Messrs M.G., S.M., J.H. and J.M. Grindal and the M.G. & S.M.

M1 Junction 19 Improvement
Response by the Highways Agency
Inquiry Document No. HA/23/01
2.1.23 Barry Moore responds: - The HA recognises that Bridleway X12 is adjacent to the M1, but
it is a Scheme objective to improve conditions for Vulnerable Users. User groups have
confirmed that they do not favour parallel diversions next to major highways. (Ref
Alternative Bridleway Report Options 1 & 2 HA/21/01 para 4.2.3). Background motorway
noise is omnipresent around the junction, but noise from traffic is more intense at close
range, as would be the case for the whole length of Bridleway Alternative 1. Therefore
Bridleway Alternative 1 would result in poorer amenity value for Vulnerable Users.
2.1.24 The Grindal Family does not agree with the HA that: ‘[t] he opportunity for positive habitat
creation in the river corridor and benefits for the river habitat and specifically otters, as
described above, would be lost under Alternative 1. The Grindal Family contend that an
excellent habitat along the river corridor has already been created that is rich in wildlife
and is home to the otters. They contend that this has not happened by accident; the river
margin is the subject of a 10 year Higher Level Stewardship (HLS) agreement with Natural
England which ‘aims to deliver significant environmental benefits in priority areas. It
involves more complex environmental management…’ ‘…achieves a wide range of
environmental benefits over a longer period of time’. The Grindal Family contends that the
otters and other wildlife would be better served by keeping work and disruption close to
the river to an absolute minimum.
2.1.25 Barry Moore responds: - The Grindal Family’s management of the river corridor for wildlife
is not in dispute. The measures proposed by the Scheme are in addition to the current
management.
BRIDLEWAY ALTERNATIVE ROUTE 1 – HORSE RIDERS
2.1.26 The Grindal Family accepts that Bridleway Alternative 1 is a longer route and may not be
as attractive as the Scheme Bridleway route that follows the River Avon. The Grindal
Family suggests, however, that as Bridleway Alternative 1 largely follows the existing
bridleway therefore there will be no loss of “amenity” from what is already enjoyed.
2.1.27 The Grindal Family seek clarification on the number of horses the HA’s survey shows
using the existing bridleway and they asserts that Bridleway Alternative 1 would improve
conditions for horse riders in comparison to the Scheme Bridleway.
2.1.28 Barry Moore responds: - The Scheme objective is to improve conditions in this area. By
contrast Bridleway Alternative 1 would increase the length of bridleway adjacent to the
highway boundary and would be subject to poorer amenity in comparison to the Scheme
Bridleway route.
2.1.29 Surveys carried out between 2003 and 2005, including for the northern termination of X12
and X13 to the north of M6, did not identify any horse riders. It is accepted that the current
usage of the network is low, but that is because (as set out in Section 6.4 of the General
Environment Proof of Evidence (HA/05/010)), the present network is considered by users
to be badly fragmented and unsafe, involving conflicts with heavy traffic. Improving
conditions would encourage greater use.
2.1.30 Representations received from supporters of Alternative 1 are set out in Alternative
Bridleway Report Options 1 & 2 (HA/21/01) Section 3.2. It is noted that 12 riders keep
horses at Manor Farm and Old Barn Farm and these could potentially use the Scheme
Bridleway or Alternative 1.
2.1.31 The track surface for the Scheme Bridleway has yet to be determined in consultation with
the Grindal Family.
B0531000/OD/411 Messrs Grindal Response Rev. 2 February 2013
5