains would connect with and run on the existing WCML to serve passengers beyond the HS2 network. A connection to HS1 would also allow some services to run to mainland Europe via the Channel Tunnel.

1.1.4 Phase Two would involve the construction of lines from Birmingham to Leeds and Manchester; with construction commencing around 2027, and planned to be operational by 2033. After Phase Two opens, it is expected that the frequency of train services on some parts of the Phase One route could increase up to 18tph.

1.1.5 The Government believes that the HS2 network should link to Heathrow and its preferred option is for this to be built as part of Phase Two. However, the Government has since taken the decision to pause work on the Heathrow link until after 2015 when it expects the Airports Commission to publish its final report on recommended options for maintaining the country’s status as an international aviation hub.

1.2 Purpose of this report1.2.1 This report presents the likely significant environmental effects as a result of the construction

and operation of Phase One (the Proposed Scheme) that have been identified to date within the area of Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood (CFA 24). It provides a summary of the likely environmental issues and proposed mitigation measures that are being addressed during the design development process within the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area.

1.2.2 The final details of the Proposed Scheme and assessment of its environmental impacts and effects will be presented in the formal ES submitted in accordance with the requirements of Parliamentary Standing Order 27A (SO27A)2.

2 Standing Order 27A of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons relating to private business (environmental assessment), House of Commons.

8


Figure 1: HS2 Phase One route and community forum areas

9


1.3 Structure of this report1.3.1 This report is divided into three parts:

• Part A – an introduction to HS2 and the purpose of this report;

• Part B – overview of the area, description of the Proposed Scheme within Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood and its construction, community forum engagement, and a description of the main local alternatives; and

• Part C – environmental topic assessments, overview of the policy framework, the environmental baseline within the area, an assessment of construction and operational effects, the proposed mitigation measures, and significant residual effects for the following environmental topics:

ȃ Agriculture, forestry and soils;

ȃ Air quality;

ȃ Community;

ȃ Cultural heritage;

ȃ Ecology;

ȃ Land quality;

ȃ Landscape and visual assessment;

ȃ Socio-economics;

ȃ Sound, noise and vibration;

ȃ Traffic and transport; and

ȃ Water resources and flood risk.

1.3.2 The maps relevant to Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood are provided in a separate corresponding document entitled Volume 2: CFA24 Map Book, which should be read in conjunction with this report.

1.3.3 In addition to the environmental topics covered in Part C of this report, Report 27 also addresses climate, electromagnetic interference and waste and material resources on a route-wide basis.

10


Part B: Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood – overview of the area and description of the Proposed Scheme

11

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood

2 Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood

2.1 Overview of the area2.1.1 The Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood CFA covers an approximately 4.4km

section of the Proposed Scheme in Solihull Borough. It extends from south-east of the A45 Coventry Road, Hampton-in-Arden, at its southern boundary to the administrative boundary between Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (SMBC) and North Warwickshire Borough Council (NWBC), in close proximity to where the M42 intersects with the M6, at its northern boundary. The area includes land within the parish of Chelmsley Wood and parts of the Bickenhill, Hampton-in-Arden and Little Packington parishes.

2.1.2 As shown in Figure 2, Balsall Common and Hampton-in-Arden (CFA23) lies to the south and Coleshill Junction (CFA19) lies to the north.

Settlement, land use and topography

2.1.3 The route of the Proposed Scheme passes through predominantly agricultural land (the majority of which lies within the Packington Estate) and urban areas. The urban areas relate to Chelmsley Wood, a large residential estate and the Birmingham Interchange area. The Birmingham Interchange area is predominantly an area of employment, which includes: Birmingham Airport; Birmingham International railway station; the National Exhibition Centre complex (NEC); Birmingham Business Park and Packington Landfill. The small historic settlements of Middle Bickenhill and Bickenhill are located within Birmingham Interchange.

2.1.4 The topography of the area is dominated by the floodplains of the rivers Blythe and Cole and related minor tributaries, which are associated with land generally below 80m above Ordnance Datum (AOD). The route of the Proposed Scheme passes through an area of gently sloping land, with slightly higher ground to the west of the River Blythe with the highest points in the vicinity of Diddington Hill and the A45 Coventry Road in the south. Between these runs the shallow valley of Hollywell Brook. Lower land in the north is associated with the River Cole. Natural slopes are typically in the gradient range of 1:40 to 1:60.

2.1.5 Coleshill and Bannerly Pools Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) is located between the route of the Proposed Scheme and the A446 Stonebridge Road. The SSSI is notified for its valley mire, wet woodland and the species they support, particularly plants that are scarce or have a localised distribution within the Midlands.

2.1.6 Woodland areas are present, comprising both ancient and semi natural woodland and secondary 20th century planted woodlands. Notable locations of woodland include: the Disused Track and Siding Wood Ecosite; Denbigh Spinney Local Wildlife Site (LWS); Pendigo Lake and The Rough Ecosite; and Coleshill Pool Wood LWS.

Key transport infrastructure

2.1.7 The existing Rugby to Birmingham rail line runs through this section of the Proposed Scheme to Birmingham International railway station, continuing in a north-west direction towards Birmingham New Street railway station. Principal roads include: the A452 Chester Road; the A45 Coventry Road; the A446 Stonebridge Road, the M42 and M6. Birmingham Airport is located within the Birmingham Interchange area.

12


Figure 2: Area context map

13


Demographic profile

2.1.8 Population statistics based on national census data are available for the study area, which includes the settlements of Middle Bickenhill, Bickenhill and Elmdon. The populations of Chelmsley Wood and Birmingham Interchange areas are approximately 2,919 and 1,392 respectively. In line with the wider Solihull borough, the population of Chelmsley Wood and Birmingham Interchange is predicted to increase between 2010 and 2035. Within Chelmsley Wood 21.7% of the population is aged 60 years and over and 20.6% are aged between 0 to 14 years. Within Birmingham Interchange area 28.2% of residents are 60 years and over and 14.8% are aged between 0 and 14 years of age3.

2.1.9 In terms of deprivation, Birmingham Interchange area is ranked midway (52.5%) according to the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) nationally. Chelmsley Wood exhibits much higher levels of deprivation and is ranked within the top 20% nationally4.

2.1.10 Birmingham Interchange area has a very high proportion of home ownership (87.3%) with levels exceeding regional and national averages. Ownership levels are much lower in Chelmsley Wood (49.2%) with the majority of the remaining properties being rented from SMBC. Chelmsley Wood has a substantially higher proportion of lone parent households (20.2%) than Birmingham Interchange (8.0%), Solihull Borough and regional and national averages. Approximately half of total households are made up of “couples” in the Birmingham Interchange area (49.8%) with levels exceeding Solihull Borough and regional and national averages. The corresponding figure for the Chelmsley Wood area is 34.5%, which is in line with the national average.

Notable community facilities

2.1.11 Chelmsley Wood is a large residential estate located approximately 20km to the east of Birmingham. Chelmsley Wood includes a range of community facilities that mostly serve local residents. Located centrally within the estate is a local centre, which provides a range of facilities including: a library; police station; job centre; bank; a large food store; and other shops. In addition, there is a neighbourhood centre at Craig Croft to the east of the estate, which provides a number of facilities including: a medical centre; family support services; church; carers centre; and worship centre. There are three primary schools within the estate, including the Windy Arbor Junior and Infant School to the eastern extent of the estate, Coleshill Church of England Primary School and the Bishop Wilson Primary School, which is to be relocated within the Craig Croft local centre.

2.1.12 Coleshill is a small town with a good range of day-to-day services and facilities, providing a choice of convenience stores, leisure, recreation, healthcare, residential care and schooling for all ages from pre-school to secondary. The town also has a range of employment opportunities, including at the Hams Hall Industrial Estate to the north, which is a regionally important focus for business.

2.1.13 Local communities within the Birmingham Interchange area relate principally to the Parish of Bickenhill that lies across the A45 Coventry Road comprising the villages of Bickenhill, Middle Bickenhill and Marston Green. The settlements within the Bickenhill area retain a rural character with neighbourhood facilities at Marston Green including a public house, a post office, primary schools and a church. However, the area is intersected by a cluster of major facilities with a national significance, including; Birmingham Airport, Birmingham International railway station, the NEC and the National Motorcycle Museum.

3 Office for National Statistics, Census 2011.4 Department of Communities and Local Government. Index of Multiple Deprivations 2007.

14


Recreation, leisure and open space

2.1.14 There are a limited number of Public Rights of Way (PRoW) in the area. The most notable PRoW are located in close proximity to Melbicks Garden and Leisure Centre, connecting the A452 Chester Road and the A446 Stonebridge Road, and a short section close to Diddington Farm, connecting a track with the A45 Coventry Road. Green Lane provides the main east-west route between Coleshill and Chelmsley Wood.

2.1.15 The Olympia Motorcycle Track is located to the north of Middle Bickenhill.

2.1.16 Public open space in the area is mostly in and around the Chelmsley Wood estate with the Bluebell Recreation Ground that borders the M6 on the outskirts of Chelmsley Wood. The recreation ground provides a range of facilities including a multi-use games area, a skate park, grassed football pitches, a children’s play area and a community garden. Further to the north, Heath Park provides grassed football pitches and amenity parkland.

2.1.17 The neighbouring Coleshill has a good range of open spaces, the largest of which are Cole End Park in the north of the town; and Coleshill Memorial Park in the town centre, which provides sports pitches, tennis courts, a cricket pitch, a skate park and a children’s play area. There are outdoor sports facilities at the schools, a bowling green to the rear of the High Street, a public playing field adjacent to the community centre and a network of amenity green spaces and corridors throughout the settlement.

Planning context and key designations

2.1.18 Volume 1 sets out the national policies under which HS2 has been developed. Given that the Proposed Scheme has been developed on a national basis and to meet a national need it is not included or referred to in many local plans. Nevertheless, in seeking to consider the Proposed Scheme in the local context, relevant local plan documents and policies have been taken into account in relation to environmental topics.

2.1.19 SMBC is the principal local planning authority for this area and the Solihull Unitary Development Plan 2006 (SUDP) is the current adopted development plan for the area5. The Solihull Draft Local Plan – Shaping a Sustainable Future, 2012 (SDLP), which is part of the Local Plan for Solihull Borough, will replace parts of the SUDP once adopted6.

2.1.20 NWBC is the local planning authority for Little Packington. The North Warwickshire Local Plan 2006 (NWLP) is the current adopted development plan for the area. This plan sets out the existing planning policies but they will be subject to change as they are due to be replaced, in part, by the North Warwickshire Local Plan Core Strategy 2012 (NWLPCS), which is currently being prepared by NWBC7,8.

2.1.21 Within the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area there are large areas of land that are within the green belt, including, the land north of the A45 Coventry Road and land to the south and north of Chelmsley Wood. Policy C2 of the SUDP states that SMBC will not permit development in the green belt, except in very special circumstances in accordance with national policy.

2.1.22 The SDLP states that the NEC aims to become a destination centre for exhibitions, events, tourism and leisure, and as such aims to increase attraction through a broad range of developments to meet the needs of visitors of all ages. In line with Policy P1 SMBC will support proposals to meet these aims, including the development of ancillary and complementary

5 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2006), Solihull Unitary Development Plan.6 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2012), Solihull Draft Local Plan – Shaping a Sustainable Future.7 North Warwickshire Borough Council (2006), North Warwickshire Local Plan 2006.8 North Warwickshire Borough Council (2012), North Warwickshire Local Plan Core Strategy.

15


facilities such as meeting space and leisure provision. Similar proposals linked to Birmingham Airport and the business parks would also be supported.

2.1.23 Relevant policies from these documents have been taken into account in relation to the technical assessments reported in Sections 3 to 13.

2.2 Description of the Proposed Scheme2.2.1 The general design of the Proposed Scheme is described in Volume 1. The following section

describes the main features of the Proposed Scheme in the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area, including the main environmental mitigation measures.

Overview

2.2.2 The Proposed Scheme through this area would commence south-east of the A45 Coventry Road in Hampton-in-Arden, in close proximity to Pasture Farm. The route would then proceed north-west into a triangular site with the A452 Chester Road to the east, the M42, Birmingham Airport and NEC to the west and the A45 Coventry Road to the south. Within the triangular site a new HS2 station and associated infrastructure, known as Birmingham Interchange station, would be constructed together with an automated people mover and people mover depot. The automated people mover would provide connectivity between this new station, the NEC, Birmingham International railway station and Birmingham Airport.

2.2.3 Leaving the triangular site, the Proposed Scheme would continue north-west, crossing over the M42 on viaduct, with Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI and LWS to the north-east and Birmingham Business Park to the south-west. It would then continue over the M6 on viaduct with Chelmsley Wood residential estate located to the south-west. The Proposed Scheme would leave this area at the administrative boundary between SMBC and NWBC, in close proximity to where the M42 intersects with the M6.

2.2.4 Details of the Proposed Scheme are shown on maps CT-06-105 to CT-06-108. Details regarding temporary construction features are shown on maps CT-05-105 to CT-05-108. Further details of temporary works, such as construction compounds, highways and utility diversions are provided in Section 2.3.

2.2.5 Since the January 2012 scheme was announced by the Secretary of State, route development work has continued, and the Proposed Scheme now differs in some respects. These changes are discussed in more detail in Section 2.6. The following represent the principal design changes in this area:

• The location of the internal roads, car parks and highway improvements relating to Birmingham Interchange station;

• The alignment of the automated people mover and location of the depot;

• The form of the bridge carrying the Proposed Scheme over the M42;

• The diversion alignment of Hollywell Brook; and

• The alignment of the Proposed Scheme in close proximity to Chelmsley Wood.

2.2.6 Design development continues on this section of route. Any further changes resulting from this would be assessed in the formal ES if accepted into the Proposed Scheme.

Start of Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood (CFA24) Route Section to north-west of the A45 Coventry Road

2.2.7 The approximate length of this section would be 420m. The route of the Proposed Scheme would continue from Balsall Common and Hampton-in-Arden CFA, in close proximity to

16


Pasture Farm. The Proposed Scheme in this location would be a four-track layout. For the full length of this section the route of the Proposed Scheme would be in cutting of varying depths. As the route of the Proposed Scheme enters the section the depth of the cutting would be approximately 9m and would gradually rise to ground level north-west of the A45 Coventry Road. Key features of this section would include:

• Pasture Farm overbridge would provide a diverted access to Pasture Farm. The height of the overbridge would be up to 10m above the railway. A diverted overhead electricity line extending from Balsall Common and Hampton-in-Arden CFA would be incorporated into the bridge structure;

• The route of the Proposed Scheme would intersect the A45 Coventry Road north-west of Bickenhill Waste Recycling Centre. Three road overbridges, A45 Service Road overbridge, A45 Coventry Road overbridge and East Way overbridge, would be constructed to facilitate the route of the Proposed Scheme passing under the A45 Coventry Road. The height of each overbridge would be up to 10m above the railway. East Way and the A45 Coventry Road would be raised by over 3m on elevated bridge structures to cross over the route of the Proposed Scheme. A local temporary diversion of approximately 1km would be implemented for the A45 Coventry Road;

• Proposed planting would be undertaken along both sides of the realigned A45 Coventry Road for landscape integration;

• Improvement works and signalisation would take place at the A45 Coventry Road/A452 Chester Road junction (Stonebridge Island) to provide access to Birmingham Interchange station. Circulatory widening, widening on junction entries, segregated left turn lanes, signalisation and a through slip connecting the A452 Chester Road and A45 Coventry Road are proposed to increase junction capacity;

• The A452 Chester Road would be realigned to the east and access to the Toby Carvery public house on Stonebridge Island would be realigned;

• Demolition of seven buildings, including one residential, one nursery and three outbuildings;

• An extension of an existing culvert where the A45 Coventry Road crosses over an unnamed watercourse; and

• Two balancing ponds for highway drainage associated with improvements to Stonebridge Island.

North-west of the A45 Coventry Road to Hollywell Brook underbridge

2.2.8 The approximate length of this section would be 420m. The route of the Proposed Scheme would continue north-west predominantly on embankment, up to 3m in height, before entering the triangular site where Birmingham Interchange station would be located. The Proposed Scheme in this location would change from a four-track to a six-track layout. The route of the Proposed Scheme would cross Hollywell Brook upon entry to Birmingham Interchange station. Key features of this section would include:

• Culvert of an unnamed watercourse;

• Automated people mover depot, in close proximity to the Hollywell Brook underbridge (this is discussed in more detail under the section on Birmingham Interchange station and surrounding area);

• Hollywell Brook underbridge would facilitate the crossing of the Proposed Scheme over Hollywell Brook, which would be realigned. The height of the underbridge would be up to 6m;

17


• Proposed planting would be undertaken adjacent to Middle Bickenhill Lane and the disused railway for landscape integration;

• The diversion of an existing overhead electricity line east of Middle Bickenhill Lane;

• Two flood storage compensation areas, north-east and south-west of the Proposed Scheme. The area to the north-east would be excavated to approximately 1m below existing ground level. The area to the south-west would be excavated to approximately 2m below existing ground level. Both areas would be regraded to tie back into the existing ground level;

• The minor realignment of an unnamed watercourse as a result of the A45 Coventry Road realignment; and

• One balancing pond for highway drainage associated with the A45 Coventry Road.

Birmingham Interchange station and surrounding area

2.2.9 The approximate length of this section would be 1.2km. Birmingham Interchange station and associated infrastructure would be constructed within the triangular site. Figure 3 below is a visualisation of the current design of the proposed Birmingham Interchange station, automated people mover, round infastructure and car parking. The design of the station remains under development and additional photomontages will be presented in the formal ES.

Figure 3: Birmingham Interchange station visualisation

2.2.10 As part of the design development and key stakeholder engagement, station designs are being refined to allow for better passenger connectivity, station operation flexibility and interface with the local setting. The preferred station design will be presented in the formal ES.

2.2.11 Key features for the Birmingham Interchange station and surrounding area would include:

• Birmingham Interchange station – northbound and southbound platforms providing domestic services with additional provision for international operations. Within the station

18


a number of facilities would be provided including retail, welfare, and information. Exiting Birmingham Interchange station, the route of the Proposed Scheme would continue north-west and change from a six-track to a four-track layout. Four balancing ponds would be provided to attenuate surface water runoff from the station, car parks and internal road network;

• Automated people mover – an elevated automated people mover, up to 17m in height, would operate from the Birmingham Interchange station providing connectivity to the NEC, Birmingham International railway station and Birmingham Airport. The design of the automated people mover system is yet to be defined. The automated people mover would commence at the Birmingham Interchange station moving south-west over Middle Bickenhill Lane, the M42, East Way, and Pendigo Lake. Middle Bickenhill Lane would be closed to vehicular traffic. The automated people mover would cross over the Rugby to Birmingham rail line before continuing onto Birmingham Airport. An automated people mover depot to facilitate the maintenance of the automated people mover would be constructed south of the Birmingham Interchange station. The automated people mover depot would be accessed from the route of the automated people mover;

• Car parking – three surface level car parks would be provided to the north, east and west of Birmingham Interchange station;

• Internal access roads – Birmingham Interchange station would be accessed from the public highways to the north-east and north-west. The majority of traffic would access and exit the Birmingham Interchange station using a dedicated link road off the A452 Chester Road. Access and exit from the north-west would be from a new roundabout north of the Birmingham Interchange station. Separate access roads would be provided to each of the three car parks. Buses, taxis, drop off vehicles and emergency vehicles would access Birmingham Interchange station from the north-east and north-west; and

• Highway realignments – to facilitate the construction and operation of Birmingham Interchange station, alterations to the existing highway network and new highway provisions would be required as follows:

ȃ M42 Junction 6 – a segregated left-turn for A45 Coventry Road westbound to M42 southbound traffic adjacent to the National Motorcycle Museum. The existing National Motorcycle Museum entrance would be closed with a new entrance being provided off the A45 Service Road on the line of a footpath. Entry slip roads to the M42 would be widened to four lanes. Two balancing ponds would be provided for highway drainage;

ȃ A452 Chester Road – offline widening to dual three lanes. Two balancing ponds would be provided for highway drainage; and

ȃ A446 Stonebridge Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout – this roundabout would reconnect the existing road network severed by the Proposed Scheme and would provide the access north-west to Birmingham Interchange station. The existing roundabout would be demolished. Existing overhead electricity lines would be required to be diverted south-east of the new roundabout. One balancing pond would be provided for highway drainage.

2.2.12 Other key design features within this section would include:

• Demolition of two buildings – one office and one outbuilding;

• Proposed planting to the south of Park Farm, a Grade II* listed building, for visual screening;

• Realignment of a footpath along the A446 Stonebridge Road;

• Culvert of an unnamed watercourse;

19


• A minor diversion of an unnamed watercourse;

• An auto-transformer site, located north-west of the A446 Stonebridge Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout; and

• Three balancing ponds for rail drainage.

Birmingham Interchange station to end of Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood CFA

2.2.13 The approximate length of this section would be 2.4km. From the A446 Stonebridge Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout the Proposed Scheme would continue north-west on embankment, up to 6m in height, to the M42 viaduct. The length of the viaduct as it crosses the M42 at an angle would be 215m in length and up to 10m in height. The length of the viaduct crossed by the Proposed Scheme is 47m. On leaving the viaduct the Proposed Scheme would continue on embankment before entering the adjoining Coleshill Junction CFA (CFA 19) at the administrative boundary between SMBC and NWBC, in close proximity to where the M42 intersects with the M6, at its northern boundary. The Proposed Scheme would leave this section on viaduct crossing the M6 and its slip road connections to the M42 on a viaduct. The M6 No.1 viaduct would be approximately 150m in length. Key features of this section would include:

• Proposed planting along the east side of the route of the Proposed Scheme to provide visual screening for Common Farm;

• Widening and signalisation of the M6 Junction 4;

• The existing A452 Chester Road/B4438 (Bickenhill Parkway) roundabout would be demolished. Two new roundabouts, including a segregated left turn lane for A452 Chester Road southbound traffic, would be constructed to connect to the existing B4438. The M42 overbridge would be constructed to facilitate the link between the A452 Chester Road to the B4438. One balancing pond would be provided for highway drainage. Planting would be undertaken along the east and west side of the Proposed Scheme to provide visual screening for Birmingham Business Park;

• Coleshill Heath Road underbridge would carry the route of the Proposed Scheme over Coleshill Heath Road, which would be lowered locally; and

• Diversion of an existing overhead electricity line over the M6 and Coleshill Heath Road and the M42 and the A452 Chester Road.

Land required for the Proposed Scheme

2.2.14 The Proposed Scheme would require land on both a temporary and permanent basis. The land required for construction is shown on the construction maps (CT-05-105 to CT-05-108) and will be subject to review as the engineering design and formal ES is prepared. The final permanent and temporary land requirements will be set out in the formal ES.

2.3 Construction of the Proposed Scheme2.3.1 This section sets out the key construction activities that are envisaged to build the Proposed

Scheme in the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area and the control measures that are proposed to manage the works. General descriptions of construction works that are relevant to the whole of the Proposed Scheme are provided in Volume 1.

20


Environmental management and Code of Construction Practice

2.3.2 All contractors would be required to comply with the environmental management regime for the Proposed Scheme, which would include:

• Code of Construction Practice (CoCP)9; and

• Local environmental management plans (LEMPs), which would apply within each CFA.

2.3.3 The CoCP, in conjunction with associated LEMPs, would be the means of controlling the construction works associated with the Proposed Scheme, with the objective of ensuring that the effects of the works upon people and the natural environment are kept to a practicable minimum. The CoCP will contain generic control measures and standards to be implemented throughout the construction process.

2.3.4 A draft CoCP has been prepared and is published alongside this document. It will be kept under review as the design of the Proposed Scheme develops and further engagement with stakeholders is undertaken.

Construction site operation

Working hours

2.3.5 Core working hours would be from 08:00 to 18:00 on weekdays (excluding bank holidays) and from 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays. While there would not normally be any construction activity on Sundays, some activities (e.g. weekend possessions, tunnelling and ventilation and intervention shaft (vent shaft) construction) would be undertaken. Site specific variations to core hours and/or additional hours likely to be required would be included within LEMPs following consultation with the relevant LPA. To maximise productivity within the core hours, HS2 Ltd’s contractors would require a period of up to one hour before and up to one hour after the core working hours for start-up and close down of activities. These activities would be subject to controls set out in the CoCP.

2.3.6 Work within track laying activities and work requiring possession of major transport infrastructure (e.g. highways) may be undertaken during night-time, Saturday afternoon, Sunday and/or bank holidays for reasons of safety or operational necessity and would often involve consecutive nights work including over weekend possessions.

Construction site compounds

2.3.7 Main site compounds would be used for core project management (engineering, planning and construction delivery), commercial, and administrative staff.

2.3.8 Satellite site compounds would generally be smaller in size, providing office accommodation for limited numbers of staff. The satellite site compound would provide local storage for plant and materials and limited car parking would be provided for staff and site operatives. Limited welfare facilities would be provided at each site.

2.3.9 The location of all site compounds along with their duration of use and a broad current estimate of the number of workers likely to work at the construction sites is set out in Table 1 and shown in maps CT-05-105 to CT-05-108. Construction site details and arrangements are continuing to be refined and will be confirmed in the formal ES. All construction staff would be required to comply with codes of behaviour set out by the CoCP.

9 Arup/URS (2013) Phase One: Draft Code of Construction Practice. HS2 Ltd, London.

21


Compound type

Location Typical use Estimated duration of use10

Estimated number of workers

Main site Birmingham Interchange station main office, Middle Bickenhill LaneMap CT-05-106

Administrative centre, construction of Birmingham Interchange station and car parks and utility diversions

46 months 465

Satellite site Stonebridge Island satellite office, Stonebridge IslandMap CT-05-105

Watercourse diversion and Stonebridge Island improvements

16 months 50

Satellite site A45 overbridges satellite office, A45 Coventry RoadMap CT-05-105

Utility diversions, watercourse diversion, A45 Coventry Road and A45 Service Road overbridges construction and earthworks

53 months 30

Satellite site A45 overbridge/East Way Loop bridgesatellite office, A45 Coventry RoadMap CT-05-105

Utility diversions, East Way Loop bridge construction and earthworks, and roadworks

42 months 20

Satellite site A45 East Way overbridges loop satellite office, East WayMap CT-05-105

Utility diversions, A45 Coventry Road/East Way overbridge construction, bridge improvements, earthworks, balancing ponds, and watercourse and culvert work

48 months 25

Satellite site M42 viaduct satellite office, M42 Junction 6 Map CT-05-107

M42 Junction 6 improvements and earthworks

24 months 40

Satellite site Birmingham Interchange station Car Park (East) satellite office, A452 Chester RoadMap CT-05-106

A452 Chester Road bridge improvements, Hollywell Brook underbridge construction and earthworks, and balancing ponds

20 months 45

Satellite Site Automated people mover Pendigo Lake Satellite office, NEC car park E5, between East Way and Pendigo WayMap CT-05-106-01

Utility diversion and construction of the automated people mover

24 months 90

Satellite site Automated people mover M42 Crossing satellite office, NEC car park E4 adjacent to the East WayMap CT-05-106-01

Construction of the automated people mover

24 months 90

Satellite site Birmingham Interchange station car park (West) and automated people mover depot satellite office, Middle Bickenhill Lane Map CT-05-106

Construction of the automated people mover and depot

36 months 70

Satellite site Automated people mover Birmingham International railway station satellite office, south of Birmingham International Station within the station car parkMap CT-05-106-03

Construction of the automated people mover and utility diversions

42months 50

Satellite site Automated people mover NEC station satellite office, east of the Perimeter Road, north of Birmingham International StationMap CT-05-106-03


36 months 55

22


Compound type

Location Typical use Estimated duration of use10

Estimated number of workers

Satellite site Automated people mover Birmingham airport satellite office, adjacent to Birmingham airportMap CT-05-106-03


40 months 55

Satellite site A446 Stonebridge Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout satellite office, A452 Chester RoadMap CT-05-106

Construction of overbridge on Stonebridge Road, watercourse/culvert works, earthworks, and utility diversions

48 months 35

Satellite site M42 viaduct (East) satellite office, A452 Chester RoadMap CT-05-107

M42 overbridge and M42 viaduct construction and earthworks, utility diversions, and road improvements

55 months 30

Satellite site M42 viaduct (West) satellite office, B4438/NorthwayMap CT-05-107

M42 overbridge and M42 viaduct construction and earthworks, utility diversions, and road improvements

60 months 20

Satellite site M6 Junction 4 satellite office, M6 Junction 4Map CT-05-107-01

M6 Junction 4 bridge widening and earthworks

24 months 35

Satellite site M6 No. 1 viaduct satellite office, Yorkminster DriveMap CT-05-108

M6 and slip roads viaduct construction 18 months 60

Table 1: Location of construction site compounds10

2.3.10 The main construction site compounds would contain space for the storage of bulk materials (aggregates, structural steel, steel reinforcement), an area for the fabrication of temporary works equipment and finished goods, fuel storage, plant and equipment storage and necessary operational parking. Buildings would be generally temporary modular units and layout would maximise construction space and limit land required. In urban areas it may be necessary to stack these units due to space restrictions. Hard standing areas would be installed at all site compounds.

2.3.11 The Birmingham Interchange station construction site compound would be accessed directly off the A452 Chester Road via Middle Bickenhill Lane and would provide the adjacent Birmingham Interchange station and associated access roads and overbridges with site office and welfare accommodation. The compound would provide administration and support facilities for the Proposed Scheme in the area.

