Newton Purcell to Brackley HS2 London-West Midlands May 2013

Home , A421 road, A422 road, A43 road, Newton Purcell, Shelswell, Verney Junction

PHASE ONE

DraFt EnvironmEntal StatEmEnt Community Forum Area Report 14 | Newton Purcell to Brackley HS2 London-West Midlands May 2013

ENGINE FOR GROWTH DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Community Forum Area Report ENGINE FOR GROWTH 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley High Speed Two (HS2) Limited, 2nd Floor, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU

Telephone 020 7944 4908

General email enquiries: [email protected]

Website: www.hs2.org.uk

You may re-use this information (not including logos or third-party material) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected].

Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

To order further copies contact: DfT Publications Tel: 0300 123 1102 Web: www.dft.gov.uk/orderingpublications

Product code: ES/12

Printed in Great Britain on paper containing at least 75% recycled fibre. CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Contents Contents

Draft Volume 2: Community Forum Area Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 5 Structure of the HS2 draft Environmental Statement 5 Part A: Introduction 6 1 Introduction 7 1.1 Introduction to HS2 7 1.2 Purpose of this report 7 1.3 Structure of this report 9 Part B: Newton Purcell to Brackley – overview of the area and description of the Proposed Scheme 10 2 Newton Purcell to Brackley 11 2.1 Overview of the area 11 2.2 Description of the Proposed Scheme 14 2.3 Construction of the Proposed Scheme 17 2.4 Operation of the Proposed Scheme 26 2.5 Community forum engagement 26 2.6 Route section main alternatives 27 2.7 Proposals for further consideration 28 Part C: Environmental topic assessments 29 3 Agriculture, forestry and soils 30 3.1 Introduction 30 3.2 Policy framework 30 3.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 30 3.4 Environmental baseline 30 3.5 Construction 32 3.6 Operation 35 4 Air quality 36 4.1 Introduction 36 4.2 Policy framework 36 4.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 36

1 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Contents

4.4 Environmental baseline 36 4.5 Construction 37 4.6 Operation 38 5 Community 39 5.1 Introduction 39 5.2 Policy framework 39 5.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 39 5.4 Environmental baseline 39 5.5 Construction 42 5.6 Operation 43 6 Cultural heritage 44 6.1 Introduction 44 6.2 Policy framework 44 6.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 44 6.4 Environmental baseline 44 6.5 Construction 45 6.6 Operation 47 7 Ecology 48 7.1 Introduction 48 7.2 Policy framework 48 7.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 48 7.4 Environmental baseline 49 7.5 Construction 51 7.6 Operation 54 8 Land quality 56 8.1 Introduction 56 8.2 Policy framework 56 8.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 56 8.4 Environmental baseline 56 8.5 Construction 59 8.6 Operation 60 9 Landscape and visual assessment 62 9.1 Introduction 62 9.2 Policy framework 62 9.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 62 9.4 Environmental baseline 63 9.5 Construction 64 9.6 Operation 69

2 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Contents

10 Socio-economics 75 10.1 Introduction 75 10.2 Policy framework 75 10.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 75 10.4 Environmental baseline 75 10.5 Construction 76 10.6 Operation 77 11 Sound, noise and vibration 78 11.1 Introduction 78 11.2 Policy framework 78 11.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 78 11.4 Environmental baseline 78 11.5 Construction 78 11.6 Operation 79 12 Traffic and transport 82 12.1 Introduction 82 12.2 Policy framework 82 12.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 82 12.4 Environmental baseline 84 12.5 Construction 84 12.6 Operation 87 13 Water resources and flood risk assessment 88 13.1 Introduction 88 13.2 Policy framework 88 13.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 88 13.4 Environmental baseline 88 13.5 Construction 90 13.6 Operation 93 14 References 95

2 3 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Contents

List of figures

Figure 1: HS2 Phase One route and community forum areas 8 Figure 2: Area context map 12 Figure 3: Indicative construction programme for the area 25 Figure 4: Business Sector Composition in South Northamptonshire and the East Midlands 76

List of tables

Table 1: Location of construction site compounds 19 Table 2: Demolition works 20 Table 3: Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions 22 Table 4: Holdings affected by the Proposed Scheme 32 Table 5: Preliminary evaluation of likely value of protected and/or notable species occurring within this section of the route 50 Table 6: Significant residual construction effects on ecological receptors within this section of the route 53 Table 7: Significant residual operational effects on ecological receptors within this section of the route 55 Table 8: Significant landscape effects during construction 65 Table 9: Significant visual effects during construction 66 Table 10: Significant landscape effects during operation year 1 (2026) 69 Table 11: Significant visual effects during operation year 1 (2026) 71 Table 12: Options for further mitigation 81 Table 13: Typical vehicle trip generation for site compounds in this area 85

