CAMPAIGNERS have raised concerns over HS2’s planned route near Middlewich, just a few hundred yards from a breach which led to a large-scale canal collapse.

While the Canal and River Trust say they are still investigating the cause of the collapse, Mid Cheshire Against HS2 have pointed to historical concerns over the issue of subsidence in the area.

Joe Rukin from the group says that the breach is just one example of ‘serious issues with ground stability’ and ‘severe historical subsidence’.

He said: “This area has been troubled by subsidence for centuries, something which got considerably worse when abandoned salt mines were left to flood.

“The fields next to the canal, which at the point of the sinkhole is on an embankment, were historically brine pumped and the ground has been sinking all around for years, something which was identified in a recent independent geological report.”

Mr Rukin also pointed out that the M6 route was ‘dog-legged’ to avoid the Cheshire brine fields, leaving HS2 Ltd unaware of the underground infrastructure much better suited, he argues, to gas storage.

In its final route selection appraisal, HS2 Ltd acknowledged subsidence concerns thrown up by a 2013 survey, but added that the route was ‘avoiding the areas with the highest risk due to brining and gas storage’.

The document adds: “The preferred route avoids direct interfaces with existing brining and gas storage infrastructure, such as caverns, wellheads and surface infrastructure, and would minimise the risk of subsidence from ground movements in the brinefield site.”

The Canal and River Trust’s official HS2 consultation response opposed the route crossing the canal at Middlewich, but did not flag up concerns over subsidence.

It said: “Assuming that it is not the intention to sever navigation the proposal, which includes a four track crossing of the canal, would have a severe adverse impact on this section of waterway in an area which is very popular with a variety of recreational users.”