2.3.12 A concrete batching and precast concrete production facility would be located within the construction site compound which would provide concrete supply to the construction works (map CT-05-106). This facility may be supplemented by the existing facility located at the proposed Washwood Heath depot (Washwood Heath to Curzon Street CFA (CFA 26)) which would be used if possible. A material reprocessing facility would also be located within the construction site compound for recycling demolition materials and aggregates for reuse (crushing, screening and grading plants). The adjacent areas would be used for the temporary storage of any topsoil stripped as part of the works.

Fencing and lighting

2.3.13 Security fencing would be provided on the perimeter of each site compound. Individual site compounds for offices, welfare and storage would generally be demarcated and secured with

10 The duration for each site compound is currently based on a draft programme, which will be refined for the formal ES.

23


fences and gates. Fence type and construction would be appropriate to the level of security required, likelihood of intruders, level of danger and visual impact to the environment.

2.3.14 Lighting of site compounds during hours of darkness would seek to reduce light pollution to the surrounding area, in accordance with the requirements of the CoCP.

Temporary worker accommodation sites

2.3.15 One temporary worker accommodation site would be located within this section of the Proposed Scheme as detailed in Table 2. Temporary worker accommodation sites will adhere to the codes of behaviour in the CoCP.

2.3.16 The duration for each site compound is currently based on construction of the scheme and does not incorporate any further time the accommodation site might be retained to enable commissioning. This will be confirmed in the formal ES.

Location Site description Facilities provided Estimated Duration of use11

Estimated number of temporary workers

Located on the edge of Birmingham Interchange station, north-east of M42 Junction 6Map CT-05-106

Modular temporary living accommodation

Living accommodation, welfare facilities, car parking

50 months 110

Table 2: Location of temporary worker accommodation sites11

Construction traffic and access

2.3.17 The following lorry route is currently proposed for the main construction site compound:

• The proposed lorry route for the Birmingham Interchange station construction site compound would be northwards along Middle Bickenhill Lane continuing southwards along the A452 Chester Road to Stonebridge Island and then westwards along the A45 Coventry Road to M42 Junction 6.

2.3.18 Satellite construction site compounds would generally be more remote and operational for shorter durations. Lorry routes would be either via internal site access routes or A, B or minor unclassified roads (shown on map CT-05-105 to CT-05-108) including:

• The proposed lorry route for the Stonebridge Island construction site compound would be westwards along the A45 Coventry Road to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the A45 overbridges construction site compound would be southwards along the site access to Diddington Lane and then northwards along Diddington Lane to Stonebridge Island via the A452 Chester Road. From Stonebridge Island the route would proceed westwards along the A45 Coventry Road to Junction 6 of the M42. Within three months of this site compound being established an access direct to the A45 Service Road would be provided;

• The proposed lorry route for the A45 overbridge/East Way Loop bridge construction site compound would be westwards along the A45 Service Road and continuing on the A45 Coventry Road to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the A45 East Way overbridges loop construction site compound would be eastwards along the A45 Coventry Road to Stonebridge Island and continuing westwards along the A45 Coventry Road to Junction 6 of the M42;

11 The duration for each site compound is currently based on a draft programme, which will be refined for the formal ES.

24


• The proposed lorry route for the M42 viaduct construction site compound would be northwards or southwards from Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for Birmingham Interchange station car park (east) construction site compound would be southwards along the A452 Chester Road to Stonebridge Island and then westwards along the A45 Coventry Road to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the automated people mover Pendigo Lake construction site compound would be westwards along East Way, continuing southwards to Pendigo Way and westwards to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the automated people mover M42 crossing construction site compound would be westwards along East Way, continuing southwards to Pendigo Way and westwards to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the Birmingham Interchange station car park (west) and automated people mover depot construction site compound would be northwards along Middle Bickenhill Lane continuing southwards along the A452 Chester Road to Stonebridge Island and then westwards along the A45 Coventry Road to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the automated people mover Birmingham International railway station construction site compound would be southwards through the railway station car park along Bickenhill Lane to the A45 Coventry Road roundabout and then eastwards to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the automated people mover NEC station construction site compound would be southwards along the perimeter road, continuing eastwards along South Car Park Road and Pendigo Way and then westwards to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the automated people mover Birmingham Airport construction site compound would be southwards along Airport Way, continuing eastwards and southwards along Bickenhill Lane to the A45 Coventry Road roundabout and then eastwards to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the A446 Stonebridge Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout construction site compound would be southwards along the A452 Chester Road to Stonebridge Island and then westwards along the A45 Coventry Road to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the M42 Viaduct (east) construction site compound would be southwards along the A452 Chester Road to Stonebridge Island and then westwards along the A45 Coventry Road to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the M42 viaduct (west) construction site compound would be directly off the north bound lane of the M42 with appropriate traffic management in place. An alternative route would be northwards along Bickenhill Parkway and then southwards along the A452 Chester Road to Stonebridge Island and then westwards along the A45 Coventry Road to Junction 6 of the M42;

• The proposed lorry route for the M6 Junction 4 construction site compound would be eastwards or westwards along the M6; and

• The proposed lorry route the M6 No.1 viaduct satellite office is Yorkminster Drive/Coleshill Heath Road, continuing onto A446 Stonebridge Road and M6.

25


Preparatoryandenablingworks

Demolition works

2.3.19 It is anticipated that the Proposed Scheme would require the demolition of two structures and seven buildings in the area. These works are outlined in Table 3.

Description of structure Location

A 1-2 storey brick nursery, a single storey timber shed, and single storey brick shed

Top Hat and Tails, A45 Coventry Road

A two storey brick residential and single storey brick garage Nursery Cottage, A45 Coventry Road

Single storey, steel frame, warehouse Park Farm, A452 Chester Road

Single storey, brick offices Olympia Motorcycle Track, Middle Bickenhill Lane

Road over M42 80m south of the A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road/B4438 roundabout

Road over M42 20m north of the A452 Coventry Road/A446 Stonebridge Road/B4438 roundabout

Table 3: Demolition works

Drainage and culverts

2.3.20 It is anticipated that drainage ponds would be required for both railway track and highway drainage. Indicative locations are shown on maps CT-06-105 to CT-06-108.

Watercourse diversions

2.3.21 The route of the Proposed Scheme and associated highway works require three diversions of watercourses as detailed in Table 4.

Location Watercourse (status)

Reason for diversion Diversion length and map reference

605m north-west of Stonebridge Island Unnamed watercourse/agricultural ditch (ordinary)

To realign watercourse around A45 Coventry Road and Proposed Scheme earthworks

100mMap CT-06-106

From 335m south-east of Park Farm to 380m south-west of Park Farm.

Hollywell Brook (ordinary)

To realign watercourse around Birmingham Interchange station and provide perpendicular crossing under the Proposed Scheme

350mMap CT-06-106

230m north-west of Middle Bickenhill Lane intersection with the A452 Chester Road to 370m west of Middle Bickenhill Lane intersection with the A452 Chester Road

Unnamed watercourse/agricultural ditch (ordinary)

To realign watercourse around A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road roundabout, the Proposed Scheme and under numerous side road connections

600mMap CT-06-106

Table 4: Watercourse diversions

Utility diversions

2.3.22 There are a number of major items of utility infrastructure in proximity to the Proposed Scheme, include: high pressure gas mains; large diameter water mains; large diameter

26


sewers; fibre optic/signal cabling; and high and low voltage electricity lines. In summary, the main proposed utility diversions required in the area would be:

• The existing services along the A45 Coventry Road would require diverting as part of the proposed realignment of the highway. Services include medium pressure gas mains, low voltage electricity lines, signal cabling and water mains;

• Diversions of signal cabling, gas mains, signal cabling and low voltage electricity lines along the A452 Chester Road;

• Diversion of a high voltage overhead electricity line is required in close proximity to Park Farm. Birmingham Interchange station requires the diversion of three electricity pylons. Several low voltage electricity lines would also require diversions to the west of the station following proposed roundabout alignments;

• Diversion of a high voltage overhead electricity line is required in close proximity to Birmingham Interchange station. Three electricity pylons would be required to be permanently relocated to accommodate the structures associated with the Proposed Scheme;

• A mobile phone mast positioned on Middle Bickenhill Lane would be required to be relocated. The location of the mast is to be determined;

• The alignment of the automated people mover requires the diversion of one high voltage and two low voltage electricity lines. Several telecommunication services, water mains and a medium pressure gas main would also affected;

• Diversions of high voltage overhead electricity line and pylons over the M6 and Coleshill Heath Road and the M42 and the A452 Chester Road;

• The diversion of a number of services along Coleshill Heath Road which include low voltage electricity lines, signal cabling and water mains; and

• A mobile phone mast positioned near Coleshill Heath Road would be required to be relocated. The location of the mast is to be determined.

2.3.23 Discussions with utility providers are underway to confirm whether plant and/or apparatus would need to be realigned away from the area of work; protected from the works by means of a concrete slab or similar; or have sufficient clearance from the work that they would not be affected.

2.3.24 Indicative utility diversions are provided on maps CT-05-105 to CT-05-108. These diversions will be subject to ongoing discussions with utility providers and as such the environmental impact associated with each diversion will be reported in the formal ES.

2.3.25 Wherever practicable, temporary connections for construction site compounds would be made to local existing utility services (i.e. electricity, water, data, sewerage and surface water drainage) to reduce the need for generators, storage tanks and associated traffic movements for fuel tankers.

Highway and road diversions

2.3.26 Proposed highway and road diversions are shown on map CT-06-105 to CT-06-108 and shown in Table 5. The total duration of works does not necessarily indicate periods of actual closure. The closure of routes would be kept to as short a duration as possible. Diversions show indicative alternative routes available to maintain general access which will be subject to change as part of the development of the design and will be detailed in the formal ES.

27


Name Location Diversion route Approximate length of diversions

Duration

A45 Coventry Road 600m north-west of Stonebridge Island

Local diversion 1km 24 months

A446 Stonebridge Road 370m north-west of Common Farm to 380m south-east of Park Farm

Contra flow on existing carriageway

300m 24 months

M42 Below the centre of the A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road/B4438 roundabout


500m 18 months

A452 Chester Road 345m south-east of Common Farm

Via A446 Stonebridge Road north to roundabout at M6 during overnight closures

4km 24 months

A452 Chester Road 200m north-west of Stonebridge Island

B443 and A45 Coventry Road during overnight closures

6km 18 months

A452 Chester Road 100m north-west of Common Farm

Via A446 Stonebridge Road north to roundabout at M6 during overnight closures

4km 24 months

M42 250m north-west of Common Farm


500m 18 months

Roundabout on A452 Chester Road/B4438

Centre of A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road/B4438 roundabout

Via B4438 and A452 Chester Road during overnight closures

1km 18 months

M42 Junction 6 Centre of M42 Junction 6 Contra flow on existing carriageway

500m 18 months

Roundabout on A452 Solihull Parkway

140m south-west of the A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road/B4438

Via B4438 and A452 Chester Road during overnight closures

1km 18 months

Coleshill Heath Road Coleshill Heath Road Contra flow on existing carriageway

100m 6 months

Table 5: Highway and road diversions

Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions

2.3.27 Proposed footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions are shown on maps CT-06-105 to CT-06-108 and shown in Table 6. The total duration of works does not necessarily indicate periods of actual closure. The closure of routes would be kept to as short a duration as reasonably practicable. Diversions show indicative alternative routes available to maintain general access which will be subject to change as part of the development of the design and will be detailed in the formal ES.

Name Location Diversion route Approximate length of diversions

Duration

FP M114 PRoW from A45 Coventry Road connecting to Diddington Lane in the south-east

Local diversion 200m 6 months

A446 Stonebridge Road 300m north-west of Park Farm to 375m south-east of Common Farm

Existing carriageway 300m 24 months

Table 6: Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions

28


Restricted accesses

2.3.28 Potential restricted accesses are shown in Table 7.

Property address Location Description Duration

Pasture Farm A45 Coventry Road Construction of Pasture Farm overbridge would be sequenced such that access is maintained at all times

6 months

Armec Demolition 50m south-east of the A45 Coventry Road

A45 Coventry Road would be sequenced such that access is maintained at all times

30 months

Properties in the vicinity of the automated people mover

Middle Bickenhill Lane Restricted access involving loss of car parking spaces, road narrowing, lane closure, traffic lights and road closures with diversion routes intermittently over 36 month construction period due to foundation and pier construction

36 months

Table 7: Restricted accesses

Mainconstructionworks–Earthworks

Earthworks

2.3.29 Major earthworks in the area would include:

• The construction of embankments along various sections of the route of the Proposed Scheme; and

• Earthworks relating to the construction of overbridges, new highways and highway improvements, and Birmingham Interchange station and associated infrastructure.

2.3.30 Works would be carried out in a sequence, taking due consideration of the impacts of road and footpath closures, flows within watercourses and vehicle movements by road.

2.3.31 During design development consideration has been given to the movement of materials. Wherever possible excavated material would be moved directly from the area of excavation to areas of the works where fill material is required. Some processing and temporary stockpiling of fill material may be necessary if direct placement into the permanent works is not possible. Some material may require crushing and/or screening to render it acceptable for use elsewhere.

2.3.32 If a shortfall of fill material arises in this section of the Proposed Scheme, where reasonably practicable, materials would be imported from surpluses generated on other sections of the Proposed Scheme. Where this is not possible due to the material being unsuitable, or the benefits of importing material are outweighed by the impacts of transportation, local sources of material would be identified.

Mainconstructionworks–Structures

Bridges and viaducts

2.3.33 Viaducts and road bridges under and over the route of the Proposed Scheme would generally be of concrete construction. Structures over the railway would provide a minimum clearance of 7.15m. Structures under the railway would allow for the clearances required by other modes (e.g. typically 5.8m for highways).

2.3.34 A simplified construction sequence for a typical viaduct is provided in Volume 1.

2.3.35 Viaducts, underbridges and overbridges are detailed in Table 8.

29


Location Element description Length (m)

Pasture Farm Pasture Farm overbridge 36

520m north-west of Stonebridge Island A45 Coventry Road overbridges (3.no)

36 (each)

345m south-east of Park Farm Hollywell Brook underbridge 26

40m north-east of North Way A452 Chester Road to B4438 Link M42 overbridge

129

315m north-west of Common Farm to 520m north-west of Common Farm

M42 viaduct 215

560m north-east of Coleshill Heath Road/A452 Chester Road to 560m north-east of Coleshill Heath Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout

Coleshill Heath Road underbridge N/A

560m north-east of Coleshill Heath Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout to 610m north-east of Coleshill Heath Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout

M6 viaduct No.114 135

Table 8: Viaducts, underbridges and overbridges12,1314

2.3.36 The design of viaducts is currently based on flood risk data received from third parties. Where viaducts, bridges, embankments or other structures intrude into floodplains, the effects of these structures would be assessed in detail and included in the final design and formal ES, in order to ensure there is no significant increase in flood risk to key receptors. Through the flood risk assessment process, hydraulic modelling may demonstrate appropriate reductions or increases to the proposed lengths and heights of viaducts and other river crossing structures. If shown to be required, the location and size of flood storage areas would be revised to mitigate for the loss of floodplain.

Birmingham Interchange station construction

2.3.37 Based on the current design detail, a simplified construction sequence for Birmingham Interchange station is proposed to be adopted as follows:

• Phase 1: Enabling works would be carried out in advance of the main construction works including; site investigation works and statutory utility diversions;

• Phase 2: Establishment of the construction site compound, haul roads, and site clearance and excavation of ground;

• Phase 3: Installation of piles, excavation to form the basement and construction of ground beams and basement slabs;

• Phase 4: Installation of tower cranes to facilitate placing of precast units;

• Phase 5: Lifting of the pre-cast panels into position to form the concrete superstructure up to concourse level consisting of columns, suspended slabs, and walls, etc.;

• Phase 6: Construction of station steel superstructure up to roof level;

• Phase 7: Installation of cladding panels to form the exterior walls;

• Phase 8: Installation of station roof;

• Phase 9: Installation of mechanical, electrical and public health systems;

• Phase 10: Internal station finishes including internal cladding, blockwork walls, windows, doors, flooring, and ceilings etc.;

12 An underbridge is a bridge that crosses under a rail line. This includes bridges for roads, PRoW or utilities.13 An overbridge is a bridge that crosses over a rail line. This includes bridges from roads, PRoW or utilities.14 The M6 viaduct extends in to the adjoining Coleshill Junction CFA (number 19).

30


• Phase 11: External station finishes including block paving, bollards; and

• Phase 12: Removal of haul roads and road and footpath realignments.

Automated people mover depot construction

2.3.38 Based on the current design detail, a simplified construction sequence for the automated people mover is proposed to be adopted as follows:

• Phase 1: Enabling works would be carried out in advance of the main construction works including; site investigation works and statutory utility diversions;

• Phase 2: Establishment of the construction site compound, haul roads, and site clearance and excavation of ground;

• Phase 3: Installation of piles, deep excavations for the inspection/drop pits and shallower excavations for the pile caps, ground beams and ground slabs. Excavation to form the basement and construction of ground beams and basement slabs;

• Phase 4: Construction of station steel superstructure up to roof level;

• Phase 5: Installation of cladding panels to form the exterior walls;

• Phase 6: Installation of the roof;

• Phase 7: Installation of mechanical, electrical and public health systems;

• Phase 8: Internal depot finishes including internal cladding, blockwork walls, windows, doors, flooring, and ceilings;

• Phase 9: External depot works including block paving and bollards; and

• Phase 10: Removal of site compound and haul roads.

Railinfrastructurefitout

2.3.39 The principal elements of rail infrastructure to be constructed are track, overhead line equipment, communications equipment and power supply. The installation of track in open areas would be of standard ballasted track configuration, comprising principally of ballast, rail and sleepers. Further details are set out in Volume 1.

Power supply

2.3.40 HS2 trains would draw power from overhead line equipment, requiring feeder stations and connections to the 400kV National Grid network. There are no feeder stations within the local area. In addition to feeder stations, smaller auto-transformer stations would be required at more frequent intervals. The anticipated location of a proposed auto-transformer station in this area would be in close proximity to the new A446 Stonebridge Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout. The location is shown on map CT-06-106.

Landscaping and permanent fencing

2.3.41 Landscaping (i.e. earthworks and seeding and planting) would be provided to address visual and noise impacts, as well as to provide screening for intrinsically important ecological habitats and heritage features. Where appropriate, the engineering embankments and/or cuttings would be reshaped to integrate the alignment sympathetically into the character of the surrounding landscape. The planting would reflect tree and shrub species native to the Arden landscape. Opportunities for ecological habitat creation would be considered.

2.3.42 Permanent fencing would be erected and will be shown on plans to accompany the formal ES.

31


Crossovers and switches

2.3.43 It may be necessary to accommodate additional crossovers on the route, or to move crossovers already included in the design, to allow the railway to operate under degraded conditions, such as the closure of one line for maintenance works, or to overcome problems caused by a train or infrastructure failure. A study is currently underway to determine the optimum locations for these crossovers, but it is likely that they would be accommodated within the currently defined footprint of the Proposed Scheme and would not result in additional land acquisition.

Construction programme

2.3.44 A construction programme that illustrates indicative periods for each core construction activity in this area is provided in Figure 4.

32


Figure 4: Indicative construction programme for the area

33


Commissioning

2.3.45 Commissioning is the process of testing the infrastructure to ensure that it operates as expected. This would take place in the year prior to opening. Further details are provided in Volume 1.

2.4 Operation of the Proposed Scheme2.4.1 Up to 11 trains per hour (tph) would travel in each direction through the Birmingham

Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area at the start of operation of the Proposed Scheme, rising to a possible 14tph as operations are set in. Should Phase Two become fully operational, the number of trains through the Birmingham and Chelmsley Wood area may rise to a maximum of 18tph.

2.4.2 The trains would be either 200m (one-unit train) or 400m (two-unit trains) long. They would run between the hours of 05:00 and 24:00 (Monday to Saturday) and between 08:00 and 24:00 (Sunday). The station would be open for a short period before and after operating hours to allow for staff and passengers to enter or leave. When required, maintenance would be conducted outside those operating hours.

2.4.3 Each train could hold up to 550 people (one-unit train) or 1,100 people (two-unit train). A portion of the passengers would alight the trains at the station, or disembark to transit to other transport services from the station.

2.4.4 The operation of the Proposed Scheme is described in more detail in Volume 1.

2.5 Community forum engagement2.5.1 HS2 Ltd’s approach to engagement on the Proposed Scheme is set out in Volume 1.

2.5.2 A series of community forum meetings and discussions with individual landowners, organisations and action groups were undertaken. Community forum meetings were held on:

• 4 April 2012 at the Concourse Hospitality Suites 21 and 22, the NEC;

• 20 June 2012 at Kingshurst Evangelical Church, Chelmsley Wood;

• 11 September 2012 at Kingshurst Evangelical Church, Chelmsley Wood;

• 26 November 2012 at the Loft, Bluebell Centre, Chelmsley Wood; and

• 6 March 2013 at the Loft, Bluebell Centre, Chelmsley Wood.

2.5.3 In addition to HS2 Ltd representatives, attendees at these community forum meetings typically included local residents (and residents groups), public representatives, representatives of local authorities and parish and district councils, action groups, affected landowners and other interested stakeholders.

2.5.4 The main themes to emerge from these meetings were:

• Routing of construction traffic and potential noise and air quality impacts;

• Proximity of the route of the Proposed Scheme to Chelmsley Wood;

• Severance of Heath Park and Bluebell Recreation Ground;

• Opportunities for an alternative horizontal alignment or cut and cover tunnel for the section of the route of the Proposed Scheme adjacent to Chelmsley Wood;

• Noise emitted from the operation of the Proposed Scheme and Birmingham Interchange station and the impact on residents of Chelmsley Wood and Middle Bickenhill;

34


• Electromagnetic impacts generated during the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme;

• Disruption to access to the NEC during and post construction;

• Location of the Birmingham Interchange station car park in terms of traffic impacts and the integration of the car parks into the existing landscape;

• Landtake from Packington Estate, particularly in relation to the Birmingham Interchange station car parks and the possible prevention of mineral extraction in close proximity to Park Farm; and

• The interface and journey times of the automated people mover with the NEC, Birmingham International railway station and Birmingham Airport.

2.6 Route section main alternatives 2.6.1 The main strategic alternatives to the Proposed Scheme are presented in Volume 1. The main

local alternatives considered for the Proposed Scheme within the local area are set out within this section.

2.6.2 Since April 2012, as part of the design development process, a series of local alternatives have been reviewed within workshops attended by engineering, planning and environmental specialists. During these workshops, the likely significant environmental effects of each design option have been reviewed. The purpose of these reviews has been to ensure that the Proposed Scheme draws the right balance between engineering requirements, cost and actual and potential environmental impacts.

Birmingham Interchange station

2.6.3 The Birmingham Interchange station would be situated within a triangular site, bordered by the M42, Birmingham Airport and the NEC to the west, the A45 Coventry Road to the south and the A452 Chester Road to the east. A review of the vertical alignment has been carried out in response to a request from the community forum for a cut and cover tunnel for the section of the route of the Proposed Scheme adjacent to Chelmsley Wood. Options were considered relating to the vertical alignment, each with three sub-options relating to the location of the station. The Proposed Scheme includes the Birmingham Interchange station located to the south of the triangular site with the route of the Proposed Scheme passing under the A45 Coventry Road and over the M42. The Birmingham Interchange station concourse would be located over the platforms. Options considered are as follows:

• Option 1: The alignment of the Proposed Scheme would be raised to pass over the A45 Coventry Road as well as the M42. The Birmingham Interchange station concourse would be located beneath the platforms. Sub-options with the station located to the south, centre and north of the triangular site were considered;

• Option 2: A45 Coventry Road passing over the route of the Proposed Scheme which would then continue in a cut and cover tunnel. The Birmingham Interchange station concourse would be located over the platforms. Sub-options of the station located to the south, centre and north of the triangular site were considered;

• Option 3: The Proposed Scheme would be in a twin bore tunnel at a maximum depth of 45m below ground level. Platforms would be approximately 35m below ground with the station concourse to be located over the platforms. Sub-options of the station located to the south, centre and north of the triangular site were considered; and

• Option 4: The Proposed Scheme.

35


2.6.4 In terms of vertical alignment the alternatives were not taken forward due to construction complexity and cost when compared to the Proposed Scheme. With respect to Option 2, the alignment limitations would mean that the route of the Proposed Scheme would pass under the M6 and the M42/M6 slip road, resulting in additional construction complexity and temporary realignment of the road network in this area. In terms of the location of Birmingham Interchange station, south within the triangular site was considered preferable as the station is considered to be better sited within the natural topography when considered against the alternatives and the connection with the A45 Coventry Road, from which the majority of operation of traffic movements would be generated, is preferred. When compared to the northern station location the Proposed Scheme is likely to result in increased amenity impacts on residents of Middle Bickenhill Lane and has the greater potential for water quality impacts associated with the construction of platforms over Hollywell Brook. As the Proposed Scheme is in the southern part of the triangular site, the crossing of Middle Bickenhill Landfill would be limited and as such, disturbance to the landfill would be reduced.

2.6.5 For these reasons HS2 Ltd decided to adopt Option 4 as the Proposed Scheme.

M42 viaduct

2.6.6 The Proposed Scheme crosses over the M42 between Junctions 6 and 7 and therefore a bridge structure is required. Currently, two bridges carry a large roundabout on the A452 Chester Road over the M42. As part of the design development process since the announcement of the scheme in January 2012 consideration has been given to the design of this crossing. The Proposed Scheme would cross at approximately the same level as the existing A452 Chester Road structures, necessitating their demolition and the realignment of the local road network. Options that would involve a complex realignment of the M42 have not been investigated as it is considered impractical due to the proximity of motorway junctions and very high traffic flows. The Proposed Scheme comprises a viaduct over the M42. The length of the viaduct would be approximately 215m. Options considered were as follows:

• Option 1: Half through girder (steel beams) spanning parallel to the Proposed Scheme with skewed abutments. A half through bridge is where the bridge deck sits within deep girders along each side of the bridge. The length of the structure would be approximately 85m;

• Option 2: Single-span truss spanning parallel to the Proposed Scheme with abutments square to the bridge. Similar to Option 2, the deck would sit between tall trusses. The length of the structure would be approximately 165m. The truss structure would be likely to have an overall depth of in excess of 20m; and

• Option 3: The Proposed Scheme.

2.6.7 When considered against the alternatives the Proposed Scheme would be the most cost-efficient, would reduce long term maintenance, and would represent the lowest risk in terms of design and construction complexity, particularly in comparison to Option 2 which would require a high skew over the M42. The Proposed Scheme would keep the top of the bridge structure as low as possible. There would be no discernible differences between these options with respect to environmental issues.

2.6.8 For these reasons HS2 Ltd decided to adopt Option 3 as the Proposed Scheme.

HollywellBrookdiversion

2.6.9 The Proposed Scheme alignment passes over Hollywell Brook, a tributary of the River Blythe, and therefore a diversion or culverting works is required. As part of the design development process since the announcement of the scheme in January 2012, the design of this diversion has been given further consideration. The Proposed Scheme here comprises a bridge crossing

36


square to the diverted river under the Proposed Scheme. The Proposed Scheme would be elevated on three bridges, with a single track bridge for the up loop, a four-track bridge for the central lines, and a single track bridge for the down loop. Hollywell Brook would be diverted beyond the platforms to the south of the Birmingham Interchange station. To the south-west of the Proposed Scheme there would be a minor diversion in a new channel prior to re-joining the existing alignment. Options considered were as follows:

• Option 1: Diversion of Hollywell Brook crossing the Proposed Scheme beneath a viaduct over the A45 Coventry Road, then flowing north-easterly to re-join the existing alignment immediately prior to crossing below the A452 Chester Road;

• Option 2: Piped culvert crossing beneath the Proposed Scheme. The option would be almost completely on the existing alignment with the culvert as close to the existing channel course as possible;

• Option 3: As the Proposed Scheme but Hollywell Brook would cross beneath the Proposed Scheme in a culvert or box; and

• Option 3b: The Proposed Scheme.

2.6.10 Given the sensitivity of Hollywell Brook each of the options considered has the potential to impact on water quality and aquatic habitat, to a greater or lesser degree. Loss of agricultural land and severance are the other key environmental issues.

2.6.11 The Proposed Scheme and Option 3 were considered to offer the greatest benefits when compared to other options in that the diversion of Hollywell Brook would be the shortest distance; and lost marginal and aquatic habitat would be offset by creating additional habitat as part of the new channel. Unlike Option 3, the Proposed Scheme reduces shading on Hollywell Brook through gaps in the platforms and therefore minimises effects on aquatic habitat. No temporary diversion of Hollywell Brook during construction would be required for the Proposed Scheme. The Proposed Scheme follows the existing topography more closely than Option 1, which would result in a significant modification to the topography in terms of deep cuttings and a long channel diversion, requiring extensive earthworks. The Proposed Scheme would additionally allow the floodplain to pass beneath the Proposed Scheme and therefore mitigate lost storage volume.