4 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Contents Draft Volume 2: Community Forum Area Report Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 Structure of the HS2 draft Environmental Statement The draft ES documentation for the purpose of this consultation comprises: • A non-technical summary (NTS) – providing a summary of the Proposed Scheme, the likely significant effects of the Proposed Scheme, both beneficial and adverse, and the means to avoid or reduce the adverse effects; • A main report – consisting of two volumes: ȃȃ Volume 1: Introduction to the Environmental Statement and Proposed Scheme which provides an introduction to HS2, an overview of the hybrid bill process and the environmental impact assessment (EIA) methodology, an introduction to consultation and engagement, the main strategic and route-wide alternatives considered; and ȃȃ Volume 2: Includes 26 Community Forum Area (CFA) reports, each with a separate corresponding set of drawings, which together provide the assessment of local environmental effects. An assessment of effects of the Proposed Scheme on a route- wide basis is presented in Report 27.

HS2 Ltd set up 26 community forums along the line of route of the Proposed Scheme, as a regular way of engaging with local communities.1 Volume 2 of this draft ES supports this engagement strategy by providing a draft ES report for each CFA. This is a report for the Newton Purcell to Brackley area, CFA14.

The draft ES has been written in a clear and accessible manner; however, on occasion it has been necessary to use technical terms. Given this, a glossary of terms and list of abbreviations for all draft ES documentation is provided.

1 Details of these community forums are provided on the HS2 Ltd website at http://www.hs2.org.uk/have-your-say/forums/community-forums. Accessed 13 April 2013.

5 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Contents Part A: Introduction

6 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Introduction 1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction to HS2 1.1.1 HS2 is planned to be a Y-shaped rail network with stations in London, Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester, South Yorkshire and the East Midlands, linked by high speed trains running at speeds of up to 360 kilometres per hour (kph) (225 miles per hour (mph)).

1.1.2 HS2 is proposed to be built in two phases. Phase One (the Proposed Scheme), the subject of this draft ES, would involve the construction of a new railway line of approximately 230km (143 miles) between London and Birmingham that would become operational by 2026; with a connection to the West Coast Main Line (WCML) near Lichfield and to the existing HS1 line in London. The HS2 London-West Midlands route and the 26 CFAs are shown in Figure 1.

1.1.3 On opening, HS2 Phase One would run up to 14 trains per hour (tph). HS2 trains would be up to 400 metres (m) long with 1,100 seats during peak hours. Beyond the dedicated high speed track, these high speed trains would connect with and run on the existing WCML to serve passengers beyond the HS2 network. A connection to HS1 would also allow some services to run to mainland Europe via the Channel Tunnel.

1.1.4 Phase Two would involve the construction of lines from Birmingham to Leeds and Manchester; with construction commencing around 2027, and planned to be operational by 2033. After Phase Two opens, it is expected that the frequency of train services on some parts of the HS2 London-West Midlands route could increase up to 18tph.

1.1.5 The Government believes that the HS2 network should link to Heathrow and its preferred option is for this to be built as part of Phase Two. However, the Government has since taken the decision to pause work on the Heathrow link until after 2015 when it expects the Airports Commission to publish its final report on recommended options for maintaining the country’s status as an international aviation hub. 1.2 Purpose of this report 1.2.1 This report presents the likely significant environmental effects as a result of the construction and operation of Phase One of HS2 (the Proposed Scheme) that have been identified to date within the area of Newton Purcell to Brackley (CFA14). It provides a summary of the likely environmental issues and proposed mitigation measures that are being addressed during the design development process within the Newton Purcell to Brackley area.

1.2.2 The final details of the Proposed Scheme and assessment of its environmental impacts and effects will be presented in the formal ES submitted in accordance with the requirements of Parliamentary Standing Order 27A (SO27A).2

2 Standing Order 27A of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons relating to private business (environmental assessment), House of Commons.

