Network Rail is the "not for dividend" owner and operator of Britain's railway infrastructure, which includes the tracks, signals, tunnels, bridges, viaducts, level crossings and stations - the largest of which we also manage. All profits made by the company, including from commercial development, are reinvested directly back into the network.

With regards to the proposal Network Rail has the following comments to make, which are from a desktop study of the document only.

Sites GT04 (land at Harbury Lane, Fosse Way) and GT11 (land at Budbrooke Lodge, Racecourse and Hampton Rd) are directly adjacent to Network Rail and the operational railway.

We would therefore request that any site option includes provision (at the applicant's expense) for a minimum 1.8m high trespass proof fence adjacent to Network Rail's boundary and make provision for its future maintenance and renewal without encroachment upon or over-sailing of Network Rail land. Network Rail's existing fencing / wall must not be removed or damaged and at no point either during construction or after works are completed on site should the foundations of the fencing or wall or any embankment therein be damaged, undermined or compromised in any way. Any vegetation on Network Rail land and within Network Rail's boundary must also not be disturbed. Any fencing installed by the applicant must not prevent Network Rail from maintaining its own fencing/boundary treatment. Any existing Network Rail fencing at the site has been erected to take account of the risk posed at the time the fencing was erected and not to take into account any presumed future use of the site, where increased numbers of people and minors may be using the areas adjacent to the operational railway. Therefore, any proposed residential site option development imports a risk of trespass onto the railway, which we would remind the council, is a criminal offence (s55 British Transport Commission Act 1949). As the applicant has chosen to develop a proposal next to the railway, they are requested to provide a suitable trespass proof fence to mitigate any risks imported by the proposal.

Network Rail is a publicly funded organisation with a regulated remit; it would not be reasonable to require Network Rail to fund boundary works, fencing and boundary enhancements necessitated by third party commercial development adjacent to the railway.

Network Rail is the "not for dividend" owner and operator of Britain's railway infrastructure, which includes the tracks, signals, tunnels, bridges, viaducts, level crossings and stations - the largest of which we also manage. All profits made by the company, including from commercial development, are reinvested directly back into the network.

With regards to the proposal Network Rail has the following comments to make, which are from a desktop study of the document only.

Sites GT04 (land at Harbury Lane, Fosse Way) and GT11 (land at Budbrooke Lodge, Racecourse and Hampton Rd) are directly adjacent to Network Rail and the operational railway.

We would therefore request that any site option includes provision (at the applicant's expense) for a minimum 1.8m high trespass proof fence adjacent to Network Rail's boundary and make provision for its future maintenance and renewal without encroachment upon or over-sailing of Network Rail land. Network Rail's existing fencing / wall must not be removed or damaged and at no point either during construction or after works are completed on site should the foundations of the fencing or wall or any embankment therein be damaged, undermined or compromised in any way. Any vegetation on Network Rail land and within Network Rail's boundary must also not be disturbed. Any fencing installed by the applicant must not prevent Network Rail from maintaining its own fencing/boundary treatment. Any existing Network Rail fencing at the site has been erected to take account of the risk posed at the time the fencing was erected and not to take into account any presumed future use of the site, where increased numbers of people and minors may be using the areas adjacent to the operational railway. Therefore, any proposed residential site option development imports a risk of trespass onto the railway, which we would remind the council, is a criminal offence (s55 British Transport Commission Act 1949). As the applicant has chosen to develop a proposal next to the railway, they are requested to provide a suitable trespass proof fence to mitigate any risks imported by the proposal.

Network Rail is a publicly funded organisation with a regulated remit; it would not be reasonable to require Network Rail to fund boundary works, fencing and boundary enhancements necessitated by third party commercial development adjacent to the railway.