2.6.12 For these reasons HS2 Ltd decided to adopt Option 3b as the Proposed Scheme.

Automated people mover

2.6.13 An automated people mover would be provided to transfer passengers between Birmingham Interchange station, the NEC, Birmingham International railway station, and Birmingham Airport. As part of the design development process since the announcement of the scheme in January 2012 the alignment of the automated people mover has been considered in terms of a number of factors including: the location of Birmingham Interchange station; existing environmental characteristics and transfer time between the station and the NEC, Birmingham International railway station, and Birmingham Airport. The Proposed Scheme includes the route passing over Pendigo Lake and over the building between NEC Hall 1 and The Pavilion towards Birmingham Airport. Options considered were as follows:

• Option 1: The route passing through the northern end of the NEC towards Birmingham Airport;

• Option 2: The route passing along the main NEC concourse area and over the building between NEC Hall 1 and The Pavilion towards Birmingham Airport;

• Option 3: The Proposed Scheme; and

37


• Option 4: The route passing through the southern end of the NEC site and following the Network Rail corridor towards Birmingham Airport.

2.6.14 Further to engagement with the NEC it was determined that Option 1 and 2 would significantly affect the NEC operational requirements and therefore both options were discounted. In addition, Option 2 represents increased complexity in passing over the Rugby to Birmingham rail line. When compared to the Proposed Scheme an alignment through the southern NEC area was not preferable as it would increase journey time of the automated people mover, increase complexities involved in construction parallel with the Rugby and Birmingham rail line and the location of the people mover terminus at the NEC would be unfavourable. The Proposed Scheme was further considered to be preferable as it marginally reduces amenity impacts on residents of Middle Bickenhill Lane and reduces the loss of agricultural land and disruption to field patterns.

2.6.15 For these reasons HS2 Ltd decided to adopt Option 3, the Proposed Scheme.

Chelmsley Wood Curve

2.6.16 The January 2012 announced scheme crosses over the M42 and then threads northwards through the existing major road corridor of the M6, A452 Chester Road, M42 and M6 (Toll) passing Chelmsley Wood and Coleshill. As a result the Proposed Scheme would pass within 75m of the residential area of Chelmsley Wood. This alignment was determined by the fact that it was the only “gap” within the transport infrastructure in the area, given the expected elevation of the Proposed Scheme at this point. The alignment had significant impacts on the residential area of Chelmsley Wood. Most notably, it would require the loss of playing fields and open space close to Chelmsley Wood.

2.6.17 More detailed design work revealed that the route needed to be raised where it crossed the M42, north of Junction 6, the M6, its slip roads and at Coleshill Heath Road to provide the necessary clearance to ensure that there was no conflict between the Proposed Scheme, the motorway and the local highway network. The option of tunnelling under the M42 was discounted because the costs were around £1bn higher than the lowest cost surface option. Similarly, options to cross under the M42 and M6 were discounted.

2.6.18 This would mean that near Chelmsley Wood the Proposed Scheme would be approximately 10m higher than the scheme announced in 2012, before returning to the same elevation as the January 2012 route near Gilson. This higher elevation past Chelmsley Wood provides opportunities to consider alternative options for the alignment through this area that were not available in January 2012; these are explained below. Options considered were as follows:

• Option A – The January 2012 alignment but at a higher elevation;

• Option B (the proposed option)- Moving the route up to 125m eastwards, further away from Chelmsley Wood, crossing over Coleshill Heath Road on its current horizontal alignment;

• Option C – Moving the route up to 125m eastwards, further away from Chelmsley Wood, crossing over a lowered Coleshill Heath Road, requiring a new horizontal alignment for Coleshill Heath Road and requiring modifications to the junction with Yorkminster Drive; and

• Option D- Moving the route up to 225m eastwards, further away from Chelmsley Wood and closer to the River Cole.

2.6.19 Option A – Maintaining the January 2012 alignment past Chelmsley Wood, but at higher elevation, would potentially increase noise and would increase visual intrusion in Yorkminster Drive, Bluebell Drive and Lyecroft Avenue on the east side of Chelmsley Wood. It would also

38


require the diversion of a fuel pipeline. The raise to the alignment would mean that Coleshill Heath Road would have to pass over the Proposed Scheme at such a high level that it could no longer tie in with the adjacent highway network. This route alignment would also result in the loss of some local parkland, playing fields and play areas.

2.6.20 Option B – Moving the Proposed Scheme east by up to 125m crossing over Coleshill Heath Road on its current horizontal alignment, which is the proposed option, would reduce the environmental impacts on the east side of Chelmsley Wood. The Proposed Scheme would be further away from the residential area of Chelmsley Wood than the existing M6 motorway and reduce the impacts on the playing fields and parkland. It would need to be up to 12m above existing ground level. Overall, there would be a small reduction in the sound and visual intrusion to the eastern part of Chelmsley Wood compared with the modified January 2012 route, as described above. The Proposed Scheme would also no longer require the diversion of the fuel pipeline.

2.6.21 Option C – Moving the Proposed Scheme east by up to 125m crossing over a lowered Coleshill Heath Road would require a new horizontal alignment for Coleshill Heath Road and its junction with Yorkminster Drive. This would have negative environmental impacts on the east side of Chelmsley Wood. Although the Proposed Scheme would be further away from the residential area of Chelmsley Wood than the existing M6 motorway, the modified highway would have a greater impact on the playing fields and parkland. It would need to be up to 10m above existing ground level. Overall, there would also be a small reduction in the sound and visual intrusion to the eastern part of Chelmsley Wood compared to the modified January 2012 route, as described above. The Proposed Scheme would also require the diversion of the fuel pipeline and both Coleshill Heath Road and Yorkminster Drive would need to be lowered locally.

2.6.22 Option D – Moving the route east by up to 225m would introduce significant additional construction complexities arising from crossing the M42 and the River Cole. It would consequently involve additional costs as well as significant changes to the track layout of Birmingham Interchange station and the Delta Junction. Whilst with this option there could be a reduction in sound, there is likely to be a higher visual intrusion to the Chelmsley Wood residents than the options to move 125 metres away, which do not have the same complications.

2.6.23 The need to raise the Proposed Scheme in this area in order to provide the necessary clearance over the M42 and Coleshill Heath Road, allows an option to move the Proposed Scheme eastwards, further away from Chelmsley Wood, with the route crossing Coleshill Heath Road on its current horizontal alignment. A move of 125m to the east reduces the local noise effects and reduces the amount of local parkland, playing fields and play areas taken. The cost and complexity of moving the route further away from Chelmsley Wood is not justified.

2.6.24 For these reasons HS2 Ltd decided to adopt Option B in the Proposed Scheme. Further mitigation, including possible landscape earthworks alongside Yorkminster Drive to screen the residential area of Chelmsley Wood from the Proposed Scheme over Coleshill Heath Road, is under consideration:

• Potential landscape earthworks alongside Yorkminster Drive to screen the residential area of Chelmsley Wood from the Proposed Scheme in the vicinity of Coleshill Heath Road.

39


2.7 Proposals for further consideration2.7.1 The following engineering developments are to be considered for inclusion within the

Proposed Scheme pending further assessment prior to release of the formal ES:

• Potential amendments to the design to incorporate additional rail crossovers;

• Potential landscape earthworks alongside Yorkminster Drive to screen the residential area of Chelmsley Wood from the Proposed Scheme in the vicinity of Coleshill Heath Road; and

• Potential amendments to the alignment of A446 Stonebridge Road to reduce likely significant effects to the Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI.

40


Part C: Environmental topic assessments

41

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

3 Agriculture, forestry and soils3.1 Introduction3.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of the impacts and the likely significant effects

to agriculture, soils and forestry arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. The section covers soils, agricultural land quality, farm enterprises, forestry and agri-environment schemes.

3.2 Policyframework3.2.1 The SUDP has three policies relating to agriculture, forestry and soils. Policy C6 recognises the

need to support the economic sustainability of farming and provides for the permitting of small scale, farm based diversification projects. Policy C4 seeks to safeguard best and most versatile (BMV) quality land from development, and to encourage the retention of land under farming use. The protection and enhancement of trees and woodlands is emphasised in Policy ENV14, which is supported by the production and implementation of the Solihull Woodland Strategy15.

3.2.2 Policy P17 in the SDLP carries forward a similar emphasis to Policy C4 of the SUDP. Woodland policies are carried forward in a similar way through Policy P10.

3.2.3 The NWLP has three applicable policies. Policy 10 supports agriculture and promotes agricultural diversification activities where they can help to underpin the rural economy. This policy is reinforced by more detailed provisions in Policy ECON8, which sets out the criteria for permitting schemes of farm diversification. Policy ENV6 includes protection of BMV quality land, as well as setting out a series of pollution prevention measures, which indirectly benefit agriculture through safeguarding soil quality.

3.2.4 The NWLPCS, which has now been submitted for examination to the Secretary of State, includes no specific references to agricultural land16. Draft Policy NW8 indicates that development should target the use of brownfield land in appropriate locations (as opposed to greenfield land). In addition, draft Policy NW13 includes emerging policy options that would indirectly support the protection of agricultural land from sterilisation by built development as part of the aim to protect existing green infrastructure within the District. Woodland and forestry are covered within draft policies NW11 and NW12 dealing with nature conservation and the natural environment.

3.3 Assessmentscopeandkeyassumptions3.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the farm impacts and agricultural land quality

assessments are set out in Volume 1.

3.3.2 The approach to the land quality assessment in this area includes the following:

• The assessment anticipates that agricultural land required for temporary purposes during construction would be re-instated as agricultural land, wherever practicable, to at least its pre-existing quality by following best practice.

15 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2010) Solihull Woodland Strategy: First Review 1.0.16 North Warwickshire District Council (2012), Local Plan for North Warwickshire Core Strategy.

42


3.4 Environmental baseline3.4.1 The main feature relevant to the agriculture, forestry and soils baseline, namely the potential

presence of BMV land, is shown on map CT-02-19 in terms of areas of a high likelihood of the occurrence of land of such quality.

3.4.2 The main drainage basin is the River Blythe. The Proposed Scheme passes through an area of gently sloping land, with slightly higher ground to the west of the River Blythe with the highest points in the vicinity of Diddington Hill; and the M42/A45 Coventry Road in the south.

3.4.3 The underlying bedrock is primarily Triassic mudstones (Mercia Mudstone Group). To the north of the Hollywell Brook and on small areas of higher ground straddling the A45 Coventry Road the bedrock is overlain by superficial deposits of glacial sands and gravels. The floodplain of the Hollywell Brook has associated alluvial deposits.

3.4.4 The National Soil Map identifies four principal groups or ‘associations’ of soil types within the study area17:

• Fladbury 1 association soils are associated with the floodplain of the River Blythe. These comprise clayey topsoils, overlying slowly permeable, clayey subsoils, derived from alluvial deposits and are subject to groundwater waterlogging associated with fluctuating river levels and perennial flooding;

• Arrow association soils associated with glaciofluvial and river terrace sands and gravels are located to the east of the M42. These comprise coarse loamy soils of variable permeability which are occasionally seasonally waterlogged;

• Brockhurst 1 association soils are derived from the underlying mudstone lithologies. They occur primarily in the vicinity of the A45 Coventry Road. These soils have fine loamy topsoils over clayey subsoils; and

• Salop association soils with clay-loam topsoils and slowly permeable clay subsoils occur in the vicinity of Chelmsley Wood. The physical characteristics of soil resources identified are combined with climatic and topographic conditions to determine the quality of the agricultural land within the national agricultural land classification (ALC).

3.4.5 Agricultural land in the study area is shown on the published mapping as predominantly within Grade 3 (good to moderate quality) of the classification18. Detailed mapping of an area to the east of Middle Bickenhill Lane and north of the A45 Coventry Road shows the Grade 3 land to be mainly of the higher Subgrade 3a, with the land attributed to the floodplain of the Hollywell Brook as Subgrade 3b. Further detailed mapping of land in the Chelmsley Wood area identifies the extensive presence of Grade 2 and Subgrade 3a land. The detailed field surveys corroborate the finding of the predictive assessments.

3.4.6 Reference has also been made to predictive mapping prepared by the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), which indicate the high likelihood of the occurrence of BMV land within this section of the Proposed Scheme19.

3.4.7 BMV land is predominant within this section of the Proposed Scheme and therefore, in accordance with the assessment methodology, is considered to be a receptor of low sensitivity.

17 Cranfield University (2001), The National Soil Map of England and Wales 1:250,000 scale, National Soil Resources Institute, Cranfield University, UK.

18 Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1988), Agricultural Land Classification of England and Wales 1:250,000 scale. 19 Natural England (2002), Likelihood of Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land in England and Wales. 1:250,000.

43


3.4.8 Other soil interactions relevant to the study area concern the role of woodland and permanent grassland as carbon sinks; historic and cultural resources retained in or supported by soils (see Section 6 Cultural Heritage); the biodiversity interest in natural and semi-natural woodland and grassland (see Section 7 Ecology); and the role of soils in the flood regime of the River Blythe and Hollywell Brook (see Section 13 Water resources and flood risk assessment).

3.4.9 Land use within the study area is primarily agricultural, divided between grassland and arable uses. The floodplain of the River Blythe and its tributaries is mainly in grassland use with the higher, more freely draining land under arable cultivation.

3.4.10 A number of environmental designations potentially influence land use within the study area. All the areas affected by construction are classified as a nitrate vulnerable zone (NVZ). NVZ are areas in which nitrate pollution is a potential problem and measures have been introduced to reduce nitrogen losses from agricultural sources to water20.

3.4.11 With the exception of land between Middle Bickenhill Lane and the M42, agricultural land is subject to the management prescriptions of the Entry Level of the Environmental Stewardship Scheme. The Entry Level Scheme is principally concerned with simple environmental measures, for example field corner and hedgerow management, and the creation of buffer strips and uncultivated field margins21.

3.4.12 The agricultural surveys to date have identified six holdings in the study area as set out in Table 9. These are primarily engaged in arable and mixed arable and livestock activity, and are receptors of medium sensitivity. Farm size is variable, but most holdings are of a substantial size between 150 and 500ha. There is a predominance of rented land affected, which includes land within the Packington Estate and the land interest of Birmingham City Council. There is some diversification of activity amongst the affected farms including large scale agricultural contracting and letting of buildings for non-agricultural purposes.

Holding Primary activity

Home Farm, Hampton-in-Arden Currently unknown

Home Farm, Packington Mixed arable and livestock (beef/sheep)

Park Farm Arable

Land east of Middle Bickenhill Lane Livestock

Wheeley Moor Farm Mixed arable and beef

Hawkeswell Farm Currently unknown

Table 9: Holdings affected by the Proposed Scheme

3.4.13 Arable land use is predominant, except for the area located between Middle Bickenhill Lane and the M42 where grassland uses occur. The associated agricultural interests are substantial in size.

3.4.14 Substantial forestry resources adjoin the M42 to the north of its junction with the A452 Chester Road. They represent a productive resource of timber, whilst retaining a biodiversity and potentially carbon storage interest. The majority of these resources are contained within the Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI which is discussed further in Section 7 Ecology.

20 Nitrate Pollution Prevention Regulations 2008, London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.21 Environmental Stewardship is an agri-environment scheme that provides funding to farmers and other land managers in England. There are

four levels of stewardship: Entry Level; Organic Entry Level; Uplands Entry Level; and Higher Level.

44


3.4.15 Smaller areas of important woodland including Siding Wood, associated with the alignment of the dismantled Hampton-in-Arden to Shustoke rail line, and Hollywell Brook are also within the study area. Woodland in the study area is located within Arrow association land, according to the National Soil Map of England and Wales. The primary attributes of the woodland are ecological or landscape character. Therefore, their sensitivity as receptors is assessed in the relevant topic sections of this report.

3.4.16 In assessing the effect of the Proposed Scheme on farms, it is important to recognise that the ability of the farms to adapt to change depends, in part, upon the size of the holding, its layout and fragmentation (both before and after construction of the Proposed Scheme) and the enterprises operated. Smaller farms and enterprises, such as dairy farms, which are dependent upon the spatial relationship between land and key infrastructure (e.g. buildings), generally have less ability to change. In the study area, there is a predominance of arable use, and the related farms are considered to be receptors of medium sensitivity.

3.5 ConstructionAssessment of impacts and mitigation

3.5.1 HS2 Ltd would require all of its contractors to comply with the CoCP, which would include the following measures:

• Measures to maintain farm access and avoid traffic over land which is used temporarily during construction;

• Ensuring that each affected farm holding would receive specific and relevant liaison regarding the construction activities that would affect the holding;

• Ensuring that agricultural land and corresponding soil quality can be reinstated post construction where this is the agreed end use;

• Ensuring that the impacts on infrastructure and livestock for individual farm holdings would be minimised;

• Ensuring that there is appropriate access provided to areas of severed land during and post-construction; and

• Ensuring the appropriate handling and conservation of soil stockpiles to allow them to be reused without any substantive reduction in long term productive capability.

3.5.2 Soil resources would be stripped at the outset of the construction phase and stored. Where land is required temporarily for construction of the Proposed Scheme, stored soils would be used to reinstate those sites to a pre-construction agricultural condition. Soils removed from the area of permanent works would be utilised, where reasonably practicable, in the construction of the Proposed Scheme. The soil association affected most extensively by temporary works is Arrow, which comprises generally freely draining loamy soils. These are less susceptible to structural damage during construction activity than the other soil types present which differ in their sensitivity to disturbance and would require greater care in handling and storage.

3.5.3 Aspects of the Proposed Scheme that would assist to reduce effects on agricultural resources include:

• Agricultural accesses to enable access to severed land, for example in the vicinity of Common Farm; and

• Replacement accesses to retained farmland, for example to the west of Stonebridge Island.

45


3.5.4 Forestry soils and resources are required by both the temporary and permanent works necessary to implement the Proposed Scheme, notably in the vicinity of the crossing of the M42 by the A452 Chester Road. Forestry soils and resources are classified as being of medium sensitivity within this section of the Proposed Scheme. The loss and disruption of these soils would result in a minor adverse impact and would not result in a significant effect.

3.5.5 Loss of forestry land would be mitigated by replanting in nearby locations as detailed in Section 7 Ecology and provided on maps CT-06-105 to CT-06-108. Such locations would include areas of agricultural land that are not agriculturally accessible as a result of severance. The loss of forestry land would result in a minor adverse impact and would not result in a significant effect during the construction phase.

3.5.6 The agricultural land required temporarily to construct the Proposed Scheme would include land of BMV quality. Since there is an extensive amount of BMV agricultural land in the wider study area, it is considered to be a receptor of low sensitivity. The temporary loss of BMV land to the Proposed Scheme would result in a moderate adverse impact and a significant effect, although it is intended that most of the soils and farmland required for temporary construction purposes would be returned to agricultural use or used within the design of the Proposed Scheme. Given the extent of BMV land to be affected in the study area, it can be reasonably expected that the construction of the Proposed Scheme in this section would have an effect of high magnitude. Consequently, the effect of the Proposed Scheme is considered to be significant.

3.5.7 Six holdings would be affected in this area, of which two would also experience the effects of the Proposed Scheme in adjoining CFAs. Based on the information currently available, it is likely that the following three holdings would experience significant effects during construction:

• Park Farm would be deprived of the majority of its land in the vicinity of the farmstead during construction for both temporary and permanent uses, with only parts of field units close to Park Farm Cottages and the Toby Carvery public house retained at the completion of construction works;

• Birmingham City Council’s land interest to the east of Middle Bickenhill Lane would be wholly required for construction purposes, and a very substantial part of it required permanently for car parking associated with Birmingham Interchange station, the automated people mover, and landscaping works; and

• Wheeley Moor Farm would be deprived of all of its land in the vicinity of its interest at Common Farm during construction for both temporary and permanent works associated with the railway and highway infrastructure. Only two areas of agricultural land would be retained between the Proposed Scheme and the M42 upon completion of construction. This holding is also affected by the Proposed Scheme in the Coleshill area.

3.5.8 The scale of disruption to these holdings during construction is one of high magnitude and likely to result in adverse effects of moderate to major significance, which would persist in the case of Park Farm.

3.5.9 Farm or diversified enterprises, such as housed livestock units, horticulture, farm shops or visitor accommodation, could be particularly sensitive to dust, noise or vibration during construction. Current information has identified only one potentially sensitive receptor, namely a dog kennels associated with buildings at Common Farm. Measures to reduce impacts associated with the emission of dust, noise and vibration during the construction phase are set out in the draft CoCP.

46


3.5.10 The construction process could lead to transportation of weed seeds and plants along the route of the Proposed Scheme. Since the land affected is largely in agricultural use there is the potential for the spread of existing weeds; particularly invasive and damaging weeds as listed in the Weeds Act 195922. Defra has powers to require occupiers of land on which weeds are growing to take action to prevent their spreading. Application of control measures within the draft CoCP would regulate this potential effect and it is not considered to be significant.

Likelyresidualsignificanteffects

3.5.11 There would be the following likely significant residual effects:

• A loss of agricultural land of BMV quality; and

• The three agricultural interests would continue to experience the effects of land loss and severance.

Further mitigation

3.5.12 No further mitigation is currently proposed.

3.6 OperationAssessment of impacts and mitigation

3.6.1 Mitigation measure have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme to avoid or reduce impacts on features of agricultural, forestry and soils value. In particular, access to severed land or parcels having had their existing means of access removed by the Proposed Scheme would be retained by the provision of new or replacement access.

3.6.2 These mitigation measures, along with other permanent features related to the Proposed Scheme, are shown on maps CT-06-105 to CT-06-108.

3.6.3 Dust generation is unlikely to be of a sufficient intensity as to lead to prejudicial levels of deposition on neighbouring farmland. No particularly sensitive crops have been identified. All runoffs from the operational area would be captured in designated drainage arrangements and capable of control prior to discharge to watercourses. It is not predicted that there would be a significant effect.

3.6.4 All corridors of transport infrastructure have a propensity to support weed growth which may prejudice agricultural interests where they can spread to adjoining land. Comparison with other railway and highway land indicates that the operational area of the Proposed Scheme has this inherent potential.

3.6.5 The potential for the establishment and spread of weeds from the operational area is capable of being effectively addressed through the adoption by the network operator of an appropriate land management regime which identifies and remedies areas of weed growth which might threaten adjoining agricultural interests.


3.6.6 There would be no likely significant residual effects.

22 Weeds Act 1959 (7 & 8 Eliz II c. 54), London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

47

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Air quality

4 Air quality4.1 Introduction4.1.1 This section of the report provides an assessment of the impacts and likely significant effects

on air quality arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme, covering nitrogen dioxide (NO2) , fine particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5) and dust23. Emissions of these pollutants are typically associated with construction activities and equipment, road traffic and the operation of combustion plants.

4.2 Policyframework4.2.1 The SUDP includes commitments to ensure any new development contributes positively

towards environmental objectives. Policy ENV15 specifies the need to consider the implications of new developments on air quality.

4.2.2 Challenges listed in the SDLP include protecting Solihull’s high quality environment, in a region (West Midlands) where air quality is a significant issue. The SDLP aims to provide better transport links, which will seek to improve and maintain air quality within SMBC. Policy P14 of the SDLP seeks to protect the amenity of areas by only permitting development that would not significantly conflict with air quality objectives.

4.2.3 The NWLP has one policy relating to Air Quality. Policy ENV9 sets out the measures to safeguard the air quality of Solihull Borough. These include restricting polluting development within Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA), and not permitting development which proposes hazardous substances, or new development within proximity of hazardous installations.

4.2.4 There is no specific reference to air quality within the emerging NWLPCS.

4.2.5 An Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) has been developed by NWBC with the aim of improving local air quality in the designated Coleshill AQMA. As the AQMA only affects one property the AQAP focusses particularly on this area and explores possible initiatives to mitigate the effects of air pollution at the property. These include continuing to gather air quality monitoring data from within the AQMA and exploring the reuse of the property in ways which do not conflict with the air quality objective.

4.3 Assessmentscopeandkeyassumptions4.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the air quality assessment are set out in

Volume 1.

4.4 Environmental baseline4.4.1 The environmental baseline reported in this section represents the environmental conditions

identified within the study area. The main source of existing air pollutants in the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area is traffic on major roads, such as the M6, M42, A45 Coventry Road, A452 Chester Road and A446 Stonebridge Road. Birmingham Airport is also situated within this area approximately 1.5 km east of the Proposed Scheme. There are two industrial installations within the area, but due to their distance from the Proposed Scheme and the nature of their activities, they are unlikely to have an impact on local air quality.

23 PM2.5 and PM10 describe two size fractions of airborne particles that can be inhaled and therefore are of concern for human health. The designations refer to particles of size less than 2.5 and 10 microns in diameter.

48


4.4.2 Estimates of background air quality have been obtained from Defra for 2011 and future years (2017 and 2026). These data are estimated for 1km grid squares for nitrogen oxides (NOx), NO2, PM10 and PM2.5. All average pollutant concentrations are less than the relevant national air quality objectives24.

4.4.3 There are two continuous air quality monitoring stations located within the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area, one located at Birmingham Airport and the other at the M6 Toll Grit Depot to the east of the Proposed Scheme. Measured concentrations for 2011 were well below the national air quality objectives for both NO2 and PM10 at the airport site. The M6 depot site was last operational in 2009 and measured NO2 concentrations for that year exceeded the national air quality objective.

4.4.4 There are three diffusion tubes located within the area, which monitor NO2 concentrations. These are operated by SMBC and are located at the M42 Junction 6 roundabout, on Blackfirs Lane adjoining the A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road roundabout, and on Partridge Close east of the M6 in Chelmsley Wood. Measured concentrations for 2011 at these locations were below the national air quality objective at all sites.

4.4.5 There is an AQMA to the east of the Proposed Scheme near the convergence of the M6 with the M42, which has been declared by NWBC for NO2. Based on the latest annual progress report by NWBC in 2010, there is a possibility of this AQMA being revoked in the future due to decreasing NO2 concentrations25.

4.4.6 Several locations have been identified in the study area, which are considered to be susceptible to changes in air quality and are in close proximity to roads that would be subject to realignments or use by construction traffic. These are:

• Properties in the M42 Junction 6 area due to works associated with the widening of the slip roads accessing the roundabout;

• Properties with the Stonebridge Island area due to demolition of brick buildings adjacent to the A45 Coventry Road, for works associated with the route of the Proposed Scheme, the formation of balancing ponds and improvements to Stonebridge Island;

• Properties around Birmingham Interchange station due to earthworks and construction activities associated with the Proposed Scheme;

• Properties in the A446 Stonebridge Road/A452 Chester Road area due to earthworks and construction activities associated with the Proposed Scheme including the construction of a new roundabout; and

• Properties in the Chelmsley Wood area due to earthworks and construction activities associated with the route of the Proposed Scheme.

4.4.7 There is one ecological receptor within the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area sensitive to dust soiling and PM10. This is the Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI.


4.5.1 Impacts from the construction of the Proposed Scheme could arise from dust generating activities and emissions from construction traffic. As such, the assessment of construction impacts has been undertaken for human receptors sensitive to dust and exposure to NO2 and PM10, as well as ecological receptors sensitive to dust and nitrogen deposition.

24 The national air quality objectives are: NO2 (40µg/m3); PM10 (40µg/m3); and PM2.5 (25µg/m3).25 North Warwickshire Borough Council (2010), 2010 Air Quality Progress Report for North Warwickshire Borough Council.

49


4.5.2 Air quality would be controlled and managed during construction through the route-wide implementation of the CoCP, where reasonably practicable. Specific measures would include:

• Contractors being required to control dust, air pollution, odour and exhaust emissions during construction works;

• Inspecting and monitoring undertaken after consultation with SMBC and NWBC to assess the effectiveness of the measures taken to prevent dust and air pollutant emissions;

• Cleaning (including watering) of haul routes and designated vehicle waiting areas to suppress dust;

• Keeping soil stockpiles away from, sensitive receptors (including historical features), watercourses and surface drains where reasonably practicable , also taking into account the prevailing wind direction relative to sensitive receptors;

• Using enclosures to contain dust emitted from construction activities; and

• Undertaking soil spreading, seeding and planting of completed earthworks following completion of earthworks.

4.5.3 In the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area dust generating activities would comprise the demolition of seven buildings, including a nursery and sheds at Top Hat and Tails, A45 Coventry Road, a garage and residential property at Nursery Cottage, A45 Coventry Road, a warehouse at Park Farm and offices at the Olympia Motorcycle Track. Activities would also include the demolition of two roads over the M42 and the A446 Stonebridge Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout, the earthworks and construction of new structures, road improvements as well as earthworks associated with the Proposed Scheme. The construction dust assessment was undertaken for the five worst case sensitive locations (see Section 4.4.6) due to their close proximity to the dust generating activities identified above. These included residential properties at the M42 Junction 6, Stonebridge Island, Birmingham Interchange station, the A446 Stonebridge Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout and Chelmsley Wood areas. The Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI was also assessed due to its proximity to works on the local road network.

4.5.4 Based on the adopted methodology and with the implementation of the CoCP, the effect of these would not be significant.

4.5.5 The construction dust assessment determined that the impact on the four sensitive locations identified would be negligible and the overall effects would be insignificant. The impact of construction activities on the Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI would be slight adverse at worst and is therefore also not a significant effect.


4.5.6 The methods outlined within the draft CoCP to control and manage potential air quality effects are considered effective in this location. Hence, no residual effects are considered likely.