6 7 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Introduction

Figure 1: HS2 Phase One route and community forum areas

8 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Introduction

1.3 Structure of this report 1.3.1 This report is divided into three parts:

• Part A – an introduction to HS2 and the purpose of this report; • Part B – overview of the area, description of the Proposed Scheme within Newton Purcell to Brackley and its construction, community forum engagement, and a description of the main local alternatives; and • Part C – environmental topic assessments, overview of the policy framework, the environmental baseline within the area, an assessment of construction and operational effects, the proposed mitigation measures, and significant residual effects for the following environmental topics: ȃȃ Agriculture, forestry and soils; ȃȃ Air quality; ȃȃ Community; ȃȃ Cultural heritage; ȃȃ Ecology; ȃȃ Land quality; ȃȃ Landscape and visual assessment; ȃȃ Socio-economics; ȃȃ Sound, noise and vibration; ȃȃ Traffic and transport; and ȃȃ Water resources and flood risk.

1.3.2 The maps relevant to Newton Purcell to Brackley are provided in a separate corresponding document entitled Volume 2: CFA 14 Newton Purcell to Brackley Map Book, which should be read in conjunction with this report.

1.3.3 In addition to the environmental topics covered in Part C of this report, Report 27 also addresses climate, electromagnetic interference and waste and material resources on a route- wide basis.

9 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Introduction Part B: Newton Purcell to Brackley – overview of the area and description of the Proposed Scheme

10 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley 2 Newton Purcell to Brackley 2.1 Overview of the area 2.1.1 The Newton Purcell to Brackley CFA covers an approximately 11.8km section of the Proposed Scheme in the council districts of Cherwell, Aylesbury Vale and South Northamptonshire, extending from the Buckinghamshire-Oxfordshire county boundary between Newton Purcell and Barley Fields in the south to a point approximately 2.4km north-east of the edge of Brackley. The area includes land within the parishes of Newton Purcell with Shelswell, Finmere, Mixbury, Westbury, Turweston and Whitfield.

2.1.2 As shown in Figure 2, Calvert, Twyford, Chetwode and Steeple Claydon (CFA13) lies to the south and Greatworth to Lower Boddington (CFA15) to the north. Settlement, land use and topography 2.1.3 The area is predominantly rural, comprising mixed agriculture with small villages and isolated farmsteads in the south and the town of Brackley the largest settlement to the north. The area lies within the broad valley of the River Great Ouse in the south, whilst to the north, the landform is broadly domed and gently undulating. The River Great Ouse passes around the edge of a flat plateau. The river passes to the west of Turweston, which lies on the side of the valley.

2.1.4 The villages of Newton Purcell, Westbury, Turweston, Whitfield and Radstone lie within approximately 250m of the temporary land take boundary for the Proposed Scheme. The nearest main town is Brackley, which lies approximately 900m to the west of the route.

2.1.5 The Proposed Scheme would cross the River Great Ouse at two locations – to the south-east and north-east of Brackley respectively. It would also cross two minor watercourses, Radstone Brook and a watercourse to the east of Mixbury, as well as several small field-drains (see map CT‑04-13). Key transport infrastructure 2.1.6 The main transport routes within the area include: the A43, which links the M1 and M40 via Brackley in the north; the A421, which links the A43 south of Brackley to Milton Keynes; and the A422 between Banbury and Buckingham via Brackley. All three highways would cross the Proposed Scheme within the area.

2.1.7 The Proposed Scheme would not cross any existing railway lines; however it would be partly on, and adjacent to, the former Great Central Main Line (GCML) railway for a section in the south. It would also cross the disused Banbury to Verney Junction Branch Line railway, which runs from east to west across the area.

2.1.8 The Westbury Circular Ride is a local circular walk that would cross the route at Westbury Viaduct and through Turweston. Two other long distance footpaths would cross the route in this area: The Palladian Way (a 190km footpath which passes through Turweston) and the Seven Shires Way (a 372km footpath which would cross the route between Mixbury and Westbury).

11 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

Figure 2: Area context map

12 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

Demographic profile

2.1.9 The population within 1km of the route, based on national census data, is estimated at approximately 860. Approximately 50% of the population is under the age of 45, with a high proportion of over 60-year olds (23%).

2.1.10 This is an area of low ethnic diversity, with 97% of the population formed of white ethnic groups. The proportion of people of working age in employment is 76%, which is slightly higher than that of Aylesbury Vale District (72%), South Northamptonshire (73%) and Cherwell (73%). Consequently, there are low levels of deprivation. This is reflected in the high level of home ownership, with 79% of homes either privately owned or privately rented in the area.

