letters HS2: just a quiet whoosh


IAM writing to calm your anxieties about the effect of high- speed trains. I confess that I do not know which properties may be demolished if the HS2 line is built, but I do deny that the trains will be noisy. I have travelled on several such trains in Germany and France and Spain, and I have heard them passing in the countryside, and I deny that they are noisy. They make a kind of whooshing sound which does not travel far. Compared with the noise from Heathrow, which starts at 5.20am now, it is nothing. It is inevitable that there will be


disruption during building, and I do pity residents for that, but peace will return to the Chilterns.


Judith Bramley Blakeney Gloucestershire


HS2:heritage demolition –weighup prosandcons


I WOULD like to add my support to Simon Mitchell’s letter in the previous edition of Cornerstone. Rail is one of the greenest and most sustainable methods of moving people and freight around the country, and more investment in rail would allow people to work more efficiently and reduce the overcrowding in the South East. Clearly it is not desirable to


demolish listed buildings, but we have to weigh the pros and cons. If the railways had not been built in the past our country would certainly be the poorer for it now. People complaining about noise


pollution should not receive the support of SPAB since as long as the buildings are untouched there is no loss of our heritage. If we wish to campaign it should be for minimal impact, NOT in opposition to rail development. This country is crying out for better, faster railways, and it is a great shame there is not more investment in moving us to a more modern, efficient system.


10 Cornerstone, Vol 32, No 2 2011 Supporting this nimbyism and


publishing details of individuals’ complaints does no favours for SPAB and I for one find it a complete turn off, and it makes me less inclined to support the good work the Society is capable of doing.


Henry L ’Estrange


Gosberton Lincolnshire


HS2:let’s trust engineers


THIS subject seems to have placed SPAB members polarised into “true heritage preservers” or “despoiling progress enthusiasts”. If this is the choice, I veer towards the latter. We have made all journeys in


Britain and mainland Europe for two decades by train, despite the cost disincentives. The time differentials compared to flying are marginal and environmental benefits obvious. For undecided SPAB members I would like to suggest two days out to visit important historic sites in Kent. Trip 1. St Pancras to


Canterbury by high-speed train, hourly direct service taking 56 minutes. Note on your journey the size of cuttings, embankments and bridges, compared with the M2 and M20 motorways alongside; also the number of historic buildings adversely affected. Trip 2. Central London to


Dover via the M20 motorway, noting the number of trains passing on the parallel HS1 line. Don’t forget this single pair of tracks carries all high-speed trains, not only Eurostar to Paris and Brussels (and on to France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, etc) but the Javelin trains to towns in North and East Kent. On your return have a tea break at Maidstone Services Junction 8 and check if you are aware that you have crossed HS1 to get to the Service area. Trust the expert engineering


teams who built up valuable experience on HS1, decide the least disruptive route, and get on with it as quickly as possible to


HS2: Cornerstone’seditor replies


AS a footnote to his recent letter to “Cornerstone” expressing support, in extremis, for railway construction over heritage conservation, one correspondent urged the SPAB to give equal space in its magazine to the case in favour of the proposed scheme. Happily there may be no need to do


this.When read as one, the several letters received on the matter and published in this and the previous edition of “Cornerstone” more or less state the case for HS2 – as set out by government, the construction firms and the railway companies – inmost of its aspects. Worryingly, there appears to be


rather a distance between what has actually been reported in “Cornerstone”, and some correspondents’ interpretation of its coverage. For the record, that there would be significant loss of historic buildings and settings – listed and unlisted, statutorily protected and unprotected – under HS2 is no longer amatter for conjecture: it is fact; the example of high-speed rail lines in Kent cannot be used as an accurate template for a vastly larger scheme in a different part of the country; and the SPAB, and itsmagazine, are not opposed to rail improvement – but neither are they platforms for promoting it. From the SPAB’s campaigning


against airport expansion, especially at Stansted, the Society saw at first hand the demoralisation and decay in historic communities, and their old buildings, that arise fromlong-term exposure to the threat of development – let alone the reality of demolition and large-scale building. This process of degradation-by-uncertainty has already begun along the HS2 route, spreading far beyond the proposed


site of lines. As the SPAB found around Stansted, a spiral of falling property prices and heritage care short-termism and why-botherism soon sets in. That, in turn, has a drastic effect on the historic landscape – all of it – as maintenance and repair money flows away from the blight zone. “Cornerstone” has visited the route,


seen many of the ancient buildings on or near the proposed line, met their owners, listened to their concerns first-hand. Its resulting coverage, by highly experienced broadsheet journalists, has been thorough and professional. And, yes, it is biased in favour of protecting historic buildings and their settings. Ideally, all these arguments would


be aired at a formal public inquiry, but government is not following this path. Indeed, none of the owners of historic buildings near the HS2 route have thus far had a formal letter, visit or notice from any government department, construction firm or railway company. SPAB members know that the


notion of good trusteeship lies at the heart of its philosophy. Allied to this core tenet of the Society is watchfulness. In crowded Britain, with already immense pressure to develop set to grow further, the Society remains vigilant in its defence of historic buildings and their best interests. As the SPAB’s magazine, “Cornerstone” will continue to report on threats – actual and potential – to historic buildings. Robin Stummer


SPAB’s Guardians will formulate the Society’s formal response to the HS2 consultation in June.


See News Briefing, page 3, for the latest on the HS2 scheme.


open up the Midlands, North and Scotland to European business and tourism.


Chris McGrath Rye East Sussex


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88