4.6.1 Impacts from the operation of the Proposed Scheme relate mainly to changes in the nature of traffic and the operation of combustion plant. There are no direct atmospheric emissions from the operation of trains that would cause an impact on air quality.

50


4.6.2 Traffic data in the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area have been screened to identify roads that required further assessment and to confirm the likely effect of the change in emissions from vehicles using those roads in 2026. In the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area, 11 roads were identified as requiring further assessment, these were: A45 Coventry Road; links between A45 Coventry Road and Airport Way; M42; South Way; Middle Bickenhill Lane; East Way; Damson Parkway; A446 Stonebridge Road; new A452 link road; station link roads; and A452 Chester Road.

4.6.3 The assessment indicated there would be very small changes in concentrations of NO2 and PM10 at all assessed locations due to changes in traffic flows and the road network infrastructure. The predicted concentrations would remain below the national air quality objectives and therefore no significant air quality effect would occur. Changes in traffic flows and their effect on the Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI will be assessed in the formal ES.


4.6.4 An assessment upon receipt of the traffic data (summer 2013) will determine if any likely significant residual effects are present as a result the Proposed Scheme. The likely significant residual effects will be reported in the formal ES.

Further mitigation

4.6.5 Further mitigation (if any) will be determined upon the completion of the assessment using traffic data due to be made available in summer 2013. Further mitigation will be reported in the formal ES.

51

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Community

5 Community5.1 Introduction5.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of impacts and likely significant effects on local

communities resulting from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme.

5.2 Policyframework5.2.1 The SUDP states that Chelmsley Wood is part of the East Birmingham/North Solihull

Regeneration Zone, which suffers from high levels of unemployment. Development within Solihull should address the requirements of this area, with respect to access to jobs, homes and other services.

5.2.2 Other relevant policies of the SUDP include:

• Policy E5 supports proposals to develop the NEC, including public transport facilities and other developments which help the efficient operation of the NEC;

• Policy ENV19 seeks to protect the amenity of residential and shopping areas; community facilities; and open spaces from potentially harmful, or bad neighbour development;

• Policy R2 and Policy R7 seek to protect and enhance public parks, open spaces, PRoW and cycling routes within Solihull Borough. Allotment gardens are protected in line with Policy R5;

• Proposal ENV11/5 Project Kingfisher, of the SUDP, states that SMBC, through the Project Kingfisher partnership, will protect, manage and enhance the River Cole Valley for the benefit of people and wildlife, and will promote the extension of the project along the Kingshurst Brook;

• Policy P5 identifies housing sites to cover the plan period. Phase 1 site proposals to be delivered up to 2018 include site 3 ‘Simon Digby’, to the north of Chelmsley Wood (4.6 hectares, up to 200 dwellings) and site 4 Bishop Wilson and St Andrews Scout Hut on Pike Drive, Chelmsley Wood (3 hectares, up to 140 dwellings);

• Policy P14 seeks to protect the amenity of areas by permitting development that would not contribute to air, noise or light pollution and protect the tranquillity and local distinctiveness of Solihull Borough;

• Policy P18 addresses the need to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities by providing opportunities for formal and informal recreational and physical activity. Loss of community and social infrastructure will be resisted unless there are commercial or operational reasons for ceasing, or an alternative is provided;

• Policy P19 states that local centres should be developed and sustained in a way which ensures their continued sustainability and economic success and all new development in local centres will need to be sensitive to local character and enhance the public realm; and

• Policy P20 states that the loss of existing open space, sports and recreational facilities will be resisted unless it can be demonstrated that it is surplus to requirements, or the benefit of the development outweighs the loss.

5.2.3 The SDLP Proposals Map identifies the NEC as important to the local and regional economy, and the UK’s largest exhibition centre. It notes that “the NEC has ambitious aspirations to enhance visitor facilities and diversify its offer to ensure its continued competitiveness.”

52


5.2.4 The study area includes the western extent of North Warwickshire Borough. The NWLP and the NWLPCS do not include any residential allocations or proposals for community infrastructure within the study area. However, both include relevant policies concerning local communities and facilities.

5.2.5 Core Policy 1 states that NWLP will support the economic and social regeneration of the area, primarily by seeking to ensure local people have access to a range of high quality employment, housing, shopping, leisure, education and other community facilities.

5.2.6 Policy NW2 of the NWLPCS states that no changes to the green belt are to be made. In regard to community facilities, Policy NW17 states that proposals that would result in the loss of an existing services or facilities which contribute to the functioning of a settlement will only be supported where the facility is replaced elsewhere or proven that it will not harm the vitality of the settlement.

5.3 Assessmentscopeandkeyassumptions5.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the community assessment are set out in

Volume 1.

5.3.2 The following assumptions are specific to the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood CFA:

• Effects relating to severance of PRoW and highway and pedestrian diversions are assessed within Section 12 Traffic and transport. However, where PRoW are considered in themselves as a recreational resource, they have been considered within this assessment. Where impacts on open space and PRoW are considered, these have been informed by open space and PRoW usage and quality surveys; the limitation to this survey data applies.

• The study area includes the area of land within the construction boundary (comprising the temporary and permanent land take), as well as a suitable additional area as relevant to inform the respective environmental topics upon which the assessment is based.

• Where open space is privately owned and not available for use by the general public, it has been excluded from the assessment e.g. woodlands on farmland. However, where land is privately owned but open for public use e.g. parks or gardens surrounding country houses, it has been included in the assessment.

• Demand on local infrastructure due to the presence of the local workforce is only considered relevant at worksites where temporary worker accommodation is provided on site. It has been assumed that there would be no accommodation for family members. Potential impacts on community infrastructure associated with the temporary accommodation of construction workers has not been assessed at this time and will be reported in the formal ES.

5.4 Environmental baseline5.4.1 The Proposed Scheme through this area would commence south-east of the A45 Coventry

Road in Hampton-in-Arden. The route of the Proposed Scheme would then proceed north-west and enter Birmingham Interchange station to the east of Birmingham Airport and the NEC. Leaving Birmingham Interchange station, the Proposed Scheme would continue north-west, crossing over the M42 on viaduct. The Proposed Scheme would then continue over the M6 on viaduct with Chelmsley Wood residential estate located to the west.

53


Bickenhill

5.4.2 The area surrounding Birmingham Airport includes a cluster of regional and national facilities, including the NEC and the National Motorcycle Museum, centred on the strategic highway network of the M6, M42 and the A45 Coventry Road.

5.4.3 The NEC is within the study area and adjacent to areas of permanent land take. This includes a hotel within the NEC site (the Hilton at the NEC), within which is the Living Well Health Club. This is open to the public and is adjacent to areas of temporary land take and permanent land take.

5.4.4 The National Motorcycle Museum is located at Junction 6 of the M42 and is accessed directly off the Junction 6 roundabout. The access, car park and grassed verge areas within the National Motorcycle Museum site are within areas of temporary land take and permanent land take. The museum provides a range of facilities including training and seminar rooms and hosts major events.

5.4.5 Other local recreation facilities within the study area include; the Olympia Motorcycle Track; small external areas of the Melbicks Garden and Leisure Centre, the Toby Carvery public house, and the Little Owl public house and restaurant.

5.4.6 The surrounding area is largely agricultural, with sparse residential properties that are within the Parish of Bickenhill. One residential property, Nursery Cottage, located off the A45 Coventry Road, is within the permanent land take area. The surrounding residential properties, within the study area, are immediately adjacent to areas of temporary land take and permanent land take. This includes those at Common Farm, Park Farm and Middle Bickenhill Lane.

5.4.7 The residential areas within Middle Bickenhill and Packington Park are served by Marston Green Junior School and the Grace Academy secondary school, both of which are outside of the study area. The only educational facility within the study area is an early year’s childcare facility, the Nipperbout Active Childcare, within the NEC, which is not within areas of permanent land take or temporary land take.

5.4.8 The Bickenhill Fire Station is also located within the study area, adjacent to the NEC and approximately 230m from the nearest area of temporary land take.

5.4.9 A footpath (PRoW M96) runs south of Packington Lane to the A452 Chester Road. The PRoW is considered to provide a recreational resource and access to the open countryside. The PRoW is outside of the areas identified for temporary land take and permanent landtake.

Chelmsley Wood

5.4.10 Chelmsley Wood, a large residential estate, is located to the north of Birmingham Airport and the NEC. The estate is well served by local community facilities, with a district centre that serves the communities of north Solihull and is outside the study area. The eastern extent of the estate is within the study area, including residential properties on Bluebell Drive, Yorkminster Drive and Lyecroft Avenue, all of which are outside of the temporary land take and permanent land take areas. The properties within the closest proximity to the Proposed Scheme would be those at the junction of Bluebell Drive and Yorkminster Drive, less than 100m from the boundary of the permanent land take.

5.4.11 The only education facility, within the study area is the Windy Arbor Junior and Infant School, which is approximately 250m from the permanent land take area on the A452 Chester Road.

54


As detailed in the latest school inspection report, the school has 261 pupils aged from 4 to 11 years26.

5.4.12 There are two public open spaces at the eastern boundary of the Chelmsley Wood estate, Heath Park and Bluebell Recreation Ground that are both within the study area. An area of Heath Park is within the temporary land take and permanent land take areas. Bluebell Recreation Ground is outside of the areas required for temporary land take and permanent landtake.

5.4.13 Bluebell Recreation Ground provides a range of open space including: a community garden, a woodland area, five seasonal grassed football pitches, a multi-use games area and a skate park and a large children’s play area in the centre of the site.


Residential property

5.5.1 There is one residential property, located to the east of the Bickenhill waste recycling centre on the A45 Coventry Road, which is within the permanent land take and would be demolished. This is considered a negligible adverse effect within the local community and therefore not considered to be significant.

5.5.2 Seven properties on Middle Bickenhill Lane are located between the permanent land take and temporary land take areas. These properties would be surrounded by construction boundary fencing and construction activities for the duration of the construction of Birmingham Interchange station and associated works. Due to the nature and proximity of works there would be restricted access to Middle Bickenhill Lane for an estimated period of 36 months. The combination of construction activity and reduced access would result in the isolation of the community. This would be a major adverse effect, and is therefore considered to be significant in a local context.

Community infrastructure

5.5.3 Part of the National Motorcycle Museum site is located within the areas identified for permanent and temporary land take. Land take is required for the construction of a segregated left turn lane for M42 southbound traffic on the M42 Junction 6 roundabout.

5.5.4 These works would result in the permanent closure of the existing access to the museum. A new access to the museum would be provided from the A45 Service Road. Construction works would require temporary land take of the existing access area, an area of the car park and the planted verge to the north of the museum. This would result in the permanent narrowing of the grassed verge. The museum hosts a range of large events and parking capacity is therefore important. The temporary loss of the parking area, for the duration of the construction works, would result in a moderate adverse effect and is therefore considered to be significant.

5.5.5 The Proposed Scheme would result in the permanent loss of the Olympia Motorcycle Track off Middle Bickenhill Lane. There are several other motocross tracks within the Solihull area. This would result in a moderate adverse effect and is therefore considered to be significant.

5.5.6 The existing A452 Chester Road/B4438 roundabout would be demolished. Two new roundabouts, including a segregated left turn lane for A452 Chester Road southbound traffic, would be constructed to connect to the existing B4438. Highway works would include the realignment of the dedicated access road to the Little Owl public house. In addition, it would

26 Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (2009), Inspection Report: Windy Arbor Junior and Infant School.

55


include the permanent loss of part of the grassed areas at the eastern and northern boundaries of the car park to the Little Owl public house. There are two points of vehicular access to the Little Owl public house and the car park would not be affected by the Proposed Scheme. The effect would therefore be negligible, and not considered significant.

5.5.7 The realignment of the A452 Chester Road and A446 Stonebridge Road would require the realignment of the access road to the Melbicks Garden and Leisure Centre and the permanent loss of a small area of the car park. Access to the garden centre would be retained throughout the construction period. The effect would be negligible, and therefore not considered significant.

5.5.8 The Toby Carvery restaurant and public house is located to the north west of Stonebridge Island. The access road to the rear of the Toby Carvery is within the permanent land take area. Improvements to Stonebridge Island would require the rear access road, off the A452 Chester Road, to be realigned so that it would extend further northwards. The existing access to the front of the site off the A45 Coventry Road and East Way would remain. The Toby Carvery could continue to function and remain accessible throughout the construction period. It would therefore be a negligible effect, and not considered to be significant.

Public rights of way and open space

5.5.9 An area to the east of Heath Park, which includes two football pitches, would be lost permanently, as the Proposed Scheme would pass through the Park. An additional area would be also lost temporarily during the construction period. The effect of the land take would result in a moderate adverse effect and is therefore considered to be significant.

Amenity

5.5.10 The incidence of significant effects, including in-combination effects, on community amenity, will be assessed in the formal ES.


5.5.11 Residual effects would be as described in the assessment section above. Multiple (in combination) community effects will be considered for the formal ES.

Further mitigation

5.5.12 Consultation will inform the development of specific mitigation measures where required, which could include improvement or provision of community resources as appropriate. These mitigation measures will be reported in the formal ES.


5.6.1 Within this study area, effects on the community resulting from the operation of the Proposed Scheme could potentially arise from changes to amenity.

5.6.2 The assessment of effects on amenity will draw upon other technical disciplines (e.g. air quality, noise and vibration, visual, transport and traffic) findings to inform the amenity assessment. The presence of in-combination impacts from these other disciplines could result in significant amenity effects on a number of community facilities and resources in the area. This will be reported in the formal ES.

56



5.6.3 Multiple (in combination) community effects will be considered, and where significant reported in the formal ES.

Further mitigation

5.6.4 The development of specific mitigation measures where required, which could include improvement or provision of community resources as appropriate, will be reported in the formal ES.

57

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Cultural heritage

6 Cultural heritage6.1 Introduction6.1.1 This section of the report presents a summary of the impacts and likely significant effects on

heritage assets and the historic environment as a result of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. Heritage assets comprise:

• Archaeological and palaeoenvironmental remains;

• Historic landscapes; and

• Historic buildings and the built environment.

6.2 Policyframework6.2.1 Objective 3 of the West Midlands Sustainable Development Framework encourages local

authorities in their plan making to “Value, protect, enhance and restore the region’s environmental assets, including the natural, built and historic environment and landscape”27.

6.2.2 The SUDP contains three policies that are relevant to cultural heritage. Policy ENV5 deals with the allocation, management and review of Conservation Areas. This policy is supported by three sub-policies, dealing with the conservation of the historic environment; the requirement for Conservation Area Appraisal Documents; and the requirement for a Conservation Area Enhancement Programme. The requirement for the consideration and protection of Listed Buildings is set out in Policy ENV6.

6.2.3 Policy ENV8 affords protection to both statutory and non-statutory archaeological assets including scheduled monuments and archaeological sites and/or remains. It gives a presumption of in-place preservation, rather than the removal of archaeological remains. Policy ENV8 is underpinned with a sub-policy Proposal ENV8/1 which places a requirement on SMBC to prepare management plans for the scheduled monuments within its ownership.

6.2.4 The SDLP contains one policy of relevance to cultural heritage. Policy P16 of the SDLP provides the framework for decision making with regards to developments which may have an effect upon areas which contribute to the historical character of Solihull. Furthermore, it recognises the importance of the historic environment, and it expects development to “conserve heritage assets as appropriate to their significance, preserve or enhance local character and distinctiveness and create or sustain a sense of place”.

6.2.5 The NWLP has two applicable policies. Policy ENV15 sets out the controls to be placed on new development within conservation areas, covering building demolition, works to trees and other development. Policy ENV16 sets out the protection measures that will control development affecting listed buildings, local buildings of historical value and sites of archaeological importance.

6.2.6 The general emphasis of current policies is carried forward within draft policy NW11 of the NWLPCS, which seeks to protect the quality, character and uniqueness of the natural and historic environment.

6.3 Assessmentscopeandkeyassumptions6.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the cultural heritage assessment is set out in

Volume 1.

27 West Midlands Regional Assembly (2006) A Sustainable Future for the West Midlands: Regional Sustainable Development Framework (Version 2)

58


6.4 Environmental baseline6.4.1 Designated assets relevant to the cultural heritage baseline are shown on shown on maps

CT-01-53 to CT-01-54.

6.4.2 This section of the Proposed Scheme lies within National Character Area (NCA) 97: Arden. The historic landscape character of the study area is dominated by the broad types of civic and commercial use to the west, fieldscapes to the centre and industrial use to the east. The historically wooded nature of this landscape, with soils being generally unsuitable for early agricultural development, has resulted in an area of low density settlement with evidence of occupation being limited. There is generally little evidence for pre-medieval activity. Forest clearance began in earnest in the medieval period and intensified up until the industrial period. Some elements of the medieval and post-medieval landscape are preserved within the existing landscape in the form of piecemeal enclosure and extensive areas of ridge and furrow. Associated with this use of the landscape was the formation of the large scale country estate at Packington Estate, which included formal designed gardens and landscapes.

6.4.3 There is evidence of archaeological activity dating from prehistoric to the modern period. The earliest archaeological evidence comprises the findspot of Mesolithic flint flake or blade found near Denbigh Spinney and a Bronze Age axehead recovered from within Little Packington Parish.

6.4.4 The first records of settlement are in the Domesday Book (1086), which names Bickenhill; Middle Bickenhill; Hill Bickenhill and Packington. The medieval period is characterised by the foundation of manors and moated sites along with deer parks for larger estates such as Packington.

6.4.5 Post-medieval and early modern periods within the study area are characterised by the creation of individual farmsteads such as Common Farm and Park Farm. Industry established in this area during this period was small in scale in the form of quarries and brickworks, for example the post medieval brickyard recorded on the Historic Environment Record (HER), located east of Brickfields Farm.

6.4.6 It was during the modern period this area was transformed from a rural area situated on the outskirts of Birmingham with good historic legibility, to an area dominated by transport networks, landfill sites, commercial buildings and business parks and the Chelmsley Wood residential estate. During the modern period the majority of fields in this section of the Proposed Scheme have had their field boundaries removed to create large open fields in the post war period.

6.4.7 Within the study area the following designated and non-designated assets are recorded.

Designated assets

6.4.8 There are no designated assets located in the areas directly affected by the Proposed Scheme or its construction activities.

6.4.9 There are 45 designated assets within the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) (see section 9 of this document) comprising:

• The Little Packington Bridge, a scheduled monument of medieval date;

• 35 listed buildings consisting of two Grade I, three Grade II* and 30 Grade II;

• Packington Hall, a Grade II* Registered Park and Garden of 18th Century date;

• Bickenhill Conservation Area; and

59


• Seven areas of ancient woodland – The Somers, Todds Rough, Mulliners Rouge, Birch Wood, Bannerley Rough, School Rough and Alcott Wood.

Non-designated assets

6.4.10 There are a number of archaeological assets recorded on the HER within the study area. Of these the following assets lie within the areas directly affected by the Proposed Scheme or its construction activities:

• The Old Road from Hampton to Coleshill;

• Earthworks relating to Warren Farm;

• A post medieval Turnpike Road;

• Ridge and furrow south of Blackfirs Lane;

• An earthwork field boundary;

• An earthwork boundary bank relating to Bickenhill Common Farm;

• The site of the early 19th century Mary Hastings Cottage (now known as Oak Tree Cottage);

• Furrows in Pool Wood; and

• 18th/19th century brick kilns at a former Brick Yard, west of Brickfield Farm.

6.4.11 There are three hedgerows within the study area which have been identified as important in accordance with the Hedgerow Regulations 199728. These hedgerows are located close to the Grade II* listed Park Farm.


6.5.1 The construction works have the potential to affect heritage assets. Impacts would occur to assets within the construction boundary, as well as the setting of heritage assets within the ZTV.

6.5.2 The draft CoCP sets out the provisions that would be adopted to control effects on cultural heritage assets. The provisions include:

• Management measures to control damage to assets that are to be retained within the area of temporary land take and the preparation of project wide principles, standards and techniques for works affecting heritage assets;

• A programme of archaeological investigation and recording to be undertaken prior to construction works affecting the assets; and

• A programme of historic building investigation and recording to be undertaken prior to modification or demolition of the assets.

6.5.3 In addition the following measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme and avoid or reduce impacts on heritage assets:

• A reduction of the area of permanent land take and temporary land take to the minimum required; and

• Design of the Birmingham Interchange station and associated works and highways improvements have been designed to reduce impacts on the setting of Grade II* listed Park Farm and Packington Hall Grade II* Registered Park and Garden.

28 Hedgerow Regulations SI.1997 No.1160 (1997), London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office

60


6.5.4 Assets that would or might experience a significant physical effect in this area are:

• The Old Road from Hampton to Coleshill, an asset of low value, would be partly removed;

• Earthworks relating to Warren Farm, an asset of low value, would be entirely removed;

• A post medieval Turnpike Road, an asset of low value, would be partly removed;

• An area of ridge and furrow south of Blackfirs Lane, an asset of low value, would be entirely removed;

• An earthwork field boundary, an asset of low value, would be entirely removed;

• An earthwork boundary bank relating to Bickenhill Common Farm, an asset of low value, would be entirely removed;

• Remains of kilns at former Brick Yard, an asset of low value, would be entirely removed; and

• Remains associated with Mary Hastings Cottage (now known as Oak Tree Cottage), an asset of low value, would be entirely removed.

6.5.5 The settings of the following specific heritage assets would experience significant effects:

• Park Farm, an asset of high heritage value, which would be affected by the activity of construction traffic, cranes, earthmoving plant, satellite construction compounds and storage facilities approximately 80m to the east and soil storage stockpiles approximately 20m to the west; and

• Packington Hall Registered Park and Garden, an asset of high heritage value, which would be affected by construction traffic, cranes and earthmoving plant approximately 335m to the east, on the south-western part of the asset.

6.5.6 The construction of the Proposed Scheme would not have an impact on any other identified heritage asset and would not have an impact on the setting of any other designated asset identified with the ZTV.


6.5.7 The impacts of the construction phase on the heritage assets through setting changes are temporary, and therefore not considered to result in residual significant effects.

6.5.8 Although a programme of archaeological and historic building investigation and recording contributes to knowledge gain, such works would not fully mitigate the effect or reduce the impact on heritage assets. The following effects would therefore remain:

6.5.9 The following assets would be lost as a result of the construction of the Proposed Scheme:

• Part of the Old Road from Hampton to Coleshill;

• The earthworks relating to Warren Farm, Coleshill;

• Part of post medieval Turnpike Road, Coleshill;

• An area of ridge and furrow south of Blackfirs Lane, Coleshill;

• An earthwork field boundary, Coleshill;

• An earthwork boundary bank relating to Bickenhill Common Farm, Coleshill; and

• The site of Mary Hastings Cottage (now known as Oak Tree Cottage), Coleshill.

6.5.10 The following assets would remain, but will be affected by the Proposed Scheme:

• Grade II* listed Park Farm; and

61


• Packington Hall, a Grade II* Registered Park and Garden.

Further mitigation

6.5.11 No further mitigation measures have been identified at this time


6.6.1 The introduction of the Proposed Scheme into an area of existing open landscape has the potential to introduce impacts on the setting of the identified heritage assets. The Proposed Scheme includes elevated sections on embankment and viaduct, together with realignment of the existing highway infrastructure. This would result in impacts to the setting of the following:

• The Grade II* listed Park Farm, which would be affected by the operation of the Birmingham Interchange station road network, car parking and associated infrastructure approximately 100m to the south and west;

• The southern part of the Packington Hall Registered Park and Garden, which would be affected by the operation of the Birmingham Interchange station road network, car parks and associated infrastructure approximately 700m to the west; and

• The non-designated Common Farm arising from operation of the Proposed Scheme, particularly Birmingham Interchange station, car parks and changes to the highway network.

6.6.2 Measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme to reduce these adverse impacts as far as reasonably practicable.

6.6.3 Planting would be implemented around the boundary of the Grade II* listed Park Farm to reduce setting impacts associated with the Proposed Scheme. The planting would provide a visual screen between Park Farm and Birmingham Interchange station and surface level car parking, which would allow for a reduction in the visual intrusion caused by the Proposed Scheme.

6.6.4 This planting, along with other permanent features related to the Proposed Scheme, is shown on maps CT-06-105 to CT-06-108.

6.6.5 The provision of earthworks and planting would provide an effective means of mitigation to reduce the effects of the Proposed Scheme on the historic landscape and specific heritage assets within it. However, mitigation would not be fully effective until planting has matured.


6.6.6 There would be likely significant residual effects on setting in relation to the Grade II* listed Park Farm and the non-designated Common Farm.

Further mitigation

6.6.7 No further mitigation measures have been identified at this time.

62

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Ecology

7 Ecology7.1 Introduction7.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of the predicted impacts and significant effects

upon species and habitats as a consequence of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. This includes effects upon sites recognised or designated on the basis of their importance for nature conservation.

7.2 Policyframework7.2.1 The SUDP contains four policies that are relevant to ecology. Policy ENV10 provides the

context for the allocation, protection and enhancement of national and local sites of importance for nature conservation. Policy ENV11 relates to the conservation and enhancement of biodiversity within Solihull and includes an expectation that developers will help maximise the potential for habitat creation and enhancement. Policy ENV12 seeks to conserve and enhance the River Blythe catchment both in terms of the natural environment and its role as a source of drinking water. Policy ENV14 seeks to safeguard important trees, hedgerows and woodland whilst encouraging new habitats of this type, where possible.

7.2.2 The SDLP contains one policy relevant to ecology. Policy P10 relates to the protection of the natural environment, including buffering to designated nature conservation sites.

7.2.3 The NWLP contains three policies relevant to ecology. Core Policy 3: Natural and Historic Environment, seeks to protect and enhance biodiversity, natural habitats, the historic environment and existing landscape and townscape character. Policy ENV3 seeks to restrict new development within nationally, regionally or locally designated sites of nature conservation interest. The policy seeks to prevent development that will have a harmful effect on rare and/or protected species, with development that has an ‘effect’ only being allowed where suitable mitigation measures are put in place. Policy ENV4 seeks to resist the loss of trees, woodlands and hedgerows and actively enhance these through planting.

7.2.4 The NWLPCS includes draft policy NW12 which seeks to protect nature conservation sites from development with a particular emphasis placed upon SSSIs. It also aims to ensure that development avoids any net loss in biodiversity.

7.2.5 In addition, the following local and regional guidance is relevant to the assessment:

• Solihull Nature Conservation Strategy29;

• Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull Biodiversity Action Plan30; and

• Solihull Green Infrastructure Study31.

7.3 Assessmentscopeandkeyassumptions7.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the ecological assessment are set out in

Volume 1.

7.3.2 The current assessment draws on existing information gathered from national organisations and from regional and local sources including Warwickshire County Council, Warwickshire Wildlife Trust and local wildlife recorders.

29 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2010), Solihull Nature Conservation Strategy 2012-2014.30 Warwickshire County Council (2003) Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull Biodiversity Action Plan.31 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2012), Solihull Green Infrastructure Study.

63


7.3.3 Citation details (reasons why the site is designated) relating to Ecosites (a type of non-statutory site designated for nature conservation importance) that have been obtained to date are incomplete. Further details have been requested from Warwickshire Biological Records Centre but are yet to be received.

7.3.4 For the current assessment the likely reasons for designation of each Ecosite have been predicted based on available data and professional judgement. Full citation details for all sites are anticipated to be available to inform the formal ES.

7.3.5 Field surveys undertaken to date have been limited to locations where landowner permission has been obtained and to areas accessible to the public. They include (but are not limited to): amphibian surveys at Brickfield Farm; bat surveys at a number of locations including along Hollywell Brook; otter and water vole surveys at Pendigo Lake; and badger surveys in the vicinity of Patrick Farm.

7.3.6 Surveys will continue during 2013 and will include (but are not limited to) the following, subject to access:

• Amphibian surveys at an number of locations including Brickfield Farm, Olympia Motorcycle Track, NEC, and Packington Landfill;

• Bat surveys at a number of locations including Brickfield Farm, Denbigh Spinney LWS and Ecosite and in the vicinity of Middle Bickenhill Lane;

• Otter and water vole surveys along Hollywell Brook and at Pendigo Lake;

• Hedgerow surveys at various locations including Park Farm; and

• Badger surveys at Common Farm.

7.4 Environmental baseline7.4.1 This section presents the environmental baseline that is relevant to the consideration of

impacts and effects reported in Sections 7.5 and 7.6.

7.4.2 Land within or adjacent to the Proposed Scheme in this area is represented by a mix of residential and industrial developments as well as areas of arable land and improved pasture bounded by open hedgerows and small blocks of plantation and broad-leaved woodland. Within this area land is intersected by tributaries of the River Blythe, including Hollywell Brook.

7.4.3 Statutory designated sites and non-statutory designated sites of country/metropolitan value are shown on maps CT-01-53 to CT-01-54 and CT-02-19.

7.4.4 Two SSSIs are present within 500m of the Proposed Scheme. These are both of national value based on the features for which they are designated:

• Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI is partly located within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. The SSSI is notified for its valley mire, wet woodland and the species these habitats support, particularly plants that are scarce or have a localised distribution within the Midlands, such as heather, cross-leaved heath, purple moor-grass and marsh cinquefoil; and

• The River Blythe SSSI is located on the boundary 0f this section of the Proposed Scheme and CFA23 Balsall Common and Hampton-in-Arden. Hollywell Brook runs through the area and is a tributary of the SSSI. The River Blythe SSSI is notified for the aquatic plant and invertebrate communities that it supports.