2.1.11 There are approximately 18% single-person households in the area, which is lower than district, regional and national levels.3 Notable community facilities

2.1.12 The main shops and services are located in Brackley, which is the largest town within the wider area. There are also a few services located in the small villages of Finmere, Westbury and Turweston. Brackley has an extensive range of facilities within the wider area. Along the high street there is a good range of shops and services, including a bank, several estate agents, a post office, opticians as well as several restaurants, cafes and public houses. There are four doctor’s surgeries, three dental practices and a care home in the town. There are four churches within the area (see maps CT‑01-31 to CT‑01-33).

2.1.13 Finmere along with other smaller villages has a small range of services including Finmere Primary school, St Michael and All Angels Church and the Red Lion public house. Westbury has limited services, including St Augustine’s Church, Westbury working men’s club and the Reindeer Inn public house. Similarly, Turweston has limited services, including Turweston Village Hall and the Station Arms public house. Recreation, leisure and open space

2.1.14 The area is predominantly rural with a limited range of recreational facilities. The main facilities include: Whitefield Race course, a 2ha race course for point-to-point horse racing and other events; Turweston Aerodrome, which holds flying rallies and other events; Westbury Cricket Club; and Finmere playing fields and sports pavilion. There is an array of informal open space in the area, including woodland and some plantations. There are also several local recreational footpaths and bridleways that cross through the area; these include the Westbury Circular Ride, Turweston/Whitfield, Halse Copse and Radstone Walk. Planning context and key designations

2.1.15 Volume 1 sets out the national policies under which HS2 has been developed. Given that the Proposed Scheme has been developed on a national basis and to meet a national need it is not included or referred to in many local plans. Nevertheless, in seeking to consider the Proposed Scheme in the local context, relevant local plan documents and policies have been taken into account in relation to environmental topics.

2.1.16 The Newton Purcell to Brackley area falls within the administrations of Cherwell, Aylesbury Vale and South Northamptonshire Districts and local policies from these areas apply. This includes: • The Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan 2011, which is a non-statutory document that has been approved as the interim development management policy in Cherwell District4;

3 Office for National Statistics; Census 2011; http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/census/2011/index.html; Accessed 1 February 2013. 4 Cherwell District Council, (2011), Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan.

13 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

• The Cherwell Local Plan Saved Policies 20075; • Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policies 20076; and • South Northamptonshire Local Plan Saved Policies 2007.7

2.1.17 Additional emerging policies are not generally considered within this report, unless a document has been submitted to the Secretary of State for approval, as is the case with West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit’s8 Joint Core Strategy (which encompasses South Northamptonshire Council), submitted to the Secretary of State for Examination in December 2012 with adoption set for the summer of 2013.9 Additionally, it should be noted that Aylesbury Vale District Council requested the Secretary of State’s direction to withdraw Aylesbury Vale District Core Strategy, such that the Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policies remain applicable whilst the Local Development Framework (LDF) is under preparation.10 Similarly, Cherwell District Council expects to submit the new Cherwell Local Plan to the Secretary of State in the spring of 2013.11

2.1.18 Relevant policies from these documents have been taken into account in relation to the technical assessments reported in Sections 3 to 13.

2.1.19 Planning policies seek to protect and enhance existing environmental and cultural features. There are a number of key planning designations in the area including: • Four conservation areas – at Mixbury, Westbury, Turweston and Brackley; • A number of listed buildings, the majority of which are concentrated in the villages of Newton Purcell, Finmere, Mixbury, Westbury, Turweston and Whitfield; • The Grade I listed Church of St Lawrence at Radstone; and • One Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), the Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI, designated for its lowland calcicolous grassland. 2.2 Description of the Proposed Scheme 2.2.1 The general design of the Proposed Scheme is described in Volume 1. The following section describes the main features of the Proposed Scheme in the Newton Purcell to Brackley area, including the main environmental mitigation measures.

2.2.2 Since the January 2012 route was announced by the Secretary of State, route development work has continued, and the Proposed Route now differs in some respects, i.e.: • The design of the green tunnel at Turweston has been refined as a 100m wide green bridge; • The alignment past Radstone has been raised by up to 4m to reduce the volume of material generated by the cutting; • Replacement of some viaducts with embankments and culverts; and • Reduced length of viaducts at Westbury and Turweston.

2.2.3 These changes are discussed in more detail in Section 2.6 below.

2.2.4 Design development continues on this section of route. Any further changes resulting from this would be assessed in the formal ES if accepted into the Proposed Scheme.

