The proposal to route High Speed Two through Ruislip is causing widespread local concern. Our Association has responded vigorously to the public consultation on this contentious proposal, as have many of our members. This page will be regularly updated as the proposal progresses.
Hillingdon Council held a meeting about HS2, which was open to any Hillingdon resident who had not yet been to any of the council's previous HS2 meetings. You did not need to live in a post code area near to the proposed route this time, in order to be able to attend.
The HS2 meeting was held on Thursday 14 July at
Nick Hurd, MP, is holding some special surgeries for residents who are concerned about HS2. These will be in Harefield on Friday 24th June from 5pm and Ickenham on Saturday 25th June from 10am.
For residents in the south of our area John Randall, MP, can be contacted on 020 7219 6885.Details of both MP’s websites can be found in our Links section, via the drop down box.
At the RRA Executive Committee meeting on 1stJune 2011 the reports and findings of the RRA HS2 working group were discussed. It was then unanimously agreed that RRA will oppose the current HS2 proposals.
We wish to thank the members of the working group for their time and hard work in creating very useful material and evidence for us to consider in an objective manner.
No doubt HS2 will be a discussion topic during the Open Forum at our AGM on Thursday 30 June at Winston Churchill Hall. See "What's New" on the Home page for details of the AGM.
Our HS2 Working Group was open to any RRA member willing to contribute time or expertise to HS2 issues. The Group worked hard to research many aspects of the proposal, and has submitted its final reports to the Executive Committee. We will report back to our members at the AGM on Thursday 30 June at Winston Churchill Hall.
Reports covered the following aspects of the HS2 proposals
- HS2 Capacity, demand and economic factors
- HS2 Government strategy
- Impact of HS2 for Ruislip Residents
- Noise factors
- Stop HS2 objections
- West Coast Rail Issues
- The rejected tunnel through Ruislip option
- The rejected direct route for HS2 via Heathrow
I write to you on behalf of our members and your constituents on the issue of compensation for members of the public who are suffering avoidable personal stress as the result of planning blight caused by the proposal to route High Speed 2 through Ruislip.You will be aware that these proposals cause many concerns. Compensation is available when compulsory purchase orders are served and the severe hardship scheme offers a minimum safety net when its harsh criteria are met, but in our view compensation should be both more readily available and considerably more generous.
When making proposals for the good of the community, we believe the guiding principle should be that individual citizens are not exploited in that process. When building new roads or railways some citizens will inevitably lose homes or face loss of amenities. Some of those losses defy compensation – the loss of good neighbours, the loss of family memories, the loss of much loved gardens – which makes it all the more appropriate that compensation for material loss should be generous.However the compensation currently available is far from generous. In our view compensation should be available to anyone who wishes to move now and is prevented from obtaining a fair price for their property due to planning blight caused by HS2 or similar proposals. Many of your constituents are already suffering great personal stress because of the impact of the current proposals. Uncertainty is corrosive, with wide implications. Health and personal relationships can suffer. The savings of a lifetime can be in jeopardy. Hopes of a peaceful retirement or of moving near to family or friends can be dashed. For small businesses the impact can be devastating.
We urge you to use your influence to ensure that compensation for planning blight is both more generous and more readily available. The community should not expect individual citizens to be sacrificed for the public good.Yours sincerely,
Joan Davis, Chairman