64


7.4.5 LWS and Ecosites which are located within the extent of or adjacent to the Proposed Scheme, or are considered potentially subject to significant effects, are relevant to the assessment32. There are two LWS, one of which is considered to be of county/metropolitan value, the other of district/borough value, and 12 Ecosites considered to be of district/borough value, which meet these criteria:

• Coleshill Pool Wood LWS and Ecosite is designated for its LBAP wet and broad-leaved semi-natural woodland. This site is considered to be of up to county/metropolitan value;

• Denbigh Spinney LWS is designated for its small areas of LBAP broad-leaved semi-natural woodland. This site is considered to be of district/borough value;

• Denbigh Spinney Ecosite is designated for its small areas of LBAP broad-leaved semi-natural woodland;

• Disused Track and Siding Wood Ecosite is likely to have been designated for its scrub and areas of LBAP broad-leaved semi-natural woodland;

• Arden Brickworks Ecosite is likely to have been designated for the water bodies and broad-leaved semi-natural woodland habitats that have developed within it since the cessation of clay extraction activities;

• Hollywell Brook corridor to A41 Ecosite is likely to have been designated for its watercourses, which are currently in an unfavourable condition, and LBAP marshy grassland habitats;

• Pendigo Lake and The Rough Ecosite is likely to have been designated for its riparian habitats and small areas of LBAP broad-leaved semi-natural woodland;

• Packington Gravel Pits Ecosite is likely to have been designated for the water bodies and broad-leaved semi-natural woodland habitats that exist within the site;

• Little Packington Churchyard Ecosite is a redundant area of churchyard which is likely to have been designated for it grassland habitats and individual broad-leaved trees;

• Hedgerow Ecosite is likely to have been designated for its species-rich hedgerows;

• Blackfirs Lane Hedgerows Ecosite is likely to have been designated for its species-rich hedgerows; and

• Coleshill Pool and Bog Ecosite is likely to have been designated for its water bodies, wet woodland, valley mire and the botanical species these habitats support. The majority of this Ecosite is included within Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI, with only a small part of the Ecosite extending beyond the northern boundary of the SSSI.

7.4.6 There are no ancient woodland inventory sites located within or adjacent to the Proposed Scheme.

7.4.7 Other habitats located outside of the designated sites identified above and which are relevant to the assessment include the following:

• Hedgerows – species-rich and species-poor hedgerows (which are habitats of principal importance as identified in Section 41 of the NERC Act 2006) are located within or adjacent to the extent of the Proposed Scheme and include some that meet wildlife and landscape criteria specified in the Hedgerows Regulations (1997)33. Based on the potential of these features to act as green corridors, the hedgerow network is collectively considered to be of up to county/metropolitan value;

32 Ecosites and Local Wildlife Sites are designated by a Local Authority as areas of local conservation interest.33 Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006), London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

65


• Wetland – marshy grassland (a habitat of principal importance) is located within or adjacent to the extent of the Proposed Scheme. The areas of this habitat type are collectively considered to be of up to county/metropolitan value;

• Woodland – areas of this habitat of principal importance are located within or adjacent to the extent of the Proposed Scheme and are collectively considered likely to be of no more than district/borough value; and

• Watercourses – two tributaries of the River Blythe flow through the Proposed Scheme and are considered to be collectively of no more than district/borough value.

7.4.8 A summary of the likely value of species/species groups covered by the assessment (excluding any features of species interest for which the sites described above are designated) is provided in Table 10.

Resource/Receptor Value Rationale

Breeding birds Up to regional Barn owl (a viable population of district/borough value) has been recorded within 1km of the Proposed Scheme in the vicinity of BickenhillThere is potential for other notable breeding bird species to be present, which will be determined during surveys to be undertaken in 2013

Wintering birds Up to regional There are no records of notable wintering birds within the area recorded to date Owing to the quality and extent of the semi-improved grassland and marshy grassland habitats which occur within this section of the Proposed Scheme there is considered to be reasonable potential for notable wintering bird species of up to regional value to be present

Flora Up to county/metropolitan

No notable species have been recorded within 500m of the Proposed SchemeOwing to the quality and extent of the semi-improved grassland and marshy grassland habitats which occur within this section of the Proposed Scheme, there is considered to be reasonable potential for other notable botanical species to be present, which will be determined during surveys to be undertaken in 2013

Bats Unlikely to be more than county/metropolitan

Small populations of the following species have been recorded:Daubenton’s bat at Packington Hall;Noctule bat (a species of principal importance) at Castle Hills;Leisler’s bat, soprano pipistrelle bat, and brown long-eared bat (a species of principal importance) along Packington Lane; andA large roost of 62 common pipistrelle bats on Packington Lane.There is potential for other notable bat species to be present, which will be determined during surveys to be undertaken in 2013

Otter County/metropolitan This species of principal importance has been recorded regularly along the River Blythe. Its tributaries, which include Hollywell Brook, represent suitable interconnected habitat

Water vole County/metropolitan There is potential for this county rare species to be present, which will be determined during surveys to be undertaken in 2013

Terrestrial invertebrates

Up to county/metropolitan

A small population of small heath butterfly (a species of principal importance) has been recorded in close proximity to Birmingham Business ParkColeshill Pool Wood Ecosite and LWS contains ponds of value to a range of invertebrate speciesThere is potential for other notable species of terrestrial invertebrate to be present, which will be determined during surveys to be undertaken in 2013

Hazel dormouse Up to county/metropolitan

There are no records for this species of principal importance recorded to date. However, suitable habitat is present within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. Further surveys will be undertaken during 2013

Macro invertebrates Unlikely to be more than county/metropolitan

A number of macro invertebrate species have been recorded at Hollywell BrookThere is potential for other notable macro invertebrate species to be present, which will be determined during surveys to be undertaken in 2013

66


Resource/Receptor Value Rationale

White-clawed crayfish


White-clawed crayfish (a species of principal importance) has been recorded at Packington Estate and the River Blythe

Amphibians Up to county/metropolitan

An exceptional population of great crested newt (a species of principal importance) has been recorded at the Packington LandfillA population of great crested newt are known to exist within Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI.Smooth newt, common frog and common toad (a species of principal importance) have also been recorded at Packington LandfillThere is potential for other notable amphibian populations to be present, which will be determined during surveys to be undertaken in 2013

Reptiles Unlikely to be more than district/borough

A small population of grass snake (a species of principal importance) has been recorded at Packington EstateA small population of slow worm (a species of principal importance) has been recorded at Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI and Sheldon Country ParkThere is potential for other notable reptile species to be present, which will be determined during surveys to be undertaken in 2013

Fish Unlikely to be more than district/borough

There are no records of notable fish within the area recorded to date.There is potential for notable fish to be present, which will be determined during surveys to be undertaken in 2013

Badger Up to local/parish There are no records of badger within the area recorded to dateThere is potential for badger to be present, which will be determined during surveys to be undertaken in 2013

Table 10: Preliminary evaluation of likely value of protected and/or notable species occurring within this section of the route

7.4.9 The habitats and species distribution and abundance within Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood is not anticipated to change before construction begins in 2017, or by the start of operation in 2026, except where permission has been granted for the development of land, such as the permitted mineral extraction at Park Farm. The potential effects of committed developments on the baseline conditions will be considered in more detail within the formal ES.


7.5.1 The following section considers the impacts and effects on ecological receptors as a consequence of construction of the Proposed Scheme, (as described in Section 2 of this report). All assessments made are provisional, based on the preliminary assessment of baseline value as presented in Section 7.4 of this report.

7.5.2 The following measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme to avoid or reduce impacts on features of ecological value:

• The footprint of earthworks has been reduced so as to avoid loss of habitat during construction;

• The planting of approximately 31ha of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland at various locations including in the vicinity of Birmingham Business Park and Hollywell Brook and adjacent to the A45 Coventry Road to address losses in this section of the route;

• Creation of approximately 6.7ha of marshy grassland in the vicinity of Hollywell Brook, Hollywell Brook Rough and the A452 Chester Road to address losses in this section of the route; and

67


• Planting of approximately 500m of species-rich hedgerow in the vicinity of Hollywell Brook, Diddington Lane and the A452 Chester Road to address losses in this section of the route.

7.5.3 The assessment assumes implementation of the measures set out within the draft CoCP, which includes translocation of protected species where appropriate. Aspects of the CoCP that are particularly relevant to this section of the route are the control of water quality within water courses and wetland habitats along the route during construction, the protection of retained habitat, and control of invasive and non-native species.

7.5.4 There would be a direct impact on Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI (and Coleshill Pool and Bog Ecosite) due to the widening of the A446 Stonebridge Road associated with improvements to M6 Junction 4. There would be a permanent loss of approximately 0.3ha of mature broad-leaved wet woodland, representing approximately 0.9% of the site. However, there would be no significant effect on the integrity of the SSSI. The design of highway works in this location is currently being reviewed in order to further reduce those remaining effects on the SSSI. These will be reported in the formal ES.

7.5.5 Through implementation of the CoCP it is anticipated that impacts on the River Blythe SSSI would be avoided, therefore the Proposed Scheme is not anticipated to result in any adverse effect on the riparian habitats for which it is designated.

7.5.6 Coleshill Pool Wood LWS and Ecosite are located entirely within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. There would be a permanent loss of approximately 3ha of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland, less than 0.1ha of semi-improved neutral grassland and less than 0.1ha of pond and riparian habitat, which would represent a total loss of the site. This would result in a permanent adverse effect on site integrity that is significant at up to the county/metropolitan level.

7.5.7 As a result of highway works and works associated with Birmingham Interchange station, there would be a permanent loss of 0.65ha of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland which falls within the boundaries of both Denbigh Spinney LWS and Denbigh Spinney Ecosite. This habitat loss would represent approximately 98% of the LWS and 70% of the Ecosite. There would be a permanent adverse effect on the integrity of both sites that would be significant at up to the county/metropolitan level.

7.5.8 At Disused Track and Siding Wood Ecosite, as a result of highway works relating to the A45 Coventry Road, there would be a permanent loss of approximately 1.5ha of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland and approximately 0.1ha of semi-improved neutral grassland. This loss of habitats collectively represents approximately 70% of the site. There would be a permanent adverse effect on site integrity that is significant at up to the district/borough level.

7.5.9 At Arden Brickworks Ecosite, as a result of highway works relating to the A45 Coventry Road, there would be a permanent loss of 0.35ha of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland representing approximately 56% of the site. This would represent a permanent adverse effect on site integrity that is significant at up to the district/borough level.

7.5.10 At Hollywell Brook Corridor to A41 Ecosite, as a result of number of construction activities including those associated with the Birmingham Interchange station, the automated people mover and diversion of Hollywell Brook, there would be a permanent loss of 1.35ha of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland and 0.15ha of semi-improved neutral grassland. This loss of habitats collectively represents approximately 15% of the site. There would be a permanent adverse effect on site integrity that is significant at up to the district/borough level.

68


7.5.11 At Pendigo Lake and The Rough Ecosite, as a result of the construction of the automated people mover, there would be a permanent loss of approximately 2.6ha of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland and 1.8ha of standing water and associated riparian habitat. This loss of habitats collectively represents approximately 30% of the site. This would represent a permanent adverse effect on site integrity that is significant at up to the district/borough level.

7.5.12 At the northern extent of the Coleshill Pool and Bog Ecosite, as a result of highway works to the M6 Junction 4, there would be permanent loss of an additional less than 0.1ha of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland representing approximately 0.1% of the site. There would be no significant effect on the integrity of this site.

7.5.13 There would be no loss of habitats at Arden Brickworks Ecosite, Packington Gravel Pits Ecosite, Little Packington Churchyard Ecosite, Hedgerow Ecosite, and Blackfirs Lane Hedgerows Ecosite as a result of the Proposed Scheme. No significant effect on these sites is anticipated.

7.5.14 The total area of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland lost as a consequence of construction in this section of the route (including that within the designated sites described above) would be approximately 7.9ha. The Proposed Scheme includes the creation of approximately 31ha of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland through the re-planting of native species of the Arden character at various locations including in the vicinity of Birmingham Business Park and Hollywell Brook, and adjacent to the A45 Coventry Road. From the point at which mitigation planting starts to establish (anticipated to between 10 to 15 years after planting) there would likely be a permanent beneficial effect that is significant at up to the district/borough level.

7.5.15 Approximately a further 0.8ha of woodland is proposed throughout the area to mitigate visual impacts and to integrate the Proposed Scheme into the surrounding landscape. Whilst not designed for ecological mitigation this planting would provide ecological benefits. These benefits would be considered and reported further in the formal ES.

7.5.16 The total area of semi-improved neutral grassland to be lost, including areas outside of designated sites, would be approximately 50ha. No mitigation for this habitat type is currently included in the design. Consequently, a permanent adverse effect on conservation status would remain which would be significant at up to the county/metropolitan level.

7.5.17 As a result of construction of Birmingham Interchange station and associated development there would be a loss of approximately 3.6ha of marshy grassland from outside of the designated sites described above. The Proposed Scheme includes the creation of approximately 6.7ha of marshy grassland in the vicinity of Hollywell Brook, Hollywell Brook Rough and the A452 Chester Road. From the point at which mitigation planting is established (anticipated to be around 5 years after planting) the increase in marshy grassland would result in a permanent beneficial effect that would be significant at the county/metropolitan level.

7.5.18 The total length of species-rich and species-poor hedgerow to be lost as a consequence of construction in this section of the route would be approximately 0.32km and 8km respectively. Species rich hedgerows, totalling 0.5km, would be provided at various locations including in the vicinity of Hollywell Brook and the A452 Chester Road, resulting in a permanent beneficial effect that would be significant at up to county/metropolitan level once established. In the absence of further mitigation there would be a permanent adverse effect on local conservation status of species-poor hedgerows that would be significant at a county/metropolitan level.

7.5.19 The total area of pond and freshwater habitat to be lost, including areas outside of designated sites, would be approximately 0.12ha. Consequently, a permanent adverse effect would remain which would be significant at up to the district/borough level.

69


7.5.20 Pending results from 2013 survey work the loss of woodland habitats could result in the loss of bat roosts. In addition, the loss of woodland, grassland and hedgerow habitats would lead to a reduction in suitable foraging habitat, and the potential disruption of dispersal corridors for bats. Therefore, there is the potential for a permanent adverse effect on the conservation status of local bat populations that would be significant at up to county/metropolitan level.

7.5.21 The loss of woodland, marshy grassland, hedgerows and semi-improved neutral grassland habitats could also result in a reduction in foraging and/or breeding success of breeding bird populations within this section of the route. This would result in a permanent adverse effect on the conservation status of the populations concerned that is significant at up to regional level.

7.5.22 The loss of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland, marshy grassland, established species-rich and species-poor hedgerow and semi-improved neutral grassland habitats, across the area and the associated establishment period of up between 10 to 15 years for areas of replacement woodland, and of up to 5 years for areas of marshy grassland and hedgerow could result in permanent adverse effects on a range of terrestrial invertebrate species (including the small population of small heath butterfly, known to exist in close proximity to Birmingham Business Park). These adverse effects would be temporarily significant at up to county/metropolitan value level, though once replacement habitats are established the adverse effect is expected to reduce to being significant at the local/parish level.

7.5.23 The diversion of approximately 350m of Hollywell Brook and 100m of an unnamed tributary of the River Blythe could initially result in increased sediment loading of the watercourses, affecting photosynthesis and resulting in the potential loss of riparian plants and displacement of both white-clawed crayfish and aquatic macro invertebrates. This would result in a temporary adverse effect of up to county/metropolitan value for both species/species groups.

7.5.24 The loss of pond and freshwater habitat as well as associated terrestrial habitats (semi-improved neutral grassland, marshy grassland and broad-leaved semi-natural woodland) that support the exceptional population of great crested newt, as well as smooth newt, common frog and common toad, could have an adverse effect on the local breeding success of these species and would be likely to cause a population decline. This would result in a permanent adverse effect significant at up to the county/metropolitan level.

7.5.25 The loss of semi-improved neutral grassland and marshy grassland has the potential to significantly affect the breeding and foraging success of slow worm. This would result in a permanent adverse effect on the conservation status of the populations concerned that is significant at up to the district/borough level.

7.5.26 Protected and/or notable species recorded within the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme but not anticipated to be affected through habitat loss include: grass snake, fish, otter and water vole.

7.5.27 A summary of likely residual significant effects is provided in Table 11. Local/parish effects, which in combination may be significant, will be described in the formal ES.


7.5.28 Taking into account mitigation included in the design of the Proposed Scheme, anticipated likely residual significant ecological effects during construction are detailed in Table 11.

70


Resource/Receptor Residualeffect Levelofsignificance

Breeding birds Permanent adverse effect due to temporary loss of woodland and marshy grassland, and permanent loss of hedgerow and semi-improved neutral grassland

Up to regional

Coleshill Pool Wood LWS and Ecosite

Permanent adverse effects on site integrity due to loss of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland, semi-improved neutral grassland and pond and riparian habitat


Species-rich hedgerow Permanent beneficial effect on conservation status Up to county/metropolitan

Species-poor hedgerow Permanent adverse effect on conservation status Up to county/metropolitan

Broad-leaved semi-natural woodland

Permanent beneficial effect on conservation status Up to county/metropolitan

Marshy grassland Permanent beneficial effect on conservation status Up to county/metropolitan

Semi-improved neutral grassland

Permanent adverse effect on conservation status Up to county/metropolitan

Terrestrial invertebrates Temporary adverse effect due to temporary loss of woodland, marshy grassland, and species-rich hedgerow


White-clawed crayfish Potential temporary adverse effect due to diversion of Hollywell Brook and an unnamed tributary of the River Blythe


Macro invertebrates Potential temporary adverse effect due to diversion of Hollywell Brook and an unnamed tributary of the River Blythe


Amphibians Permanent adverse effect due to loss of pond and freshwater habitat as well as associated terrestrial habitats (semi-improved neutral grassland, marshy grassland and broad-leaved semi-natural woodland)


Bats (Daubenton’s, Leisler’s, brown long-eared, soprano pipistrelle, common pipistrelle and noctule)

Potential permanent adverse effect due to loss of woodland, marshy grassland, semi-improved neutral grassland and hedgerows.


Denbigh Spinney LWS, Denbigh Spinney Ecosite, Arden Brickworks Ecosite

Permanent adverse effect on one LWS and two Ecosites due to loss of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland


Disused Track and Siding Wood Ecosite, Hollywell Brook Corridor to A41 Ecosite

Permanent adverse effect on two Ecosites due to loss of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland and semi-improved neutral grassland

Up to district/borough

Pendigo Lake and The Rough Ecosite

Permanent adverse effect due to loss of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland and standing water and associated riparian habitat


Pond and freshwater habitat Permanent adverse effect on conservation status Up to district/borough

Reptiles Potential permanent adverse effect due to loss of semi-improved neutral grassland and marshy grassland


Table 11: Significant residual construction effects on ecological receptors within this section of the route

71


Further mitigation

7.5.29 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include:

• Further design of the widening of the A446 Stonebridge Road in order to minimise the effect on the Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI;

• The creation of replacement valley mire habitat where suitable conditions are available;

• Planting of further hedgerows in suitable locations to link with existing hedgerows and help to maintain integrity and species dispersal;

• The creation of semi-improved neutral grassland habitat where suitable conditions are available;

• Replacement of lost pond, water body and aquatic habitats, where reasonably practicable, to provide new breeding habitat for amphibian species;

• Provision of replacement roosting habitat for bats that may be required on the basis of 2013 survey results;

• Provision of measures to facilitate the passage of species across the route where significant foraging or commuting routes would be disturbed; and

• Opportunities to reduce the time lag to establishment of mitigation habitats.


7.6.1 The following section considers the potential effects on ecological receptors during operation of the Proposed Scheme. All assessments made are provisional, based on the preliminary assessments of baseline value presented in Section 7.4.

7.6.2 The following mitigation measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme to avoid or reduce impacts on features of ecological value:

• The naturalisation of the realigned Hollywell Brook and another tributary of the River Blythe at Denbigh Spinney LWS and Ecosite;

• The bridge that spans the Hollywell Brook has been designed to reduce shading impacts to aquatic plants and the animals they support; and

• Implementation of measures to provide safe passage for otters during flood events at locations where built structures span Hollywell Brook and other tributaries of the River Blythe, for example at Denbigh Spinney LWS and Ecosite.

7.6.3 The Proposed Scheme includes the provision of otter/mammal ledges in all built structures that span watercourses, in order to ensure the retained passage of species across the route. These mitigation measures, along with other permanent features related to the Proposed Scheme, are shown on maps CT-06-105 to CT-06-108.

7.6.4 The Proposed Scheme has the potential to bisect bat dispersal corridors. Bats are potentially at risk of being killed by collision with trains or by turbulence. Owing to their low reproductive rates and the long life span of UK bat species, this could have a significant effect on the conservation status of local bat populations. Likely significant effects as a consequence of the Proposed Scheme will be reported in the formal ES when more is known about how bat species utilise the local area. Depending on results of 2013 surveys there could be a permanent adverse effect on conservation status of bat populations that is significant at up to the county/metropolitan level.

72


7.6.5 There is additionally a risk of train strikes affecting barn owls. This low flying species is particularly susceptible to vehicle and train strikes. The likely scale of these effects will be considered in detail within the formal ES in light of data collected from surveys to be conducted during 2013. Pending review of this data there is the potential for a permanent adverse effect on conservation status that is significant at up to the district/borough level.

7.6.6 The Proposed Scheme would include the installation of pollution interceptors at attenuation ponds, which, in conjunction with the operational adherence to industry best practice, would control the use and disposal of polluting substances. In addition, best practice pollution control guidance would be adopted for maintenance of the Proposed Scheme.

7.6.7 Structures spanning watercourses could also have the potential to provide a direct pathway for contaminants to enter the associated watercourses and affect their ecological viability. However, following the implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in Section 13 Water resources and flood risk assessment, including the adoption of best practice, no likely significant residual effects are anticipated.

7.6.8 A summary of likely residual significant effect is provided in Table 12. Local/parish effects, which in combination may be significant, will be described in the formal ES.


7.6.9 Taking into account mitigation included in the design of the Proposed Scheme, anticipated likely residual significant ecological effects during operation are detailed in Table 12 below.

Table 12: Significant residual operational effects on ecological receptors within this area

Resource/Receptor Residualeffect Levelofsignificance

Bats Potential permanent effect on conservation status due to mortality through train strike


Barn owl Potential permanent effect on conservation status due to mortality through train strike

District/borough

Further mitigation

7.6.10 Further mitigation measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include:

• Potential provision of measures to facilitate the passage of species across the route where significant foraging or commuting corridors would be disturbed, including the provision of appropriate landscape planting at key locations.

73

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Land quality

8 Land quality8.1 Introduction8.1.1 This section provides a summary of the likely impacts and significant effects to land quality

and geology, as a result of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. Consideration is given to land that contains contamination and land that has special geological significance, either from a scientific, mining or mineral resources point of view, including: geological sites of special scientific interest (SSSI), local geological sites (LGS), areas of current underground or opencast mining, and areas of designated mineral resources.

8.1.2 Areas of land have been identified, both within and adjacent to construction areas, that could affect or be affected by the construction of the route because they are contaminated (for example contaminated soils may need to be removed or the construction may alter existing contamination pathways). Each of these areas has been studied in order to determine the scale of any potential impacts caused by existing contamination and what needs to be done to avoid significant consequences to people and the wider environment. In addition, a review has been undertaken to establish whether the operation of the Proposed Scheme would lead to contamination of its surroundings and what needs to be done to prevent such contamination. This process is known as a contamination risk assessment.

8.2 Policyframework8.2.1 There are two policies of relevance to land quality contained within the SUDP. Policy ENV10/2

relates to undertaking surveys of regionally important geological sites in consultation with Warwickshire Geological Conservation Group; and Policy ENV16 states that SMBC require proposals to assess any land with known or potential contamination prior to any development occurring along with appropriate remediation strategies.

8.2.2 Policy P10 and Policy P14 of the SDLP reinforce SMBC’s requirements on safeguarding areas of national and local importance for geodiversity and the requirement to assess and remediate any potential or known contaminated land. Policy P13 defines mineral safeguarding areas for important underground coal resources and for sand and gravel aggregate resources. Within these mineral safeguarding areas, proposals for non-mineral development will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the development will not result in the sterilisation of mineral resources, the loss of important infrastructure or sites of potential infrastructure needs in the area.

8.2.3 Policy ENV6 and ENV3 of the NWLP relates to land resources and their protection during development, including the control of contamination; and the identification, protection and enhancement of designated sites respectively34. In respect of emerging policy contained in the NWLPCS, this includes policies regarding contaminated land and remediation in the context of delivering Sustainable Development (Policy NW8); the requirement to avoid the sterilisation of mineral reserves (Policy NW8); and the conservation and enhancement of the natural and historic environment including geo-diversity (Policies NW11 and NW12).

8.2.4 The Minerals Local Plan for Warwickshire (1995) aims to safeguard parcels of land where there are mineral resources of economic or conservation value (Policy M1) and safeguards against the sterilisation of potentially workable minerals by ensuring their removal prior to development (Policy M5)35.

34 North Warwickshire Borough Council (2012), Local Plan for North Warwickshire Core Strategy.35 Warwickshire County Council (1995) Minerals Local Plan for Warwickshire.

74


8.3 Assessmentscopeandkeyassumptions8.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the land quality assessment are set out in

Volume 1.

8.3.2 Engagement has been undertaken with SMBC Environmental Health Department regarding contaminated land and the Policy and Spatial Planning department of SMBC regarding mineral resources. Information has been received from NWBC and WCC and similar consultation will be undertaken with WCC and NWBC during 2013. Sita UK who operate both the Packington landfill site and Park Farm Quarry, located on the Packington Estate, has also been consulted.

8.4 Environmental baselineGeology

8.4.1 There are known areas of made ground identified within the study area which are associated with infrastructure development. These include:

• Unsuitable material from the construction of the M42 located between the motorway and Middle Bickenhill Lane36;

• Earthworks associated with the dismantled Hampton-in-Arden to Shustoke rail line at Middle Bickenhill;

• Excavated material from a balancing pond to the west of Middle Bickenhill Lane;

• A borrow pit from the construction of the M42 between the M42 and Middle Bickenhill Lane; and

• Deposits to the west of the M42 associated with the construction of the NEC, Birmingham International railway station and Birmingham Airport.

8.4.2 Superficial glacial deposits are present across much of the study area. Most of the glacial deposits beneath the route are sands and gravels, which are extensive but not continuous, beneath the axis of the River Blythe valley and constitute a significant local aggregate resource. A dissected layer of glacial till (generally a brown silty or sandy clay) overlies the glacial sand and gravel which is generally a firm to stiff brown silty or sandy clay with many clasts of quartzite. Fluvial/alluvial deposits are present across lower parts of the River Blythe and stream valleys that cross the route. A discontinuous cover of superficial glacial deposits (mainly sand and gravels) and very locally alluvium are located in close proximity to the proposed automated people mover.

8.4.3 Mercia Mudstone underlies much of the study area. Mercia Mudstone typically comprises weak red brown silty mudstone with minor amounts of carbonate and gypsum when unweathered. Occasional beds of dolomitic siltstone occur within the Mercia Mudstone which are generally thin and when unweathered are a medium strong rock. Within the Mercia Mudstone sequence, in the vicinity of the automated people mover, a thicker horizon of interbedded sandstone, siltstone and mudstone, known as the Arden Sandstone Member occurs.

8.4.4 There are known areas of made ground identified within the study area which are associated with infrastructure development including unsuitable material from the construction of the M42; earthworks associated with the dismantled Hampton-in-Arden to Shustoke rail line at Middle Bickenhill; excavated material from a balancing pond to the west of Middle Bickenhill Lane; a borrow pit from the construction of the M42 between the M42 and Middle Bickenhill

36 Unsuitable material includes material that is geotechnically or geochemically unsuitable for reuse during construction.

75


Lane; and deposits to the west of the M42 associated with the construction of the NEC, Birmingham International Station and Birmingham Airport.

Groundwater and surface water

8.4.5 There are two categories of aquifer identified within the study area. The Arden Sandstone and the Glaciofluvial deposits, river deposits and alluvium are classified as Secondary A Aquifers and Mercia Mudstone is classified as a Secondary B Aquifer37,38.

8.4.6 There are no groundwater source protection zones located within the study area.

8.4.7 Hollywell Brook flows from west to east across the study area joining the River Blythe, which is designated as an ecological SSSI of high value. Hollywell Brook is also present within 250m of the automated people mover alignment (maps CT-01-53 to CT-01-54).

8.4.8 Pendigo Lake would be located to the south of the automated people mover alignment, opposite the NEC buildings. Hollywell Brook enters the west of Pendigo Lake and flows out of the east of the lake. Two minor pollution incidents to controlled waters have occurred at Pendigo Lake, relating to diesel spillages. Potable supply is noted to have been affected during one of the incidents, however the Environment Agency (EA) have no record of potable abstraction at Pendigo Lake.

8.4.9 Issues relating to groundwater and surface water are reported in Section 13 Water resources and flood risk assessment.