5 Cherwell District Council, (2007), Adopted Local Plan, Saved Policies. 6 Aylesbury Vale District Council, (2007), Adopted Local Plan, Saved Policies. 7 South Northamptonshire Council, (2007), Adopted Local Plan, Saved Policies. 8 Comprising Councillors from Daventry District Council, Northampton Borough Council, South Northamptonshire Council and Northamptonshire County Council. 9 West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit (2012), Joint Core Strategy. 10 Aylesbury Vale District Council (2009), Submission Core Strategy. 11 Any policy changes arising will be reported in the formal ES, if available.

14 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

The developments being considered currently include refining the area required and access arrangements.

2.2.5 The design of viaducts is currently based on flood risk data received from third parties.Where viaducts, bridges, embankments or other structures intrude into floodplains, the effects of these structures would be assessed in detail and included in the final design and formal ES, in order to ensure there would be no significant increase in flood risk toe k y receptors. Through the flood risk assessment process, hydraulic modelling may demonstrate appropriate reductions or increases to the proposed lengths and heights of viaducts and other river crossing structures. If shown to be required, the design would mitigate for any loss of floodplain by creating new flood storage areas nearby. Overview

2.2.6 The Proposed Scheme through this area would commence just east of Newton Purcell and then proceed north-west, passing between the settlements of Finmere and Mixbury. It would cross the River Great Ouse downstream of Brackley, to the west of Westbury, before passing between Turweston and the Turweston Aerodrome. The route would cross the River Great Ouse again upstream of Brackley, to the west of Whitfield. North of the River Great Ouse the route would turn to the north-west passing to the west of Radstone before reaching the edge of the Newton Purcell to Brackley area just south of the woodland at Halse Copse South. This section of route is illustrated on maps CT‑06-060 to CT‑06-068. PRoW are illustrated on maps CT‑03-31 to CT‑03-34. Proposed Scheme – Section by section

2.2.7 The Proposed Scheme would enter the area in the south in shallow cutting following the former alignment of the GCML. It would remain in cutting up to 8m deep, following the contours of the land towards the A421, London Road (see maps CT‑06-060 to CT‑06-062). Key features of this section would include: • A footpath overbridge at Barton Hartshorn – a replacement of footpath BHA/2/2; • A maintenance access point – adjacent to the old A4421 overbridge; • An overbridge at Newton Purcell – a realignment of A4421 approximately 100m north-west of its current alignment and associated attenuation ponds; • An earthwork bund on the north-east side of the A4421 to provide acoustic and visual screening; • A noise barrier on the west side of the Proposed Scheme at Newton Purcell; • An overbridge at Barleyfields – a diversion of bridleway 213/7/10; • An overbridge at Widmore Farm – a diversion of bridleway 213/4/10 and agricultural accommodation access; • An emergency access point at the A421 London Road overbridge; and • A replacement overbridge for the A421 London Road.

2.2.8 The Proposed Scheme would then diverge from the former GCML continuing in shallow cutting, which would deepen to approximately 10m. The route would then cross over a tributary of the River Great Ouse at Mixbury on a short embankment. The route would then enter a short section of cutting near Mossycorner Lane followed by an overbridge at Hollow Barn. It would then cross over the Banbury to Verney Junction Branch disused railway south of the River Great Ouse on embankment and then across the floodplain of the river at a point approximately 600m to the west of the edge of the village of Westbury. From there the route would continue on a short section of embankment across the north side of the floodplain,

15 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

prior to entering cutting to exit the area (see maps CT‑06-062 to CT‑06-064). Key design features of this section would include: • A footpath diversion at Mixbury Lodge – a diversion of footpath 213/1/10 to tie in with the overbridge at Featherbed Lane; • A viaduct at Westbury, approximately 300m long and up to 11m high, with noise barrier along each edge; • A replacement overbridge for Featherbed Lane; • An electricity pylon diversion near Featherbed Lane; • A maintenance access point east of Tibbets Farm; • An auto-transformer station east of Tibbets Farm; • A culvert of a tributary of the River Great Ouse at Mixbury and an associated area of floodplain compensation on the west side of the Proposed Scheme; • An overbridge near Hollow Barn and Mossycorner Lane – a diversion of bridleway 303/4/20; • An emergency access point near the overbridge at Hollow Barn; • A diversion of the Westbury Circular Ride bridleway (303/5/10) beneath the viaduct; • A viaduct over the River Great Ouse west of Westbury, including an incorporated noise barrier; and • Planting and earthworks along the floodplain of the River Great Ouse and the Proposed Scheme to provide visual screening for the residents at Westbury.