Current and historic land use

8.4.10 There are five historic landfills and one operational landfill located within the study area. These are Jacksons Brickworks historic landfill; Middle Bickenhill Lane historic landfill; Brackenlands Farm historic landfill; Windbridge Nurseries historic landfill; Packington operational landfill; and the historic Coleshill Civic and Amenity Site landfill. There are several pockets of made ground and infilled pits within 250m of the area identified for construction activities, comprising predominantly of marl pits, gravel pits and areas of other excavation. A wide range of contaminants could be associated with the landfill sites and they may be emitting landfill gases such as carbon dioxide or methane.

8.4.11 Commercial and industrial land uses identified in the study area include: The Jacksons Brickworks Trading Estate bordering the edge of this section of the Proposed Scheme; Olympia Motorcycle Track; Melbicks Garden and Leisure Centre and Birmingham Business Park. Typical contaminants from such sites include oils, fuels, solvents and metals.

Mining/mineral resources

8.4.12 The glacial sands and gravels and the river terrace deposits that overlie the Mercia Mudstone form a locally important aggregate resource. The route would pass adjacent to several areas of former aggregate extraction and areas of active working of glacial sand and gravel in the vicinity of Denbigh Spinney and at Packington Landfill.

8.4.13 There is one Mineral Safeguarding Area for sand and gravel extraction located within the triangle of land between the A45 Coventry Road in the south, the M42 in the west and the A452 Chester Road in the east.

37 Permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale, and in some cases forming an important source of base flow to rivers.

38 Predominantly lower permeability layers which may store and yield limited amounts of groundwater due to localised features such as fissures, thin permeable horizons and weathering.

76


8.4.14 In June 2012, the SMBC Planning Committee granted approval for the commercial extraction of sand and gravel from a site at Park Farm, Bickenhill within the Mineral Safeguarding Area. Operations at this site started in spring 2013.

Geo-conservation resources

8.4.15 There is one local geological site known as Nursery Cottage Brickworks which is located within the Jacksons Brickworks landfill site. This site is designated due to fresh exposures of Triassic Mercia Mudstone (within an excavation up to 28m deep).

Receptors

8.4.16 Contaminated land could affect people living or working on or adjacent to the route, as well as surface and groundwater bodies, farmland, ecological resources and the built environment. It could also affect the viability of nearby mineral resources.

8.5 ConstructionLand contamination

Assessment of impacts and mitigation

8.5.1 Construction of the Proposed Scheme through this section of the route would mostly require cut below existing ground levels. However, the route would cross above the M42 and M6 on embankment or viaduct. A smaller section between the A45 Coventry Road would also sit on an embankment and the automated people mover would be on an elevated viaduct. The works would include earthworks, utility diversions, deep foundations, temporary dewatering and other activities. In addition, significant road infrastructure works would be required within this section of the Proposed Scheme.

8.5.2 The draft CoCP sets out the measures and standards of work that would be applied to the construction of the Proposed Scheme. Its requirements would involve detailed ground investigations in order to confirm the full extent of areas of contaminated land. Measures would include:

• Methods to control waste, dust and vapours;

• Methods to control spillage and prevent contamination of adjacent areas; and

• Methods for the management of unexpected contamination.

8.5.3 The CoCP would require that a programme of ground investigation would take place prior to construction in order to confirm areas of contamination and a risk assessment undertaken to determine what, if any, site specific remediation measures would be required to allow the Proposed Scheme to be constructed safely and to prevent harmful future migration of contaminants. Any remediation scheme would be discussed with the regulatory authorities.

8.5.4 The centre of the Proposed Scheme rail line crosses the Jacksons Brickworks landfill and Middle Bickenhill landfill in cut. Consequently earthworks would be likely to include excavation and remediation of landfill material during construction. The Brackenlands Farm, Packington and Coleshill Civic Amenity Site landfills are located adjacent to road infrastructure works. The requirement for remediation would depend on whether earthworks would be undertaken inside the landfill boundaries.

8.5.5 In accordance with measures set out in the draft CoCP, contaminated soils excavated from the site, wherever feasible, would be treated as necessary to remove or render any contamination inactive, and reused within the Proposed Scheme where needed and suitable for use. Techniques are likely to include stabilisation methods, soil washing and bio-remediation to

77


remove oil contaminants. Contaminated soil disposed off-site would be taken to a soil treatment facility, another construction site (for treatment, as necessary, and reuse) or an appropriately permitted landfill site.

8.5.6 The main site compound for the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area would be located to the northeast of the Birmingham Interchange station. The compound would include maintenance facilities for plant and machinery and fuel storage in bunded tanks.

8.5.7 A concrete batching, precast fabrication and material processing facility is proposed in the area of land between the M42 and the proposed new A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road roundabout. The facility would be partially located over one of the infilled borrow pits containing unsuitable material from the construction of the M42. The facility would be used for recycling of site won demolition materials and soils for reuse elsewhere on the Proposed Scheme and would include crushing, screening and grading plant. This area would also be used to store and treat unsuitable material.

8.5.8 Whilst the site compounds would store and use potentially contaminative materials such as fuels, oils and solvents, they would be managed in accordance with the CoCP, thus minimising the impacts of contamination from these sources.

8.5.9 Where significant contamination is encountered, a suitable remediation strategy would be developed, and discussed with SMBC prior to implementation. Remediation would be undertaken as part of the construction phase.

Likely residual significant effects

8.5.10 At locations where remediation of contaminated soils or groundwater is required to be carried out, there would be a beneficial effect for the environment in the long term with respect to contamination.

Further mitigation

8.5.11 As no significant residual effects have been identified, no further mitigation is currently proposed.

Mining/mineral resources


8.5.12 The construction of the Proposed Scheme would affect existing mineral reserves through direct excavation and temporary and/or permanent severance during the construction phase within the known mineral safeguarding area at the triangle of land between the M42, A45 Coventry Road and A452 Chester Road.

8.5.13 It is possible that mineral extraction could be undertaken in advance of the construction of the Proposed Scheme. In order to ensure effective management of minerals in this location, further discussions will be held with the landowner and mineral planning department at SMBC.


8.5.14 With the required minerals plan agreed in advance of the construction works, there would be no likely significant residual effects.

Geo-conservation resources


8.5.15 There is potential for important geology to be exposed through construction.

78



8.5.16 There would be no likely residual significant effects.


8.6.1 Maintenance and operation of the railway would be in accordance with environmental legislation and best practice. Spillage and pollution response procedures similar to those outlined in the draft CoCP would be established for all high risk activities and employees would be trained in responding to such incidents.

8.6.2 An auto-transformer station can, in principle, be a source of contamination through accidental discharge or leaks. However the proposed auto-transformer station, in common with other modern substations, would use biodegradable oils and double containment thereby minimising the likelihood of future contamination.

8.6.3 There exists the potential of minor leakage of hydraulic or lubricating oils from the trains. However, such leakage or spillage is expected to be very small and would not lead to any significant contamination.


8.6.4 There would be no likely residual significant effects.

79

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Landscape and visual assessment

9 Landscape and visual assessment9.1 Introduction9.1.1 This section of the report presents the assessment of the likely significant landscape and

visual effects. It starts by describing the current conditions found within and around the route of the Proposed Scheme, the nature and pattern of buildings, streets, open space and vegetation and their interrelationships within the rural environment. A summary of the significant effects that would arise from the construction and operation on landscape character areas (LCAs) and visual receptors is provided.

9.2 Policyframework9.2.1 The SUDP contains eight policies that are relevant to landscape and visual assessment in

terms of determining the value and sensitivity of LCAs and assessing the effects on these character areas. Policy ENV5 sets out the designation of conservation areas. Policy ENV6 addresses the safeguarding and enhancement of listed buildings. Policy ENV14 covers trees and woodlands. Policy R6 seeks to promote waterways as a recreational feature whilst safeguarding the natural and heritage environment. Policy C1 and Policy C2 relate to controlling development within the green belt. Policy C8 covers landscape quality and how this can be maximised within development. Policy C9 concerns light pollution and is of relevance when determining effects arising from additional lighting at night-time on visual receptors.

9.2.2 There are three proposals within the SUDP that are relevant to landscape and visual assessment in terms of determining the value and sensitivity of LCAs and assessing effects on these character areas. Proposal ENV11/4 addresses the promotion of landscape corridors. Proposal ENV11/5 describes the role of Project Kingfisher in enhancing the Cole Valley in Birmingham and Solihull Borough. Proposal C8/2 addresses landscape character and how SMBC will use appropriate guidance to ensure that development enhances the character of the landscape.

9.2.3 The SDLP contains six policies that assist in the assessment of landscape and visual effects. Policy P10 relates to the protection of the natural environment, including buffering to designated nature conservation sites. Policy P14 relates to the protection and enhancement of local amenity. Policy P16 addresses the conservation of heritage assets and local distinctiveness. Policy P17 covers development in the countryside and the protection of the green belt. Policy P18: Health and Well Being introduces a package of policy considerations aimed at improving community health. The policy includes reference to the role of green infrastructure in supporting health; and seeks to safeguard and increase opportunities for local food production across the Borough. Policy P20 relates to the provision of open space and outdoor recreation and sport facilities.

9.2.4 There are three policies of relevance within the NWLP. Policy ENV1 advises that development that does not protect or enhance the quality of the landscape as defined by the Landscape Character Assessment will not be permitted. Policy ENV4 seeks to protect trees and hedgerows in new development and policy ENV12 advocates that new development be harmonised within the existing landscape.

9.2.5 In respect of emerging policy contained in the NWLPCS (2012) policy NW11 sets out the measures to enhance the quality, character and distinctiveness of the natural environment within identified landscape character areas.

80


9.2.6 Other relevant local policies include the Green Space Strategy 2006 (SMBC); the Warwickshire Historic Landscape Characterisation 2010 (WCC) and the Warwickshire Landscapes Guidelines Report 1993 (WCC)39, 40, 41.

9.3 Assessmentscopeandkeyassumptions9.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the landscape and visual assessment is set out

in Volume 1.

9.3.2 Consultation has taken place with SMBC on the extent of the study area, the distribution of visual receptor viewpoints and the location of verifiable photomontages. Field surveys were undertaken from May to July 2012 and from December 2012 to February 2013, including photographic studies of landscape character areas (LCAs) and visual assessment viewpoints. Further surveys will be undertaken in 2013.

9.3.3 The study area has been informed by early drafts of the ZTV, which is being prepared for inclusion in the formal ES. LCAs and visual receptors within approximately 500m of the Proposed Scheme have been assessed along with some long distance views of up to 1,750m from numerous rural roads and PRoW in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme.

9.4 Environmental baseline9.4.1 The following section sets out the baseline conditions for the landscape and visual assessment

in the study area. Maps LV-11-53 to LV-11-54 show the location of landscape character areas and visual receptor viewpoints.

9.4.2 This area is located largely within the wide gently undulating valley of the River Blythe, which flows predominantly south to north. The area is defined by large areas of agricultural land, predominantly within the ownership of Packington Estate. The transport corridors of the M42, M6/M6 Toll, A45 Coventry Road and the A452 Chester Road are dominant elements. In the northern part of the study area, land use is increasingly urban, comprising a mixture of commercial development, the NEC, Birmingham Airport, Birmingham International railway station and Birmingham Business Park. Chelmsley Wood forms the main residential development. The principal historic landscape elements in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme are the deer park at Packington Hall and wider parkland associated with the Packington Estate.

Landscape character assessment

9.4.3 Landscape character areas (LCAs) are defined as areas with broadly homogenous characteristics and are influenced by national and district published character assessments. The Proposed Scheme in this area is located within national character area (NCA) 97: Arden, as defined by the Character of England mapping and Natural England42. For the purposes of this assessment the study area has been sub-divided into seven discrete LCAs, three of which would be significantly affected. Chelmsley Wood LCA, a suburban residential area, and Solihull Rural Heartland LCA, an agricultural area dissected by infrastructure routes, have a medium sensitivity to change. M42 Corridor LCA has a low sensitivity to change.

39 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2006), Solihull Green Space Strategy 2006.40 Warwickshire County Council (2010), Warwickshire Historic Landscape Characterisation (HLC) 2010.41 Warwickshire County Council (1993), Warwickshire Landscapes Guidelines 1993.42 Natural England (1996), The Character of England 1996; http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/default.aspx. Accessed 8/1/2013

81


Visual baseline

9.4.4 Viewpoints have been selected in liaison with stakeholders to represent groups of receptors within the study area. The sensitivity of each group of receptors within the viewpoints is summarised below.

9.4.5 Residential receptors (i.e. residents) have a high sensitivity to change and are located along Middle Bickenhill Lane. Recreational receptors also have a high sensitivity to change and are located along PRoW in the wider landscape. Transport receptors, such as views from vehicles on roads in the study area, have a low sensitivity to change. There are no healthcare receptors. There are no known protected views located within the study area.


9.5.1 Due to the scale of the construction activities, works would be highly visible in many locations and would have the potential to give rise to significant effects which cannot be mitigated. This is commonplace with construction of major infrastructure projects, but it should be noted that these effects are temporary in nature and relate to the peak construction phase. Effects during other phases of works are likely to be less due to less construction equipment being required at the time and a reduced intensity of construction activity.

9.5.2 Measures that have been incorporated into the draft CoCP to avoid or reduce landscape and visual effects during construction include:

• Identifying areas of existing trees and vegetation to be retained and protected and provision of protective fencing;

• Use of well-maintained hoardings or fencing;

• Trees intended to be retained which may be accidentally felled or die as a consequence of construction works would be replaced;

• Planting and other landscape measures would be implemented as early as is reasonably practicable where there is no conflict with construction activities or other requirements of the Proposed Scheme; and

• Contractors would be required to undertake appropriate maintenance of planting and seeding works and implementation of management measures, through the construction period as landscape works are completed.

9.5.3 These measures have been taken account of in the assessment of the construction effects in this section.

Landscape assessment

9.5.4 The key changes to the landscape character, as a result of the construction activities, relate to the modification of landform, removal of vegetation, presence of construction plant and the demolition of two buildings and two roads over the M42; as well as the construction of the Birmingham Interchange station, the automated people mover and associated infrastructure.

9.5.5 Some vegetation along rivers and transport corridors would be removed to accommodate the Proposed Scheme, including along Hollywell Brook, the M42 Junction 6 and the A45 Coventry Road. There would be the introduction of large construction plant (cranes, vehicles and machinery), lighting and substantial earthworks at Middle Bickenhill Lane; Hollywell Brook; and near Bluebell Drive/Yorkminster Drive at Chelmsley Wood. This activity would discernibly alter the tranquillity of this area. Construction would result in the loss of characteristic landscape elements such as trees, hedges and agricultural land. There would be severing of

82


fields and land parcels as the route of the Proposed Scheme crosses through the agricultural landscape. These activities would be controlled by measures included within the CoCP.

9.5.6 Table 13 summarises the LCAs that would be significantly affected during construction of the Proposed Scheme.

LCA Sensitivity of LCA

Magnitude of change

LevelofeffecttoLCA

M42 Corridor LCAConstruction activities would involve; large scale earthworks and severance of numerous fields including loss of hedges and mature trees; highway severance, diversions and junction amendments including the A452 overbridge to the M42

Low High Moderate adverse

Solihull Rural Heartland LCAConstruction activity would change the character of the areas of agricultural land within the LCA, fragment fields and introduce further built development, land use change and activity into the LCA

Medium High Moderate adverse

Chelmsley Wood LCARecreational land would be lost and partially fragmented. Construction activity would temporarily introduce machines and activity and reduce tranquillity as well as disrupt highway usage. Some loss of vegetation would occur, but overall impacts would be localised within the LCA and not in close proximity to residential receptors

Medium Medium Moderate adverse

Table 13: Significant landscape effects during construction

Visual assessment

9.5.7 The most apparent changes to views during construction relate to the temporary presence of construction plant and changes in visual amenity arising from removal of existing landscape elements and introduction of new landforms and built development most notably in the area of the construction of the Birmingham Interchange station. The height of the construction plant, the proposed viaducts, bridges and buildings and proximity to the viewpoint of construction plant and activity, coupled with the absence of intervening screening would result in significant visual effects during construction. In certain locations, landform and the retention of intervening hedgerows and trees would partially screen low level construction activity.

9.5.8 Further visual intrusion would occur from soil storage mounds, for example in the vicinity of Middle Bickenhill Lane and between the A446 Stonebridge Road/A452 Chester Road and the M42. The topography in certain locations and the retention of intervening hedgerows and trees would partially screen soil stores.

9.5.9 The introduction of site offices would add to visual intrusion at locations adjacent to the A45 Coventry Road, the A452 Chester Road and to a lesser extent within the NEC. Temporary worker accommodation to the west of Middle Bickenhill Lane would be large scale and would introduce additional visual intrusion within the study area.

9.5.10 An assessment of effects arising from lighting during construction (where required) will be prepared and included as part of the formal ES.

9.5.11 Table 14 summarises the views which would be significantly affected by the construction of the Proposed Scheme. The numbers in brackets identify the viewpoint locations which are shown on figures LV-11-53 to LV-11-54. The assessed level of effect is considered to be the maximum level at the height of construction activity in the view at each location. The duration

83


of this effect would in most instances be less than the entire construction period and will be considered in the formal ES. An indicative construction programme is set out in Section 2.3.

Viewpoint Sensitivity of visual receptors

Magnitude of change

Levelofeffecttovisual receptors

Residential receptors

Viewnorthandsouth-eastalongMiddleBickenhillLanefromElmGables and Meadow Cottage residences (299.2.005 and 299.2.006)Activity to build Birmingham Interchange station, the car parks, Hollywell Brook viaduct and automated people mover and A45 overbridge, would be visible

High High Major adverse

View east across Chelmsley Wood Recreation Ground from residences on Bluebell Drive/Lyecroft Avenue (305.2.006)Visibility of construction of a viaduct and embankment requiring use of cranes

High Low ModerateAdverse

Viewnorth-eastacrossopenspaceadjacenttoYorkminsterDrivefromresidential receptors on Foxland Close (305.2.008)Cranes would be visible in the view, similar in height and scale to the pylons and lighting columns which currently rise above the middle ground screening

High Medium Major Adverse

Recreational receptors

Long view south-west across Church Farm farmland from Public Right of Way (M96) (300.3.001) Cranes required to construct Birmingham Interchange station would also appear on the skyline

High Medium Major adverse

View south-west across A452 Chester Road towards the Toby Carvery from PRoW M96 (298-3-002)Visibility of overbridges associated with East Way, A45 Coventry Road and the adjacent service road and cranes

Medium Medium Moderateadverse

Transport receptors

Viewnorth-eastacrossMiddleBickenhillfarmlandfromthefootpathparallel to East Way (299.4.003)Cranes and high level plant required for construction of the Birmingham Interchange station would be visible


ViewwestacrossMiddleBickenhillpasturefromMiddleBickenhillLane (299.4.009/299.4.010)Foreground views dominated by construction traffic and plant associated with access road construction and the movement of excavated materials


View south-west across pasture from the A452 Chester Road (302.4.001/302.4.002)The view would include cranes and high plant required to construct the infrastructure of the A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road roundabout


View north-east towards A452 Chester Road roundabout from Solihull Parkway (303.4.002)Visibility of cranes required to demolish the large roundabout on the A452 Chester Road and to construct the M42 viaduct


View west towards A452 Chester Road roundabout from Stonebridge Road (304.4.001)Short range views of cranes and large plant required to construct the M42 viaduct


84



Magnitude of change


View south-west along M6 slip road from Coleshill Heath Road overbridge and west from the A446 Stonebridge Road (306.4.001 and 306.4.002)Tall elements such as cranes required to construct the 8m high viaduct structure


Table 14: Significant visual effects during construction


9.5.12 Due to the highly visible nature of the construction activities along the Proposed Scheme there would be significant residual effects, as set out in Tables 13 and 14, although they would be temporary and reversible in nature, lasting only for the duration of the construction works. Residual effects would generally arise from the foreground visibility of construction activity, demolitions and vegetation removal from residential receptors, PRoW and travellers on roads in the study area.

Further mitigation

9.5.13 No further mitigation is considered practicable during construction.


9.6.1 The operational assessment of impacts and mitigation measures is based on the first year of opening of the Proposed Scheme (2026). A process of iterative design and assessment has been employed to avoid or reduce adverse effects during the operation of the Proposed Scheme. Measures that have been incorporated into the design of the Proposed Scheme include:

• Replacement of lost woodland on a like for like basis, for example along areas of the A45 Coventry Road, A452 Chester Road and the disused railway in the vicinity of Birmingham Interchange station;

• Planting, including native broad-leaved woodland, shrub and hedgerows along various sections of the Proposed Scheme to screen views from neighbouring residential properties and users of adjacent PRoW and to aid integration of the Proposed Scheme into the landscape. This is proposed around the A45 Coventry Road overbridge, around Birmingham Interchange station (including the car parks) and between the Birmingham Business Park and the Proposed Scheme;

• Marginal planting around balancing ponds to aid integration of the Proposed Scheme into the landscape would be introduced at locations around the Birmingham Interchange station; and

• Embankment and cuttings, both for the route of the Proposed Scheme and highway realignments, that have been shaped to integrate the Proposed Scheme into the character and topography of the surrounding landscape, including for roads associated with Birmingham Interchange station.

9.6.2 These measures have been taken account of in the assessment of the operation effects.

85


Landscape assessment

9.6.3 The potential significant effects on the landscape in 2026 (i.e. the assumed year of opening) occur within the same LCAs experiencing effects during construction. Effects on LCAs would arise from new engineered landforms cutting across the existing landscape; the introduction of overhead line equipment (OLE); the introduction of new viaducts of approximately 10m high with associated infrastructure; the introduction of noise barriers that would create a manmade linear feature; permanent severance of land; the introduction of highway infrastructure into the rural environment, including road bridges; introduction of major built development associated with the Birmingham Interchange station; and the introduction of regular high speed trains.

9.6.4 Table 15 summarises the LCAs that would be significantly affected by the Proposed Scheme in year one of operation (2026).

LCA Sensitivity of LCA

Magnitude of change

LevelofeffecttoLCA44

Solihull Rural Heartland LCAChange in land use, loss of characteristic elements and introduction of buildings as well as the new rail line

Medium High Moderate adverse

Chelmsley Wood LCALand within the recreational ground at Bluebell Drive would be severed and the Proposed Scheme would influence the context of residential properties and the recreational land within the LCA

Medium Medium Moderate adverse

M42 Corridor LCA Effects on land use, severance of fields and increased infrastructure, including over bridges, noise barriers, overhead gantries/power lines and visibility of trains


Table 15: Significant landscape effects during operation year 1 (2026)43

Visual assessment

9.6.5 The potential significant effects on views in 2026 (i.e. the assumed year of opening) are applicable to fewer viewpoints than those considered to be affected during construction. Whilst significant effects remain, planting proposed along the Proposed Scheme would act as screening in future years. This screening potential would increase over time as planting increases in height and matures.

9.6.6 Principal sources of visual effects during year one of operation would include infrastructure, such as viaducts, trains on embankments, Birmingham Interchange station and highway modifications, notably the A45 Coventry Road.

9.6.7 At a number of locations views of the Proposed Scheme would be obscured by the rising landform, retention of intervening hedgerows and trees and the route of the Proposed Scheme within a cutting.

9.6.8 Photomontages have been produced illustrating the view of the Proposed Scheme during operation year 1 from viewpoints 299.2.005 on Middle Bickenhill Lane (figure LV-12-70) and 302.4.012 on the A452 Chester Road (figure LV-12-72).

9.6.9 Table 16 summarises the visual receptors that would be significantly affected by the Proposed Scheme in year one of operation (2026). The numbers in brackets identify the viewpoint locations which are shown on figures LV-11-53 to LV-11-54.

43 In year one of operation, any new planting along the Proposed Scheme would be immature and therefore would not help to integrate the Proposed Scheme into the landscape. As the plants mature, screening of the Proposed Scheme would improve.

86



Magnitude of change


Residential receptors

Viewsnorthandsouth-eastalongMiddleBickenhillLanefromElmGables and Meadow Cottage residences. (299.2.005 and 299.2.006)Views of the Birmingham Interchange station and associated car parking as well as the Hollywell Brook viaduct and the automated people mover linking to the NEC.

High High Major adverse

Viewnorth-eastacrossopenspaceadjacenttoYorkminsterDrivefromresidential receptors on Foxland Close (305.2.008)Views of upper section of catenaries and filtered views of trains through the intervening vegetation.

Medium Medium Moderate Adverse

Transport receptors

Viewnorth-eastacrossMiddleBickenhillfarmlandfromfootpathparallel to East Way (299.4.003)Birmingham Interchange station would be evident within middle to background views.

Low High Moderate Adverse

ViewwestacrossMiddleBickenhillpasturefromMiddleBickenhillLane (299.4.007)Direct views of an access road adjacent to the Birmingham Interchange station.


ViewwestacrossMiddleBickenhillpasturefromMiddleBickenhillLane (299.4.009 and 299.4.010)The Proposed Scheme, associated infrastructure and an access road would constitute the fore to middle-ground view. Changes in the view would include the Proposed Scheme, including OLE and gantries.


Views southwest across pasture from the A452 Chester Road (302.4.001 and 302.4.002)OLE and gantries would be visible against the skyline along with glimpsed views towards the realigned section the A452 Chester Road approaching the A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road roundabout.


Views south-west along M6 slip road from Coleshill Heath Road overbridge and west from the A446 Stonebridge Road (306.4.001 and 306.4.002)The Proposed Scheme would contribute to visual detractors in an existing infrastructure context.


Table 16: Significant visual effects during operation year 1 (2026)

9.6.10 Where planting has been proposed, effects in year 15 (2041) and 60 (2086) of operation would be reduced compared to year one (2026), due to the increased height and maturity of trees. An assessment of effects for these assessment years will be prepared and presented within the formal ES.


9.6.11 Due to the visibility of the Proposed Scheme, significant residual effects would remain as set out in Tables 15 and 16. The residual effects would arise from a local change in character in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme and the foreground visibility of the proposed structures from residential receptors, PRoW and travellers on roads in the study area.

87


9.6.12 These effects would reduce over time as planting increases in height and matures, integrating the Proposed Scheme into the environment.

Further mitigation

9.6.13 Further mitigation measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include:

• Earthworks designed to integrate the Proposed Scheme into the landscape and natural topography;

• Planting designed appropriately to screen views towards the route of the Proposed Scheme and tie-in with the existing vegetation pattern of the landscape and consolidating existing blocks of woodland and hedgerows; and

• Integration of viaduct abutments into the earthworks and softening with planting.

88

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Socio-economics

10 Socio-economics10.1 Introduction10.1.1 This section provides a summary of the assessment methodology and scope, environmental

baseline, and likely significant economic and employment effects during construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme.

10.1.2 The need generally for a socio-economic assessment results from the potential for the Proposed Scheme to affect:

• Existing businesses and community organisations and thus the amount of local employment;

• Local economies, including employment; and

• Planned growth and development.

10.1.3 The beneficial and adverse socio-economic effects of the Proposed Scheme are reported at two different levels; route-wide and CFA. Effects on levels of employment are reported on route-wide level within Report 27 (Route-wide effects). Localised effects on businesses and observations on potential local economic effects are reported within each CFA.

10.2 Policyframework10.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to the area are described in

Sections 2.1.

10.2.2 The area lies within part of Solihull Borough identified as an area of future development opportunity associated with the M42 corridor of the West Midlands. According to emergent development plans, managed, sustainable growth could result in the area supporting 100,000 jobs and contributing £5bn by 202644. The Proposed Scheme is consistent with emergent strategy.

10.3 Assessmentscopeandkeyassumptions10.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the socio-economic assessment is set out in

Volume 1.

10.4 Environmental baseline10.4.1 Section 2.1 provides a general overview of the CFA which includes data of specific relevance to

socio-economics, notably demographic and employment data. The following provides a brief overview in terms of employment, economic structure, labour market, and business premises available within the CFA.

10.4.2 The Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area is predominantly located within Solihull Borough.

10.4.3 In 2011, 99,000 people worked in Solihull Borough45. The employment rate within Solihull, in 2011 was 66% which was higher than that recorded both for West Midlands (62%) and England (65%)46,47. As of September 2012 the unemployment rate for Solihull Borough stood at 8%, the same as the England average48. In 2011, 29% of Solihull Borough residents aged 16

44 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2012), Solihull Draft Local Plan – Shaping a Sustainable Future.45 Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2012), Business Register and Employment Survey 201146 The proportion of working age (16-74 year olds) residents that are in employment47 ONS (2011), Census 201148 ONS (2012), Annual Population Survey

89


and over were qualified to National Vocational Qualification Level 4 (NVQ4), compared to 23% in West Midlands and 27% in England, while 23% of these residents had no qualifications, which was lower than that recorded for the West Midlands (27%) but the same as England (23%)49.

10.4.4 Within Solihull Borough there is a wide spread of business types reflecting a diverse range of commercial activities. The professional, scientific and technical sector accounts for the largest proportion of businesses (17%), with construction as second largest (13%), followed by retail (11%), and business administration and support services (8%).This is shown in Figure 550. For comparison within the West Midlands region, retail accounts for the largest number of businesses (12%) followed by professional, scientific and technical (12%), construction (10%), production (8%) and business administration and support services (7%)51.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Professional, scientific & technical

Construction

Retail

Business administration and support services

Arts, entertainment, recreation and other services

Information & communication

Health

Accommodation & food services

Wholesale

OtherSolihull

West Midlands

Figure 5: Business Sector Composition in Solihull Borough and the West Midlands

Source: Office for National Statistics (2011), UK Business: Activity, Size and Location52

10.4.5 Aside from the main business locations centred on Birmingham and Blythe Valley Business Parks the borough still has a number of older industrial estates (Elmdon, Cranmore and Boulton Road) offering opportunities for growth. In 2008 there was 356,000 square metres of warehousing space in the Solihull area.53 Average annual vacancy rates have ranged from 2% to 9% across a seven year period. Overall there is a relatively high current vacancy rate in existing industrial and warehouse properties and a good supply of new development land for employment use.