2.2.9 North of the River Great Ouse the Proposed Scheme would pass to the east of Turweston in cutting up to 20m deep. It would then transfer onto sections of embankment on the approach to the River Great Ouse floodplain, upstream of Brackley (see maps CT‑06-065 and CT‑06- 066). Key design features of this section would include: • An area of floodplain compensation on the northwest side of the viaduct atWestbury; • An overbridge south of A422 Brackley Road – a diversion of footpath WBB/17/1; • An overbridge at the A422 Brackley Road – a diversion of the A422; • A maintenance access point adjacent to A422 overbridge; • A green overbridge at Turweston – a diversion of the road leading to Oatley’s Hall; • A diversion of public footpath TUW/3/2 at Turweston; • An overhead electricity line diversion east of Turweston; • A viaduct north of Turweston over the River Great Ouse – the viaduct would be approximately 80m long and 9m high. It would include noise barriers along both edges. Along the western edge the barrier would extend to the north and south of the viaduct; and • An area of floodplain compensation on the upstream side of the viaduct.

2.2.10 Beyond the River Great Ouse floodplain the land rises out of the valley and the Proposed Scheme would enter a cutting up to 17m deep that shallows towards Radstone. The A43 would be realigned northwards on an overbridge. The Proposed Scheme would pass through the Helmdon Disused Railway Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) in cutting on the approach to Radstone, which is located approximately 300m to the east. Beyond Radstone the Proposed Scheme would be in shallow cutting (up to 6m deep) (see maps CT‑06-066 to CT‑06- 068). Key design features of this section would include:

16 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

• A footpath diversion – diversion of footpath BD/008 beneath the viaduct at Turweston; • An auto-transformer station and an emergency access point adjacent south of the A43, including a compound for emergency vehicles to access the railway; • A bridleway diversion east of the Proposed Scheme near Brackley – diversion of bridleway BD/007 to an underpass beneath the realigned A43; • An area of floodplain compensation near the southern end of the A43 diversion; • An overbridge – a diversion of the A43 Northampton Road and highway drainage ponds at the eastern and western extent; • An overbridge south of Helmdon disused railway line – a diversion of the bridleway AX/016; • An overbridge east of Radstone – a diversion of the footpath AX/015; • A maintenance access point east of Radstone; • A culvert over Radstone Brook and an associated area of floodplain compensation; • A noise barrier on the east side of the alignment between Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI and Radstone Road; • A diversion of Radstone Road and Footpath AX/007; • An overbridge north of Radstone Road – diversions of bridleway AX/018 and AX/019 and footpath AX/005; and • A culvert south of Halse Copse.

2.2.11 The route would then leave the area, continuing in shallow cutting towards Greatworth. Land required for the Proposed Scheme

2.2.12 The Proposed Scheme would require land on both a temporary and permanent basis. The land required for construction is shown on the construction maps (map series CT‑05) and will be subject to review as the engineering design and formal ES is prepared. The final permanent and temporary land requirements will be set out in the formal ES. 2.3 Construction of the Proposed Scheme 2.3.1 This section sets out the key construction activities that are envisaged to build the Proposed Scheme in the Newton Purcell to Brackley area and the control measures that are proposed to manage the works. General descriptions of construction works that are relevant to the whole of the Proposed Scheme are provided in Volume 1. Environmental management and Code of Construction Practice

2.3.2 All contractors would be required to comply with the environmental management regime for the Proposed Scheme, which would include: • Code of Construction Practice (CoCP)12; and • Local environmental management plans (LEMPs), which would apply within each CFA.

2.3.3 The CoCP, in conjunction with associated LEMPs, would be the means of controlling the construction works associated with the Proposed Scheme, with the objective of ensuring that the effects of the works upon people and the natural environment are eptk to a practicable minimum. The CoCP will contain generic control measures and standards to be implemented throughout the construction process.

12 Arup/URS (2013) Phase One: Draft Code of Construction Practice. HS2 Ltd, London.

17 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

2.3.4 A draft CoCP has been prepared and is being published alongside this document. It will be kept under review as the design of the Proposed Scheme develops and further engagement with stakeholders is undertaken. Construction site operation Working hours

2.3.5 Core working hours would be from 08:00 to 18:00 on weekdays (excluding bank holidays) and from 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays. While there would not normally be any construction activity on Sundays, some activities (e.g. weekend possessions, tunnelling and ventilation and intervention shafts (vent shafts) construction) would be undertaken. Site specific variations to core hours and/or additional hours likely to be required would be included within LEMPs following consultation with the relevant LPA. To maximise productivity within the core hours, HS2 Ltd’s contractors would require a period of up to one hour before and up to one hour after the core working hours for start-up and close down of activities. These activities would be subject to controls set out in the CoCP.

2.3.6 Track laying activities, transportation of over-sized equipment (such as the auto-transformer feeder station) and work requiring possession of major transport infrastructure (e.g. highways) may be undertaken during night time, Saturday afternoon, Sunday and/or bank holidays for reasons of safety or operational necessity and would often involve work on consecutive nights, including over weekend possessions. Construction site compounds

2.3.7 Main site compounds would be used for core project management (engineering, planning and construction delivery), commercial, and administrative staff.

2.3.8 Smaller satellite site compounds, providing office accommodation for limited numbers of staff, would provide local storage for plant and materials and limited car parking would be provided for staff and site operatives. Limited welfare facilities would be provided at each site.

2.3.9 The location of all site compounds along with their duration of use and a broad current estimate of the number of workers likely to work at the construction sites is set out in Table 1 and shown in maps CT‑06-060 to CT‑06-068. Construction site details and arrangements are continuing to be refined and will be confirmed in the formal ES. All construction staff would be required to comply with codes of behaviour set out by the CoCP.

18 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

Compound Location Typical use Duration13 Estimated number of type workers

Average Peak work working day day

Main site Northampton Main area administration and support and 5.5 years Up to 25 Up to 150 Road, Brackley, material storage map CT‑05-066

Satellite site Newton Purcell, Highway, PROW and private access 3.5 years Up to 50 Up to 125 map CT‑05-061 diversions, overbridges and earthworks

Satellite site London Road, map Highway and PRoW realignment and 2 years Up to 50 Up to 75 CT‑05-062 earthworks

Satellite site Featherbed Lane, Highway and PRoW realignment and 4 years Up to 25 Up to 100 map CT‑05-062 overbridges, earthworks and watercourse/ culvert works

Satellite site Westbury, map Viaduct construction and earthworks 2 years Up to 100 Up to 125 CT‑05-064

Satellite site Brackley Road, map Green bridge construction, earthworks 3 years Up to 50 Up to 100 CT‑05-064 and PRoW diversion

Satellite site Turweston, map Highway and PRoW diversions and 2 years Up to 100 Up to 125 CT‑05-065 overbridges, culvert and watercourse diversion

Satellite site Radstone, map Highway and PRoW diversions and 2.5 years Up to 50 Up to 100 CT‑05-067 overbridges, culvert and watercourse diversion

Table 1: Location of construction site compounds13

2.3.10 All main site compounds would contain space for the storage of bulk materials (aggregates, structural steel, and steel reinforcement), an area for the fabrication of temporary works equipment and finished goods, fuel storage, plant and equipment storage and necessary operational parking. Buildings would be generally temporary modular units and layout would maximise construction space and limit land required. Hardstanding areas would be installed at all site compounds.

2.3.11 The adjacent areas would be used for the temporary storage of any topsoil stripped as part of the works.

2.3.12 Material arising from the cutting at Turweston would be re-processed where reasonably practicable for re-use within the construction of the Proposed Scheme. Excavated material would be re-processed adjacent to the cutting. Re-processing is likely to include crushing and re-grading. Much of the re-processed excavated material would be transported to other areas along the Proposed Scheme for use during construction, potentially including bunding and landscaping. Workers for this activity are included in the numbers for the Turweston satellite compound, which would provide the support facilities for this activity. Excavated materials re-processing and reuse will be assessed and reported in the formal ES. Fencing and lighting

2.3.13 Security fencing would be provided on the perimeter of each site compound. Individual site compounds for offices, welfare and storage would generally be demarcated and secured with fences and gates. Fence type and construction would be appropriate to the level of security required, likelihood of intruders, level of danger, and visual impact to the environment.