49 ONS (2011), Census 201150 Figure 5 reports the proportion of businesses within each business sector in the borough but not the proportion of employment by sector.51 ONS (2011), UK Business: Activity, Size and Location52 ‘Other’ includes Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing; Production; Motor Trades; Transport and Storage; Finance and Insurance; Property; Public

Administration and Defence; and Education sectors. 53 ONS(2008), Commercial and Industrial Floorspace Statistics

90


10.5 ConstructionAssessmentofimpactsandeffects

10.5.1 From an employment perspective, no significant direct effects on non-agricultural employment have been identified within the study area. The construction of the Proposed Scheme would encroach on some businesses. These include the Birmingham Business Park (the acquisition of land used for landscaping leaving buildings intact); National Motorcycle Museum (the acquisition of land used for landscaping and parking); Melbicks Garden and Leisure Centre (acquisition of land used for landscaping and car parking) and the Olympia Motorcycle Track.

10.5.2 It is estimated that the Proposed Scheme would result in the displacement or possible loss of a total of around 20 jobs within this study area54. Taking into account the availability of alternative premises, skill levels of local people and the relatively healthy local economy, the displacement or possible loss of jobs is considered to be relatively modest compared to the scale of economic activity and opportunity in the area.

10.5.3 There are plans to locate one main construction site compound, to be accessed of the A452 Chester Road, a temporary worker accommodation site, to be accessed off Middle Bickenhill Lane, and a further 17 satellite site compounds to support construction activity. The use of these sites could result in the creation of up to 4,060 person years of construction employment that, depending on skill levels required and the skills of local people, are potentially accessible to residents in the locality and to others living further afield55. It could also lead to opportunities for local businesses to supply the project or to benefit from expenditure of construction workers. Quantification of direct and wider construction employment effects are captured at a route wide level (see Report 27: Route-wide effects).

10.5.4 It is intended that discretionary enhancement measures, such as business support, supply chain engagement and local construction skills development initiatives to enhance local business performance will be included as appropriate in the formal ES.


10.5.5 The likely residual significant socio-economic effects are currently being assessed and will be reported in the formal ES.


10.6.1 The Proposed Scheme will create direct and wider operational employment opportunities at locations along the route including stations, train crew facilities and infrastructure/maintenance depots. This study area would include Birmingham Interchange station and initial estimates suggest that gross direct employment for station operations may be 120 jobs56. In addition, further jobs are to be expected as a result of operating and maintaining the proposed automated people mover.

54 Employment within businesses has been estimated through a combination of sources, for example, surveys of businesses, the Experian employment dataset, employment floor space and the Homes and Communities Agency (2010) Employment Density Guide. The estimate is calculated using standard employment density ratios and estimates of floor areas and may vary significantly from actual employment at the sites.

55 Construction labour is reported in construction person years, where one construction person year represents the work undertaken by one person in a year composed of a standard number of working days.

56 HS2 Ltd (2010), Appraisal of Sustainability, (Section 8.15 Economic Prosperity, Appendix III Chapter 2).

91


10.6.2 With the anticipated increased footfall and travel in the area this would create increased direct and wider employment. In addition the station is likely to encourage further investment in the surrounding area in line with regional and local policy aspirations.

10.6.3 Some of these opportunities would accessible to residents of the CFA and, given the transport accessibility of the area, residents from others living further afield either by working on the project itself or within businesses supplying to the project or through the expenditure of workers in local businesses. Operational effects are captured and assessed at a route wide level (see Report 27: Route-wide effects).


10.6.4 The likely residual significant socio-economic effects are currently being assessed and will be reported in the formal ES.

92

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Sound, noise and vibration

11 Sound, noise and vibration11.1 Introduction11.1.1 This chapter provides a summary of the likely noise and vibration significant effects associated

with the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. This section should be read in conjunction with Volume 1.

11.2 Policyframework11.2.1 The policy framework for sound, noise and vibration is set out in Volume 1.

11.3 Assessmentscopeandkeyassumptions11.3.1 The approach to the assessment of sound, noise and vibration and the related key

assumptions are set out in Volume 1, with local variations as described below. A summary of the operating assumptions is given in section 2.4 of this report.

Assumptions

11.3.2 In addition to those assumptions given in Volume 1 and section 2.4 of this report, non-stopping passenger services have been assumed to operate at 360 kph in this area. Stopping services at Birmingham Interchange station would reduce in speed between 360 kph on the main (non-stopping lines) and the station platforms.

11.4 Environmental baseline11.4.1 The baseline sound environment for this study area is generally dominated by the M6, M42,

A45 Coventry Road and A452 Chester Road. Due to these dominant sources, night-time sound levels generally remain high. Parts of this study are more rural in nature, but sound levels remain dominated by distant road traffic. Overflying aircraft to and from Birmingham Airport also contribute significantly to baseline sound levels throughout much of the area.

11.4.2 It is likely that the majority of receptors adjacent to the route of the Proposed Scheme are not currently subject to appreciable vibration. For this draft ES, vibration at all receptors has been assessed using the absolute vibration criteria as described in Volume 1.


11.5.1 This initial assessment has considered the potential effects on community receptors within the study area, their occupants and their use (including annoyance and activity disturbance) arising from construction noise and/or vibration.

11.5.2 The mitigation measures specified within the draft CoCP have been included within the assessment of construction noise and vibration.

11.5.3 Potential construction noise or vibration effects could occur on the receptors closest to the construction areas in the following communities and non-residential receptors and land uses (e.g. schools, hospitals, hotels):

• Middle Bickenhill, arising from Birmingham Interchange station construction, automated people mover construction and the alignment (earthworks, substructure and superstructure) works (refer to Sections 2.2 and 2.3 and to maps CT-05-105 to CT-05-108);

93


• Chelmsley Wood, arising from the Birmingham Interchange station construction, automated people mover construction and the alignment (earthworks, substructure and superstructure) works (refer to Sections 2.2 and 2.3 and to maps CT-05-105 to CT-05-108);

• Birmingham Business Park , arising from Birmingham Interchange station construction, automated people mover construction and the alignment (earthworks, substructure and superstructure) works (refer to Sections 2.2 and 2.3 and to maps CT-05-105 to CT-05-108); and

• Common Farm, arising from Birmingham Interchange station construction and the alignment (earthworks, substructure and superstructure) works (refer to Sections 2.2 and 2.3 and to maps CT-05-105 to CT-05-108).

11.5.4 Track laying, power system and signalling installation works along the line of route are unlikely to result in significant construction noise effects, given the short duration close to any communities and the presence of the permanent noise barriers.


11.5.5 Further work is being undertaken to confirm significant construction noise and vibration effects, including any temporary effects from construction traffic. Non-residential receptors identified at this stage as potentially subject to construction noise or vibration effects will be further considered, where necessary, on a receptor-by-receptor basis. Any further assessment will be reported in the formal ES.

Further mitigation

11.5.6 Further work is being undertaken to confirm the likely significant effects and identify any site specific mitigation considered necessary in addition to the general measures set out in the draft CoCP. Any site specific mitigation will be presented in the formal ES and will include an estimate of the number of properties that may qualify for noise insulation or temporary re-housing under provisions set out in the draft CoCP.


11.6.1 This initial assessment has considered the potential effects on community receptors within the study area, their occupants and their use (including annoyance, activity and sleep disturbance) arising from operational noise and/or vibration. Further assessment will be undertaken for the formal ES.

11.6.2 The on-going development of the Proposed Scheme includes noise barriers in the form of landscape earthworks, noise (fence) barriers and/or low level barriers on viaducts. The envisaged noise barrier locations are shown on the Operational Sound Contour and Potential Significant Effect Maps SV-01.

11.6.3 The Operational Sound Contour and Potential Significant Effect Maps SV-01 indicate the likely long term daytime sound level (defined as the equivalent continuous sound level from 07:00 to 23:00 or LpAeq,day) from the Proposed Scheme alone. The contours are shown in 5dB steps from 50dB to 70dB. With the train flows described in Volume 1, the night-time sound level (defined as the equivalent continuous sound level from 23:00 to 07:00 or LpAeq,night) from the Proposed Scheme would be approximately 10dB lower than the daytime sound level. The 50 dB contour therefore indicates the distance from the Proposed Scheme at which the night-time sound level would be 40dB. This contour represents where the lowest observed community noise effects would be expected to occur during the day (with respect to annoyance) and night (with respect to sleep disturbance). It is generally unlikely that there will be any adverse noise

94


effects outside of this contour. With regard to sleep disturbance the assessment has also taken account the maximum sound levels generated by each train passing by.

11.6.4 Residential receptors within the daytime 65dB contour, and therefore the night-time 55dB contour, have been identified as being likely to experience a significant adverse effect from the Proposed Scheme alone. This is in line with the daytime threshold in the Noise Insulation Regulations 1996 and the Interim Target defined in the World Health Organization’s Night Noise Guidelines.57,58

11.6.5 The potential for significant noise effects on communities in areas between the 50dB and 65dB daytime sound contours, or 40dB and 55dB night-time contours, will be dependent on the baseline in that area and the change in sound level brought about by the Proposed Scheme.

11.6.6 For this draft ES, the criteria used in assessing whether an effect is potentially significant includes factors such as the number and magnitude of impacts in a community as well as the existing sound environment. The further significance criteria set out in Volume 1, including the character of the existing sound environment, any unique features of the sound or impacts relating to the Proposed Scheme, and the potential combined impacts of sound and vibration will be taken into account in the formal ES.

11.6.7 This initial assessment has identified potential airborne noise effects on the following non-residential receptors and land uses (e.g. schools, hospitals, hotels):

• Businesses in Birmingham Business Park that are closest to the route of the Proposed Scheme (identified by SV24-A on Maps SV-01).

11.6.8 PRoW are, by their nature, transitory routes, with users not staying in any one location for long periods. Train sound from the Proposed Scheme is intermittent and its level will vary as the PRoW deviates closer to, and further from, the Proposed Scheme. Noise effects would generally be reduced by the landscape earthworks envisaged to reduce visual impact of the Proposed Scheme and envisaged noise mitigation to protect other receptors. No significant noise effects have therefore been identified on PRoW within this study area.

11.6.9 No potentially significant noise or vibration effects arising from changes to existing roads are anticipated at this stage. This will be confirmed in the formal ES.

11.6.10 Potential minor ground-borne noise and vibration impacts have been forecast at a small number of properties very close to the alignment. Taking account of the number and minor magnitude of the impacts, and the experience of HS1, no significant effects have been identified. Further assessment will be undertaken for the formal ES to confirm whether the impacts currently forecast are likely to occur. Vibration from the operation of the Proposed Scheme will present no risk of any building damage.


11.6.11 The envisaged mitigation (especially landscape earthworks and noise barriers) would substantially reduce the potential airborne sound impacts and noise effects that would otherwise arise from the Proposed Scheme. Nonetheless, potential significant adverse airborne noise effects have been identified for residential receptors in the following communities:

• One individual receptor in the vicinity of Common Farm that is closest to the Proposed Scheme (identified by receptor SV24-01 on map SV-01-53). At this receptor, the forecast noise from long term railway operation may exceed the daytime threshold set by the Noise

57 Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems)Regulations 1996, London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office58 World Health Organization (2009), Night Noise Guidelines for Europe 2009

95


Insulation Regulations and the night-time Interim Target identified in the World Health Organization Guidelines59.

11.6.12 Further assessment work is being undertaken to confirm operational sound and vibration significant effects, including those at non-residential receptors and quiet areas (as necessary on a receptor-by-receptor basis). This will be reported in the formal ES which will present baseline levels, forecasts for the Proposed Scheme and the change in sound levels brought about by the Proposed Scheme both as impact plans and tables.

Further mitigation

11.6.13 Noise insulation would be offered following the principles of the Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996 where, taking account of the mitigation incorporated into the Proposed Scheme, the long term operational noise level exceeds 68dB LpAeq,18 hour. It is estimated that one dwelling – marked as SV24-01 on Map SV-01 – would potentially experience noise levels higher than the insulation trigger level.

59 World Health Organization (2009) Night Noise Guidelines for Europe 2009

96

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Traffic and transport

12 Trafficandtransport12.1 Introduction12.1.1 This traffic and transport section describes the likely impacts and effects arising from the

construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme within the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood CFA on all forms of transport.

12.2 Policyframework12.2.1 West Midlands regional transport policy has a strong emphasis on improving access to jobs

and on enabling growth whilst managing congestion and supporting urban regeneration. SMBC transport policy seeks to promote sustainable travel and make efficient use of existing infrastructure to support economic development in the region. The importance of the Proposed Scheme in the above is shown in regional and local transport policies including those detailed below.

12.2.2 The West Midlands Local Transport Plan 2011 – 2026 (WMLTP) sets out a way forward to deliver the transport needs of the West Midlands Metropolitan Area through short, medium and long term transport solutions60. WMLTP is supportive of the Proposed Scheme and seeks to actively promote the Proposed Scheme with the aim of providing the West Midlands metropolitan area with high capacity, fast and reliable connectivity across the UK. WMLTP sees this connectivity as providing huge economic benefits to the region by allowing people to live and work in a greater range of places across the High Speed network within the journey to work area, increasing their access to employment opportunities. The Proposed Scheme therefore has an important role in delivering WMLTP strategy objectives towards supporting economic growth, reducing carbon emissions and reducing road congestion; and is strongly supported by WMLTP.

12.2.3 Centro’s draft prospectus Towards a World Class Integrated Transport Network (Centro 2012)61 sets out the Integrated Transport Authority’s vision for public transport infrastructure in the region. The prospectus states “It is essential that the West Midlands is connected to the European High Speed Rail Network. An international link to Birmingham Interchange and Birmingham city centre HS2 stations will improve economic performance by increasing European connectivity and providing additional national rail capacity.”

12.2.4 The SDLP identifies policies that support economic growth, help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, connect communities, centres and employment, encourage ease of access and movement and make best use of existing assets. With regard to the Proposed Scheme, the SDLP states “The Government’s proposal to introduce a national High Speed rail network could play a key role in future growth in the borough.”

12.3 Assessmentscopeandkeyassumptions12.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions of the traffic and transport assessment is set out

in Volume 1. It should be noted that the transport and passenger modelling of the Proposed Scheme is continuing to be developed and therefore the assessment may be updated for the formal ES.

12.3.2 The impact of construction traffic has been assessed on the assumption that all excavated material from the worksites would be removed by road, although investigation will continue

60 Centro; West Midlands Local Transport Plan, Local Transport Strategy Appendices 2011-202661 Centro (2012); Towards a World Class Integrated Transport Network Public Consultation Draft December 2012-February 2013.

97


to establish the possibility of movement by rail. The construction traffic assessment may be updated for the formal ES.

12.3.3 The scope of work and assessment methodology has been discussed in detail with SMBC, Birmingham City Council, Coventry City Council, WCC, Centro (the West Midlands Integrated Transport Authority) and the Highways Agency.

12.3.4 The study area includes the M42 Junction 6, A45 Coventry Road from west of Damson Parkway to east of Stonebridge Island, A452 Chester Road, A446 Stonebridge Road, Coleshill Heath Road, Birmingham Airport approach roads and NEC approach and circulation routes.

12.3.5 A number of transport modelling tools have been used to inform the assessment including the West Midlands regional transport model, PRISM (Policy Responsive Integrated Strategy Model), for future forecast road traffic growth in the area. The assessment covers the morning and evening peak periods for an average weekday.

12.3.6 The assessment is based on an evolving design, and changes have been made subsequent to the transport assessment work which underlies this assessment. Changes which have not yet been assessed include:

• General updates to construction traffic flows, temporary diversions, traffic management arrangements and detailed phasing;

• The Bromford Tunnel, which has the potential to alter materials import/export assumptions and consequently HGV vehicle routing. Disposal of construction waste has not been included in the assessment;

• Traffic flows, traffic management and site access associated with the construction of the automated people mover, which has the potential to increase construction traffic flows; and

• Alterations to the access arrangements to Birmingham Interchange station, which would cause a small rerouting of traffic at the proposed A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road roundabout.

12.3.7 The combined impacts and effects from construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme in the Stoneleigh, Kenilworth and Burton Green CFA (CFA 18), and Coleshill Junction CFA (CFA 19) have not as yet been assessed. These will be included in the formal ES.

12.3.8 The following key limitations exist in the reporting of significant effects:

• As yet only limited assessment has been made of the impacts on public transport. This is confined to rerouting of buses during construction and operation to suit road diversions/layout changes. As the transport assessment progresses, it is anticipated that key catchments and public transport corridors will be identified which could provide opportunities for improved public transport links; and

• Design and testing of highway mitigation is currently being progressed, and it is envisaged that mitigation would be focused around Birmingham Interchange station including Stonebridge Island, M42 Junction 6 and M6 Junction 4.

12.3.9 The following criteria for construction have not been assessed at this stage:

• Bus delays;

• Traffic delays; and

• Journey ambience.

98


12.3.10 The following criteria for operation have not been assessed at this stage:

• Bus delays;

• Highway capacity;

• Off-peak hour traffic flows; and

• Journey ambience.

12.3.11 The criteria listed in 12.3.9 and 12.3.10 will be assessed at a later stage and reported in the formal ES.

12.4 Environmental baseline12.4.1 Existing conditions in the West Midlands have been determined through site visits, specially

commissioned transport surveys, and liaison with West Midlands transport authorities and stakeholders to source transport models, information on public transport, PRoW and accident data.

12.4.2 Traffic surveys of all roads crossing the route or potentially affected were undertaken in June 2012 comprising junction turning counts and queue surveys, Automatic Traffic Counts, traffic signal timing and saturation flow surveys, and journey time surveys. This was supplemented by traffic and transport data obtained from other sources where available, including from the Highways Agency, SMBC, Centro and the regional and local transport models. The highway peak hours in the study area were 0800-0900 and 1700-1800.

12.4.3 PRoW surveys were undertaken in August and September 2012. Three of the routes were used by less than ten people a day. There were also seven roads that were used by less than ten people per day. The routes with the greatest usage were Solihull Parkway with 101 users and Coleshill Heath Road with 55 users per day.

12.4.4 There are several strategic routes that pass through the area. The M42 travels in a north/south direction and is accessed in the area from Junction 6. The M6 crosses the north eastern fringe in two locations and is accessible from Junction 4. The A45 Coventry Road passes through the southern area in an east/west direction and provides access to the NEC, Birmingham Airport and Birmingham International Station. The A452 Chester Road runs in a north-west/south-east orientation providing access to Chelmsley Wood, the NEC and Birmingham Business Park. The A446 Stonebridge Road crosses the northern tip of the area.

12.4.5 The main local roads affected by the Proposed Scheme are Coleshill Heath Road, which leads to Coleshill; Solihull Parkway, which leads to Birmingham Business Park; Bickenhill Parkway which leads to the NEC and Birmingham Airport; Middle Bickenhill Lane, which provides access to a few residential properties; Eastway, which provides access to the NEC; and the A45 Service Road, which provides access to the civic amenity site.

12.4.6 The strategic roads within the area are busy at peak times and delays can be experienced on the M42, M42 Junction 6 and the A45 Coventry Road/Damson Parkway junction in particular.

12.4.7 There are two public bus services that pass through the Middle Bickenhill area. The bus services provide connections to Birmingham, Coventry, Solihull, Meriden, Coleshill and Birmingham Airport.

12.4.8 The area covering the Birmingham International railway station, NEC and Birmingham Airport is served by eight public bus services. The bus services provide connections to Coventry, Birmingham, Solihull, Chelmsley Wood, Marston Green, Erdington, Birmingham Business Park and Blythe Valley Business Park.

99


12.4.9 The southern area of Chelmsley Wood is served by six public bus services. These bus services provide connections to Coventry, Birmingham, Solihull, Marston Green, Erdington, and Birmingham Airport.

12.4.10 National and local rail services are accessible via Birmingham International railway station. Marston Green railway station is located on the northwest boundary of this study area providing access to local services between Coventry and Birmingham.

12.4.11 The Proposed Scheme impacts on four PRoW within the Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood area and crosses PRoW in two locations. The Proposed Scheme crosses 11 roads.

12.4.12 There are pedestrian footways in the built up area of Chelmsley Wood and in the area around Birmingham Airport, NEC, Birmingham International railway station and Birmingham Business Park. In the rural areas, and around the proposed Birmingham Interchange station site, there are occasional sections of footways. There are off-road cycle routes along Eastway and Coleshill Heath Road. In the area around the proposed Birmingham Interchange station, Eastway, Middle Bickenhill Lane, Packington Lane, Solihull Parkway and The Crescent are identified as advisory cycle routes. There is a network of advisory cycle routes in Chelmsley Wood and a route through the NEC to Birmingham International Station.

12.4.13 There are no navigable waterways in the area.

12.4.14 Future baseline traffic volumes for 2021, 2026 and 2041 have been calculated by applying growth factors derived from PRISM and adding any major consented schemes. Traffic in the peak hours is forecast to grow by around 19% by 2021, by around 26% by 2026, and by around 36% by 2041 compared to 2012. The Birmingham Airport Runway Extension (including the realignment of the A45 Coventry Road), AEC Business Park and Resorts World at the NEC are major consented development schemes within the area. There are planned infrastructure improvements at the M42 Junction 6.


12.5.1 The following section considers the impacts on traffic and transport and the consequential effects resulting from construction of the Proposed Scheme.

12.5.2 The following measures (as detailed in Section 2) have been included as part of the engineering design of the Proposed Scheme and would avoid or reduce effects on travellers:

• Off line construction of new road infrastructure on the A452 Chester Road and the replacement for the A452 Chester Road/Solihull Parkway roundabout;

• Temporary diversion of one PRoW and two roads;

• An off-road haul route running north/south from the neighbouring Balsall Common and Hampton-in-Arden CFA to just south of the existing A452 Chester Road/Solihull Parkway Roundabout;

• Overnight and/or weekend road closures on the M42, M42 Junction 6, M6 Junction 4, M42/M6 slip roads and A452 Chester Road;

• HGV routing as far as possible along the strategic road network; and

• On site accommodation and welfare facilities to reduce daily travel by site workers.

12.5.3 Details of construction compounds including location and number of workers employed at each site along with planned construction routes are provided in Section 2. The typical

100


numbers of vehicles estimated to be generated by the site compounds in this area are shown in Table 17.

Compound Type

Location Access Estimated duration of use (Years)

Typical daily number of two-way trips

Car/LGV HGV

Satellite site Stonebridge Island A45 Coventry Road westbound off-slip approach to Stonebridge Island

1.5 50-80 <10

Satellite site A45 overbridges, A45 Coventry Road

A45 Coventry Road westbound service road, between Stonebridge Island and Bickenhill Waste Reception Centre entrance

4.5 80-120 <10 – 70

Satellite site A45 overbridge/East Way Loop bridge, A45 Coventry Road

A45 Coventry Road westbound service road, between Bickenhill Waste Reception Centre and East Way loop

3.5 10-20 <10 – 20

Satellite site A45 Eastway overbridges loop, East Way

A45 Coventry Road eastbound service road

4 10-20 <10 – 140

Satellite site Birmingham Interchange station car park (East), A452 Chester Road

Temporary access off A452 Chester Road northbound initially, then via proposed new roads

1.5 20-40 <10 – 210

Satellite site Birmingham Interchange station car park (West) & automated people mover depot, Middle Bickenhill Lane

Middle Bickenhill Lane off A45 Coventry Road eastbound service road

3 20-40 <10 – 30

Main site Birmingham Interchange station, Middle Bickenhill Lane

Middle Bickenhill Lane off A45 Coventry Road eastbound service road

4 200-450 <10 – 70

Satellite site A446 Stonebridge Road/A452 Chester Road roundabout

A452 Chester Road southbound between Melbicks Garden and Leisure Centre entrance and joining the A446 Stonebridge Road

4 20-40 <10 – 235

Satellite site M42 viaduct (East), A452 Chester Road

A452 Chester Road northbound between Melbicks Garden and Leisure Centre and A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road/Solihull Parkway roundabout

4.5 years 20-40 <10 – 30

Satellite site M42 viaduct (West), B4438/Northway

Southbound Northway, south of the Solihull Parkway roundabout

5 20-40 <10 – 110

Satellite site Automated people mover -M42 crossing

East Way between M42 and Pendigo Way

2 20-40 <10 – 30

Satellite site Automated people mover -Pendigo Lake

South Way between M42 Junction 6 and Pendigo Way

2 20-40 <10 – 20

Satellite site Automated people mover -NEC station

Perimeter Road 3 20-40 <10

Satellite site Automated people mover – Birmingham International railway station

Through car park from Bickenhill Lane/B4436 roundabout

3.5 20-40 <10

101


Compound Type

Location Access Estimated duration of use (Years)

Typical daily number of two-way trips

Car/LGV HGV

Satellite site People Mover – Birmingham Airport station

Hermes Road 3.5 20-40 <10

Satellite site M42 Junction 6 Off northbound M42 2 20-40 <10 – 20

Satellite site M6 Junction 4 Access off J4 roundabout 2 20-40 <10

Satellite site M6 No.1 viaduct, Yorkminster Drive

Yorkminster Drive 1.5 130-190 10-20

Table 17: Typical vehicle trip generation for site compounds in this area

12.5.4 The measures in the CoCP would include HGV management and control measures and a project framework travel plan. A project framework travel plan would incorporate route-wide travel planning measures and would include the need for a project-wide travel plan manager, initial travel surveys during construction and a monitoring framework to minimise construction impacts.

12.5.5 Construction vehicle movements required to construct the Proposed Scheme include the delivery of plant and materials, movement of excavated materials and site worker trips. In the busiest month there are estimated to be approximately 2,300 vehicle movements (in/out) per day across the study area. The split of construction vehicles is expected to be 65% HGV and 35% Light Goods Vehicle (LGV) and cars.

12.5.6 It is envisaged that the M42 and M6 motorway networks would provide the primary HGV access and egress routes.

12.5.7 At this stage it is not expected that the construction of the Proposed Scheme would impact on bus routes, as road closures are proposed overnight, when the bus services would not be operational.

12.5.8 Construction of the proposed scheme is unlikely to result in a temporary loss of physical linkage at Birmingham International railway station, or a significant temporary loss of bus, taxi and park and ride facilities at the station. The effect on stations is therefore not likely to be significant.

12.5.9 At this stage it is envisaged that the construction of the automated people mover would result in the following loss of parking:

• Up to 5,200 car parking spaces at the NEC for up to 12 months;

• Up to 770 spaces at Birmingham International railway station for up to two years;

• Up to 240 spaces at Birmingham Airport for up to three years;

• Approximately 220 spaces from the West Car Park for up to two years; and

• Twenty one disabled car parking spaces at Birmingham International railway station for up to two years.

12.5.10 There may be a loss of loading bays at the NEC and Birmingham Airport.

12.5.11 One PRoW and two roads would be temporarily diverted during the construction period, but there would not be an increase in distance. Diversions of the remaining PRoW would form part of the permanent works.

102


12.5.12 The effect on accidents and safety is not significant as there are no locations where the threshold for significance would be reached (where the increase in traffic is forecast to be greater than 30% and there have been more than nine accidents within the last three years).


12.5.13 Construction of the Proposed Scheme is anticipated to result in significant increases in traffic flows (i.e. more than 30% for HGV or all vehicles) on several roads in the area as a result of vehicles accessing worksites. Roads that would experience effects likely to be considered significant are:

• Packington Lane northbound slip onto the A452 Chester Road (moderate/major effect);

• A452 Chester Road (moderate effect);

• Eastway (moderate/major effect);

• A45 Coventry Road eastbound on slip from M42 Junction 6 (major effect); and

• The A45 Service Road (major effect).

12.5.14 In terms of severance, the Proposed Scheme has no significant effect on the diverted PRoW and the two roads.

12.5.15 In terms of vulnerable road user delay, the Proposed Scheme has a neutral effect on the PRoW and the two roads.

12.5.16 The effect in terms of percentage loss of spaces is summarised below:

• At the NEC approximately 29% of spaces would be lost;

• At Birmingham International railway station approximately 35% of spaces would be lost;

• At Birmingham Airport approximately 2% of spaces would be lost; and

• At the West Car Park approximately 9% of spaces would be lost.

12.5.17 There is a large amount of car parking in the local area around the NEC, Birmingham International railway station and Birmingham Airport, which could potentially be available as alternative car parking locations. In addition, detailed phasing of the works including temporary access could potentially reduce the loss of spaces and/or the duration over which spaces are lost. The overall effect of the loss of car parking is therefore assessed as moderate adverse at the NEC and Birmingham International railway station, and minor adverse at Birmingham Airport and the West Car Park. HS2 Ltd will work closely with the car park owners/operators to reduce the loss of spaces and to coordinate works.

12.5.18 The effect of the loss of disabled car parking spaces at Birmingham International railway station is moderate adverse due to the number of spaces lost and the duration of the works.

Further mitigation

12.5.19 Further mitigation measures will be considered based on the outcomes of the ongoing assessment and will be reported in the formal ES.


12.6.1 The following section considers the impacts on traffic and transport and the consequential effects resulting from the operational phase of the Proposed Scheme (as described in Section 2.4 of this report).

103


12.6.2 The following measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme and would avoid or reduce impacts on travellers:

• Station design has been sized to include sufficient concourse and platform space to accommodate passenger growth to 2041 (which relates to the HS2 Phase Two);

• Dedicated car parking facilities;

• Dedicated taxi facilities;

• Dedicated drop-off and pick-up areas;

• Dedicated bus facilities;

• Pedestrian and cycle facilities;

• An automated people mover to provide connectivity between Birmingham Interchange station and the NEC/Birmingham International railway station/Birmingham Airport;

• Multiple access routes from the highway network including access via M6 Junction 4 for passengers from the M6 corridor and access via M42 Junction 6 for passengers from the south;

• Replacement of the A452 Chester Road/Solihull Parkway roundabout with new access roads and junctions to maintain access and connectivity and an overbridge at Coleshill Heath Road; and

• Upgraded highway capacity including improvements to M42 Junction 6, M6 Junction 4 and Stonebridge Island and improvements to the signal timings at Damson parkway/A45 Coventry Road junction. No further mitigation measures have been identified at this stage.

12.6.3 With the introduction of the Proposed Scheme in 2026, there would be approximately 1,550 rail passengers boarding, alighting and interchanging at Birmingham Interchange station in the morning peak hours and around 1,750 rail passengers boarding, alighting and interchanging at Birmingham Interchange station evening peak hours. These passengers are forecast to generate around 950 two way vehicle trips in the morning peak hour and 950 two way vehicle trips in the evening peak hour.

12.6.4 These numbers increase to approximately 7,000 passengers using Birmingham Interchange station in the morning peak hour and approximately 8000 passengers using Birmingham Interchange station in the evening peak hour in 2041 (HS2 Phase Two) through increased train frequency and additional national rail destinations. These passengers are forecast to generate around 1,800 two way vehicle trips in the morning peak hour and 1950 two way vehicle trips in the evening peak hour.

12.6.5 The Proposed Scheme would require the realignment and/or reconfiguration of highways around Birmingham Interchange station including realignment of the A452 Chester Road, A45 Coventry Road, A45 Service Road, Eastway and replacement of the A452 Chester Road/Solihull Parkway roundabout to accommodate the scheme.

12.6.6 The increases in traffic as a result of the Proposed Scheme are largely observed on the strategic network including the M42 to the south of M42 Junction 6, the M6 north of the M42, the A45 Coventry Road and the A452 Chester Road. The traffic impact on the M42 Junction 6, M6 Junction 4 and Stonebridge Island would be addressed through highway capacity improvements and queues would be similar to those forecast without the Proposed Scheme. Signal timings at the junction of A45 Coventry Road/Damson Parkway are likely to require optimisation.

12.6.7 The Proposed Scheme would include facilities to enable bus services to stop at Birmingham Interchange station.

104


• At this stage it is envisaged that there will be a loss of around 30 car parking spaces at the NEC, approximately 70 spaces at Birmingham International railway station and 20 spaces in the West Car Park as a result of the automated people mover. There may also be a loss of loading bays at the NEC and Birmingham Airport.

• Two PRoW and 11 roads would be diverted. In addition, two PRoW would be slightly reduced in length. The demolition of the A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road/Solihull Parkway roundabout would result in a footpath diversion with a maximum walk distance of around 1,300m. The number of users affected is approximately 100. The closure of Middle Bickenhill Lane would affect less than 10 users.


12.6.8 As a result of the Proposed Scheme, rail passengers in the area would benefit from an increase in rail capacity and would benefit significantly from improved journey times between Birmingham and London. There would also be benefits to local commuters of released capacity on the existing rail network although the extent of these benefits has not been quantified at this stage. In 2041, the primary benefit will be the increased train frequency and additional national rail destinations.

12.6.9 The primary effects in the study area in 2026 relate to increases in peak hour traffic flows on the road network local to Birmingham Interchange station as follows:

• Two-way traffic flows on the A452 Chester Road, between Stonebridge Island and Packington Lane would increase by around 15% in the peak hours. The effect would be moderate adverse;

• Traffic flows on Stonebridge Island would increase by around 12% in the peak hours. The effect would be moderate adverse;

• Traffic flows on M42 Junction 6 would increase by around 3% in the peak hours. The effect would not be significant;

• Traffic flows on M6 Junction 4 would increase by around 4% in the peak hours. The effect would not be significant; and

• In the peak hours traffic flows would increase by around 8% on the A45 Coventry Road between M42 Junction 6 and Stonebridge Island. The effect would not be significant.

12.6.10 The effect on accidents and safety is not significant as there are no locations where the threshold for significance would be reached (where the increase in traffic is forecast to be greater than 30% and there have been more than nine accidents within the last three years).

12.6.11 The loss of car parking at the NEC, Birmingham International railway station and Birmingham Airport will depend on the design and spacing of the automated people mover supporting structures, and the redesign of parking and loading areas below. At this stage, it is not anticipated that the loss of parking would be significant given the total parking available at the NEC, Birmingham International railway station and Birmingham Airport and the effect in terms of percentage loss of spaces is summarised below:

• At the NEC less than 1% of spaces would be lost (not significant);

• At Birmingham International Station approximately 3% of spaces would be lost (not significant);

• At Birmingham Airport it is not expected that any spaces would be lost (not significant); and

• At the West Car Park less than 1% of spaces would be lost (not significant).

105


12.6.12 The potential loss of loading bays at the NEC and Birmingham Airport is not expected to be significant relative to the total number of loading areas at the facilities.

12.6.13 In terms of severance, the Proposed Scheme has no significant impact on three PRoW and a moderate effect on one PRoW. In addition, there would be no significant impact on three roads and a moderate effect on eight roads. The moderate adverse effects are on Middle Bickenhill Lane, which would be severed by the Birmingham Interchange station, and on the routes affected by the demolition of the A452 Chester Road/A446 Stonebridge Road/Solihull Parkway Roundabout.

12.6.14 In terms of vulnerable road user delay, the Proposed Scheme would have a neutral effect on three PRoW and a minor adverse effect on one PRoW. There would be a neutral effect on three roads and a minor effect on eight roads.

12.6.15 With the exception of the traffic flows, the effects in 2041 would be the same as in 2026. The effect on peak hour traffic flows on the road network local to Birmingham Interchange station is expected to be:

• Two-way traffic flows on the A452 Chester Road, between Stonebridge Island and Packington Lane would increase by around 25% in the peak hours. The effect would be major adverse;

• Traffic flows on Stonebridge Island would increase by around 30% in the peak hours. The effect would be major adverse;

• Traffic flows on M42 Junction 6 would increase by around 6% in the peak hours. The effect would not be significant;

• Traffic flows on M6 Junction 4 would increase by around 8% in the peak hours. The effect would not be significant; and

• Two way traffic flows on the A45 Coventry Road between M42 Junction 6 and Stonebridge Island would increase by around 14% in the peak hours. The effect would be moderate adverse.

12.6.16 Overall, average travel times for vehicles through the area would be similar to those forecast without the Proposed Scheme.

Further mitigation

12.6.17 Further mitigation will be considered based on the outcomes of the ongoing assessment and will be reported in the formal ES.

106

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

13 Waterresourcesandfloodriskassessment

13.1 Introduction13.1.1 This section provides a summary of the likely impacts and significant effects on water

resources and flood risk as a result of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. The assessment considers effects on surface water resources, groundwater resources and flooding risk.

13.2 Policyframework13.2.1 The SUDP has three applicable policies relating to water. These are:

• Policy ENV17 (Water Protection) advises that development that is harmful to ground and surface water resources will only be permitted if it incorporates suitable pollution control measures such as Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS);

• Policy ENV20 (Water Conservation) encourages the conservation of water resources through the incorporation of water minimisation techniques, in order to protect groundwater resources and the aquatic environment; and

• Policy ENV21 (Development in Floodplains) advises that development within floodplains will only be permitted where it does to reduce its capacity and the area not liable to flooding. Built development should be restricted to essential infrastructure only.

13.2.2 The SDLP has four applicable policies relating to water. These are:

• Policy P10 (Natural Environment) relates to the protection of geological designations and indirectly to groundwater resources;

• Policy P11 (Water Management) aims to protect and improve water quality, water efficiency and assess changes in surface water flows as a result of development; and

• Policies ENV6 (Land Resources) and ENV8 (Water Resources) both refer to the development of contaminated land (or potentially contaminated land) and promote the implementation of practical measures to treat (i.e. remediate), contain or control the contamination to avoid contamination of a watercourse.

13.2.3 The NWLP contains one policy relating to flooding and water resources. Policy ENV8 requires that water resources are safeguarded and enhanced and that development is protected from floodwater. In addition, it requires that new development has satisfactory surface water drainage including the use of SuDS where appropriate. This policy also requires that contamination is prevented and where this has previously occurred be reduced. Policy ENV8 for Water Resources can be applied to groundwater quality as well as the surface water quality.

13.2.4 There is one policy of relevance within the NWLPCS. Policy NW8 advises that development should, amongst other things, incorporate sustainable drainage and water efficiency measures and protect ground/surface water sources to reduce the risk of flooding.

13.3 Assessmentscopeandkeyassumptions13.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the water resources and flood risk assessment

is set out in Volume 1.

107


13.3.2 The assessment of surface water resources and flood risk focuses on the River Blythe, its tributaries and their associated catchment areas and floodplains.

13.3.3 The groundwater resources assessment focuses on aquifers that are present within bedrock and overlying deposits. Effects on groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems (GWDTEs) and groundwater users/receptors (both licensed abstractions and private users) are also considered.

13.4 Environmental baseline 13.4.1 Features relevant to the water resources and flood risk assessment baseline are shown on

map CT-04-19.

13.4.2 The Proposed Scheme is located within the catchment of the River Blythe, a significant tributary of the River Tame. The River Blythe is classified by the EA as a Main River, its catchment comprising the southern suburbs of Solihull and Dorridge in its upper reaches, before becoming a more agricultural catchment within this section of the Proposed Scheme. The River Blythe is the only watercourse within this section of the Proposed Scheme, which is classified under the European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive (WFD) (EU, 2000/60/EC). The current WFD status of the River Blythe is “moderate.” The WFD objective for this water body is good. The River Blythe is an aquatic and riparian habitat and is classified as a SSSI and it is considered of very high value, as are tributaries. The route of the Proposed Scheme would cross Hollywell Brook, a small unnamed watercourse near Denbigh Spinney, which are both tributaries of the River Blythe and a deep culvert close to the M42 crossing. These are all tributaries to the River Blythe. The proposed automated people mover would cross Pendigo Lake.

13.4.3 There are four discharge permits to surface water within the study area and no surface water abstractions.

13.4.4 The study area is underlain by two Secondary A Aquifers; the Arden Sandstones and the permeable superficial deposits aquifer (comprised of the glaciofluvial deposits, river deposits and alluvium); and one secondary B Aquifer, Mercia Mudstones. These aquifers have been identified as groundwater receptors and are considered to be of moderate value and sensitivity.

13.4.5 Under the WFD, the permeable superficial deposits aquifer is not a designated groundwater body; however the Mercia Mudstones and Arden Sandstones are designated as the Tame Anker Mease – Secondary Combined groundwater body. The EA predicts WFD status of this groundwater body to be “poor” in 2015, the same as current conditions.

13.4.6 Groundwater flow in the permeable superficial deposits and the underlying bedrock aquifers within this catchment is assumed to be towards the River Blythe and is generally controlled by topography. Borehole logs show the groundwater as being shallow at less than 5m below ground level within the permeable superficial deposit or bedrock aquifers, or not encountered at all until more than 15m below ground level. The Mercia Mudstones are generally regarded as predominantly impermeable and are only water-bearing in places by virtue of the interbedded Arden Sandstones.

13.4.7 Along the route of the Proposed Scheme glaciofluvial deposits and alluvium associated with the River Blythe overlies the Mercia Mudstones. It is expected that shallow groundwater would be present in these locations and may be within 2m of the surface. Groundwater flow would be expected to be towards the River Blythe.

108


13.4.8 There are no groundwater source protection zones (SPZs) located within the study area. There is one licensed groundwater abstraction (consisting of two boreholes) within the study area which appears to abstract directly from the Mercia Mudstones or Arden Sandstones, but may need further investigation. There are no private groundwater users within the study area.

13.4.9 There are three discharge permits to ground or to groundwater within the study area.

13.4.10 There are three GWDTEs located within the study area. These are the Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI, Hollywell Brook potential local wildlife site (pLWS) and the River Blythe SSSI, the latter being approximately 650m from the route of the Proposed Scheme. These GWDTEs could be affected during construction or operation and therefore have been identified as groundwater receptors62. The SSSIs are considered to be of very high value and sensitivity, while Hollywell Brook pLWS is considered to be of low value and sensitivity. All of these wetland areas are likely to be at least partially dependent on groundwater contributions from the permeable superficial deposits aquifer and underlying bedrock aquifers, where water-bearing. Further investigation and assessment would be required to understand these conditions in more detail.

13.4.11 The Warwickshire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, the NWBC Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and the Warwickshire County Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment all report that there are no known major problems with flooding from groundwater. Where groundwater flooding has occurred, it is usually recorded in combination with other sources of flooding63,64,65.

13.4.12 Other guidance relevant to the assessment is the Solihull Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment Report. This was compiled using readily available information from a number of sources to identify areas within the borough that are at risk of flooding from sources that are not managed by the EA66.

13.4.13 The Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) includes an allowance for climate change to account for the extreme 1 in 100 (1%) year event. The effects of climate change on water resources will be addressed in the formal ES.

13.4.14 The flood zone maps provided by the EA show areas at risk from flooding from the River Blythe and Hollywell Brook. These show that flood waters may inundate a significant area away from the main channel. As the catchment area is largely rural and undeveloped the impact of flooding on the River Blythe and Hollywell Brook is relatively low in terms of how it affects human populations, property and infrastructure.


13.5.1 The draft CoCP sets out the measures and standards of work that will be applied to the construction of the Proposed Scheme. It would provide effective management and control of the impacts during the construction period including those required for utility diversions and strengthening.

62 Sites that have been highlighted as having the potential to become LWS but have not yet been surveyed are known as potential Local Wildlife Sites (pLWSs).

63 Warwickshire County Council (2008). Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Local Development Framework.64 North Warwickshire Borough Council (2008), Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Local Development Framework.65 Warwickshire County Council (2011). Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment. 66 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2008), Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Development Framework.

109


13.5.2 The draft CoCP includes the following provisions:

• Implementing, in consultation with the EA, a surface water and/or groundwater monitoring plan, as required, particularly in relation to works that may affect groundwater sensitive areas;

• Undertaking risk assessments associated with excavation work and impacts on surface water, groundwater, abstractions, aquifers and private water supplies;

• Preparing site specific flood risk management plans for those areas at risk of flooding;

• Avoiding the use of contaminating materials through appropriate design, construction and equipment specification and wherever possible, using biodegradable substances;

• Following the measures outlined for the provision of suitable site drainage, for the storage and control of oils and chemicals and to mitigate against accidental spillages; and

• Undertaking, as required, further pre-construction monitoring to establish baseline water quality conditions for watercourses; groundwater and during construction works. This would enable the effectiveness of those mitigation measures introduced to limit pollution risk to be monitored and any pollution incidents to be identified.

13.5.3 Measures defined in the draft CoCP, including detailed method statements, would ensure that there would be no effect on surface water quality or flows associated with construction.

13.5.4 There would be four watercourse diversions in the area as shown on maps CT-06-105 and CT-06-106. These include Hollywell Brook (335m south east of Park Farm), two unnamed watercourse/agricultural ditches (ordinary) (605m north-west of Stonebridge Island and 230m north-west of Middle Bickenhill Lane) and minor modifications to the unnamed watercourse near Denbigh Spinney (250m north of Park Farm). It is considered that, as the works would be undertaken in accordance with the draft CoCP, which refers to obtaining permissions from the EA for works within a watercourse, and the use of best practice measures in Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) guidance, the construction of the watercourse diversions would not result in a significant effect67.

13.5.5 There are three areas of below ground construction which are likely to require temporary dewatering. These areas are cuttings near Pasture Farm, for the Hollywell Brook underbridge and an area of ‘dig out and replace’ under an embankment near Hollywell Brook. At these locations, the groundwater levels would need to be lowered by up to approximately 6m in the vicinity of the construction sites. This has the potential to affect groundwater flows within the aquifers and towards identified receptors, such as the River Blythe and to affect groundwater quality by disturbing and mobilising any existing poor quality groundwater. This would result in a minor adverse impact and a significant effect on the River Blythe SSSI due to its high value. This would result in a minor adverse/negligible impact and would not result in a significant effect on the permeable superficial deposits, Mercia Mudstones, Arden Sandstones and the Hollywell Brook pLWS. No effects are anticipated on the licensed groundwater abstraction or the Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI, which are over 1km from these the above locations.

13.5.6 All below ground construction sites and structures, which extend into the saturated zone, have the potential to act as barriers of low permeability and to disturb or interrupt existing patterns of groundwater flow. The disturbance is likely to lead to rising groundwater levels and risk of groundwater flooding on the upstream side of the structure and to groundwater shadowing on the downstream side. This would result in a minor adverse impact and a significant effect on the River Blythe SSSI.

67 Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) (2006), C648 Control of water pollution from linear construction projects, London.

110


13.5.7 All of the areas of below ground construction have the potential to create new pathways or significantly alter existing pathways, by linking strata currently protected by clay layers, along which any existing poor quality groundwater could migrate laterally or downwards towards identified receptors. This would result in:

• A minor adverse impact and a significant effect on the River Blythe SSSI, due its very high value;

• A minor adverse/negligible impact and would not result in a significant effect on the permeable superficial deposits, Mercia Mudstones, Arden Sandstones and Hollywell Brook pLWS; and

• No effects are anticipated on the licensed groundwater abstraction or the Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI, which are over 1km from these the above locations.

13.5.8 Two areas of construction activity would be located within areas at risk of flooding. Any potential for increase in off-site flood risks would be managed by measures defined in the draft CoCP. More detailed flood risk information will be reported in the formal ES and the FRA. The areas of construction activity that would be located within flood risk areas are:

• The crossing of Hollywell Brook to the east of the NEC between the A452 Chester Road and Middle Bickenhill Lane for the Birmingham Interchange station; and

• Crossing of Hollywell Brook upstream of Middle Bickenhill Lane for the proposed automated people mover.

13.5.9 These features are shown on map CT-06-106.

13.5.10 The main areas at risk of river flooding from a 1 in 100 (1%) annual probability of river flooding are those in the vicinity of Hollywell Brook. During the construction stage there is a risk of flooding in terms of inundating excavations, damage to plant and materials used on-site and the safety of the construction workforce.



• Dewatering associated with below ground construction would have a significant effect on the River Blythe SSSI; and

• Below ground construction causing the alteration or creation of new pathways for the migration of poor quality groundwater would have significant effects on the River Blythe SSSI.

Further mitigation

13.5.12 The residual effects could be mitigated by the following measures:

• Installation of cut-off structures around excavations for cuttings and diversions to avoid the temporary dewatering of aquifers;

• Ensure temporary cut-off structures are driven to sufficient depths to meet an underlying strata or zone of lower permeability;

• Provide low permeability plugs of cement-bentonite grout or clay in linear features to break any new pathways; and

• Create temporary hydraulic barriers, such as discharge pumped water to recharge trenches, around excavations to maintain baseline groundwater conditions.

110 111



13.6.1 The Proposed Scheme has been designed to control impacts on the water environment through the following:

• Track drainage has been designed, through the use of balancing ponds to reduce the rate and volume of run-off from the railway and prevent an increase in flood risk;

• Sustainable drainage systems would be implemented where appropriate, to encourage water to soak back into the ground; and where drainage or cuttings intercept groundwater flow;

• Sustainable drainage systems may include basins, grassed channels and ponds. These would also provide opportunities to reduce the effect on water quality by reducing potential contaminants through filtration, vegetative, adsorption or settlement;

• Pollution control guidance would be adopted for the maintenance of the Proposed Scheme;

• Where the route of the Proposed Scheme would cross a watercourse the structure has been designed to take account of future flood risks; and

• Where the Proposed Scheme would result in the loss of floodplain, flood storage compensation areas would be provided. Flood storage compensation areas would be excavated, regraded and returned to their former use.

13.6.2 These mitigation measures, along with other permanent features related to the Proposed Scheme, are shown on maps CT-06-105 to CT06-108.

13.6.3 The main surface water discharges from the tracks would drain into the Hollywell Brook and into the unnamed watercourse near Denbigh Spinney which are tributaries of the River Blythe SSSI. Routine discharges associated with the operation and maintenance of the Proposed Scheme, such as track drainage, have the potential to result in effects on surface water quality. The design of the track drainage, including longitudinal filter drains and balancing ponds, would ensure that water quality impact on Hollywell Brook and the unnamed watercourse near Denbigh Spinney and subsequently the River Blythe would be negligible. Therefore the effect would not be significant.

13.6.4 Hollywell Brook would be realigned and directed under the southern end of the proposed Birmingham Interchange station following construction. Birmingham Interchange station structure would be approximately 5m above ground level and would extend approximately 50m over Hollywell Brook. This would create an area of watercourse where there would be reduced daylight availability. Lower light levels in the watercourse have the potential to inhibit plant growth and primary production within the water column. This has the potential to reduce water quality and habitat from loss of natural light levels. This would result in a minor adverse impact and would result in a significant effect on Hollywell Brook, due to its high value. Partial mitigation would be provided by the design of the underbridge.

13.6.5 The three new culverts on the unnamed watercourse near Denbigh Spinney would increase the length of the culverted unnamed watercourse to approximately 175m within a 400m length of watercourse. Increasing the length of culvert would result in a major adverse impact and would result in a significant effect on the unnamed watercourse, due to reduction in natural light levels affecting the ability of aquatic plants to undertake photosynthesis.

112


13.6.6 There is one area of below ground structures which is likely to require permanent groundwater control. This area is the cutting near Pasture Farm. At this location, groundwater levels would need to be lowered by approximately 6m in the vicinity. This has the potential to affect groundwater flows within the aquifers and towards identified receptors and to affect groundwater quality by disturbing and mobilising any existing poor quality groundwater. This would result in:

• A minor adverse impact and would be significant for the River Blythe SSSI, due to its high value;

• A minor adverse/negligible impact and therefore significant impact on the permeable superficial deposits, Hollywell Brook pLWS, Mercia Mudstones and Arden Sandstones aquifers; and

• No effects are anticipated on the licensed groundwater abstractions or the Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI, which are over 1km from these locations.

13.6.7 Permanent below ground structures, which extend into the saturated zone, have the potential to act as barriers to groundwater flow, leading to an increased risk of groundwater flooding on the upstream side of the structure and to reduce groundwater levels on the downstream side. This would result in:

• A minor adverse impact and a significant effect on the River Blythe SSSI, due to its very high value;

• A minor adverse/negligible impact and would not result in a significant effect on the permeable superficial deposits, Hollywell Brook pLWS, Mercia Mudstones and Arden Sandstones aquifers; and

• No effects are anticipated on the licensed groundwater abstraction or the Coleshill and Bannerly Pools SSSI which are over 1km from these locations.

13.6.8 The modelling of flood risk, which will be reported in the flood risk assessment (FRA) and formal ES predicts a negligible increase in flood levels for the Hollywell Brook. Changes to level extent and velocity are not considered to be significant and do not affect vulnerable receptors. Appropriate flood storage compensation would be provided, only as required, where there would be a significant loss of floodplain storage. Flood storage compensation areas include locations near Hollywell Brook.

13.6.9 The overall impact on flooding from all sources during operation is therefore not significant and the effect on property and the water environment is not significant.



• Permanent groundwater control for the cutting near Pasture Farm would have a significant effect on the River Blythe SSSI; and

• Permanent below ground structures, which extend into the saturated zone, have the potential to act as barriers to groundwater flow, and would have significant effects for the River Blythe SSSI.

13.6.11 In addition, the diversion of Hollywell Brook and the diversion and culverting of the unnamed watercourse near Denbigh Spinney could be partially mitigated through naturalising the banks outside of the culverted lengths to facilitate the establishment of bankside vegetation. However, the reduction of natural light falling on Hollywell Brook and the unnamed watercourse near Denbigh Spinney cannot be mitigated and is therefore considered a residual effect, which is considered to be significant.

113


Further mitigation

13.6.12 The residual effects of permanent groundwater control, permanent below ground structures and routine discharges on groundwater levels, flows and quality during operation could be mitigated by the following measures:

• Remove, or break through, cut-off structures following construction;

• Provide low permeability plugs of cement-bentonite grout, ‘plugs’ of clay in linear features to break any new pathways;

• Incorporate longitudinal filter drains at the base of cuttings to collect groundwater seepages and transfer them to an appropriate discharge point;

• Incorporate passive bypasses within the Proposed Scheme, which could comprise of a ‘blanket’ of permeable material, such as gravel, placed below cuttings or around structures allowing groundwater to bypass the structure without a rise in groundwater levels on the upstream side; and

• Managing the application of herbicide to reduce unnecessary over use and to reduce the risk of leaching to groundwater.

13.6.13 Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the only remaining significant effect would be the reduction of natural light falling on the watercourse due to the diversion of Hollywell Brook and the diversion and culverting of the unnamed watercourse at Denbigh Spinney.

114

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I References

14 ReferencesArup/URS (2013), Phase One: Draft Code of Construction Practice, HS2 Ltd, London.

Centro (2012), Towards a World Class Integrated Transport Network Public Consultation Draft December 2012 – February 2013.

Centro (Undated), West Midlands Local Transport Plan, Implementation Plan 2011-2016.

Centro (Undated), West Midlands Local Transport Plan, Local Transport Strategy Appendices, Detailed topic areas relating to the ten long term themes 2011-2026.

Centro (Undated), West Midlands Local Transport Plan, Local Transport Strategy 2011-2026.

Construction Industry Research and Information (CIRIA) (2006), C648 Control of water pollution from linear construction projects, London.

Cranfield University (2001), The National Soil Map of England and Wales 1:250,000 scale, National Soil Resources Institute, Cranfield University, UK.

Department of Communities and Local Government (2007). Index of Multiple Deprivations 2007.

Hedgerow Regulations 1997, London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

Homes and Communities Agency (2010), Employment Density Guide.

HS2 Ltd, Community forums, http://www.hs2.org.uk/have-your-say/forums/community-forums, Accessed: 11 April 2013.

HS2 Ltd (2010), Appraisal of Sustainability (Section 8.15 Economic Prosperity, Appendix III Chapter 2).

Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1988), Agricultural Land Classification of England and Wales 1:250,000 scale.

Natural England (1996), The Character of England 1996, http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/default.aspx, Accessed: 8 January 2013.

Natural England (2002), Likelihood of Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land in England and Wales: 1:250,000.

Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

Nitrate Pollution Prevention Regulations 2008, London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems Regulations 1996, London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

North Warwickshire Borough Council (2006), North Warwickshire Local Plan 2006.

North Warwickshire Borough Council (2008), Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Local Development Framework.

North Warwickshire Borough Council (2010), 2010 Air Quality Progress Report for North Warwickshire Borough Council.

North Warwickshire Borough Council (2012), Local Plan for North Warwickshire Core Strategy.

Office for National Statistics (2008), Commercial and Industrial Floorspace Statistics.

Office for National Statistics (2011), Census 2011.

http://www.hs2.org.uk/have-your-say/forums/community-forums

http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/default.aspx

http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/default.aspx

115

CFA Report – Birmingham Interchange and Chelmsley Wood/No 24 I References

Office for National Statistics (2011), UK Business: Activity, Size and Location.

Office for National Statistics (2012), Annual Population Survey.

Office for National Statistics (2012), Business Register and Employment Survey 2011.

Office for National Statistics (2012), Census 2011.

Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (2009), Inspection Report: Windy Arbor Junior and Infant School.

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2006), Solihull Green Space Strategy 2006.

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2006), Solihull Unitary Development Plan.

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2008), Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Development Framework.

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2010), Solihull Nature Conservation Strategy 2012-2014.

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2010), Solihull Woodland Strategy: First Review 1.0.

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2012), Solihull Draft Local Plan – Shaping a Sustainable Future.

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (2012), Solihull Green Infrastructure Study.

Standing Order 27A of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons relating to private business (environmental assessment), House of Commons.

Warwickshire County Council (1993), Warwickshire Landscapes Guidelines 1993.

Warwickshire County Council (1995), Minerals Local Plan for Warwickshire.

Warwickshire County Council (2003), Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull Biodiversity Action Plan.

Warwickshire County Council (2008), Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Local Development Framework.

Warwickshire County Council (2010), Warwickshire Historic Landscape Characterisation (HLC) 2010.

Warwickshire County Council (2011), Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment.

Weeds Act 1959 (7 & 8 Eliz II c. 54), London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

West Midlands Regional Assembly (2006), A Sustainable Future for the West Midlands: Regional Sustainable Development Framework (Version 2).

World Health Organization (2009), Night Noise Guidelines for Europe.