13 The duration for each site compound is currently based on a draft programme, which will be refined for the formal ES.

19 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

2.3.14 Lighting of site compounds during hours of darkness would seek to reduce as far as reasonably practicable light pollution to the surrounding area, in accordance with the requirements of the CoCP. Temporary worker accommodation sites

2.3.15 There would be one accommodation site in this area, located at the main construction compound adjacent to the A43 Northampton Road at Brackley. This site would accommodate up to 80 workers on an average work day and up to 170 during a peak workday. Construction traffic and access

2.3.16 The following lorry routes are currently proposed to access each of the site compounds: • The route to the compound at Northampton Road, Brackley would be from the A43 accessed from the M1 to the east and the M40 to the west; • The route to the compound near Newton Purcell would be from the A4421 via the M40 from the west and the A421 via the M1; • The route to the compound at London Road would be from the A421 continuing on to the A43 in the west and on to the M40; • The route to the compound at Featherbed Lane would be from A421 continuing on to the A43 in the west and on to the M40 from the west and the A421 via the M1; • The route to the compound near Westbury would be from the A421 to the west via the A43 continuing on to the M40; • The route to the compound on Brackley Road would be from the A422 Brackley Road via the A43 continuing on to the M40; • The route to the compound near Turweston is from Turweston Road via the A43 to the M40; and • The proposed lorry route for the compound on Radstone Road would be from the A422 in the west to the M40 and the east from the B4525 and Radstone Road. Preparatory and enabling works Demolition works

2.3.17 It is anticipated that the Proposed Scheme would require the demolition of buildings in the area. These works are outlined in Table 2.

Description of structure Location

Station House – residential property A4421, Newton Purcell

Outbuildings associated with Widmore Farm Widmore Farm near A421

Two small outbuildings Adjacent to A421

The Oaks Farm – farm and residential property Adjacent north to A421

Parkside and associated outbuildings – residential property Turweston Road, Turweston

Bellabeg – residential property, stables and associated outbuildings Turweston Road, Turweston

Ilett’s Courtyard – holiday homes Northampton Road, Brackley

Ilett’s Farm – farm and residential property Northampton Road, Brackley

Table 2: Demolition works

20 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

Drainage and culverts

2.3.18 It is anticipated that drainage ponds would be required for both railway track and highway drainage. Indicative locations are shown on maps CT‑06-061 to CT‑06-068. Watercourse diversions

2.3.19 The route of the Proposed Scheme and associated highway works require five diversions of watercourses, those being: • Two drains at Station House, Newton Purcell, which would require diversions of approximately 430m and 250m respectively; • The River Great Ouse north of Turweston, which would require a diversion of approximately 170m; and • Two drains north of Radstone, which would require diversions of approximately 640m and 200m respectively. Utility diversions

2.3.20 There are a number of major items of utility infrastructure in proximity to the Proposed Scheme, including: high pressure gas mains; large diameter water mains; large diameter sewers; fibre optic/signal cabling; and high and low voltage electricity lines. In summary, the main proposed utility diversions required in the area would be: • Diversion of a Western Power Networks 132kV overhead electricity line at Featherbed Lane over the proposed alignment and the proposed overbridge; • Diversion of the Anglian Water main located adjacent to the A422 Brackley Road; • Diversion of a Western Power Networks 132kV overhead electricity line at Turweston westwards to avoid crossing the proposed alignment; • Diversion of an Anglian Water pumped foul water sewer under the Proposed Scheme approximately 1.2km south of the River Great Ouse at Westbury; • Diversion of the Anglian Water main located adjacent to the A43 Northampton Road; and • A Western Power Networks 132kV overhead electricity line at the A43 which may require raising to maintain clearance above the realigned highway.

2.3.21 Discussions with utility providers are underway to confirm whether plant and/or apparatus would need to be realigned away from the area of work; protected from the works by means of a concrete slab or similar; or have sufficient clearance from the work that they would not be affected.

2.3.22 Wherever practicable, temporary connections for construction site compounds would be made to local existing utility services (i.e. electricity, water, data, sewerage and surface water drainage, to reduce the need for generators, storage tanks and associated traffic movements for fuel tankers).

2.3.23 Some of the impacts of these diversions would be accounted for in the current assessment. However, complete assessments of main utility diversion works will be presented in the formal ES. Highway and road diversions

2.3.24 Proposed highway and road diversions are shown below and on maps CT‑06-061 to CT‑06- 068. The total duration of works does not necessarily indicate periods of actual closure. The closure of routes will be kept to as short a duration as possible. Diversions show indicative

21 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

alternative routes available to maintain general access which will be subject to change as part of the development of the design and will be detailed in the formal ES. • A4421 London Road, permanent diversion to a new offline overbridge; • Private access to Warren Farm and Greystone Barn, permanent diversion; • A421 London Road, permanent diversion to new online overbridge; • Featherbed Lane, permanent diversion to new online overbridge; • A422 Brackley Road, permanent diversion to a new offline overbridge; • Private Road at Turweston, permanent diversion to a new online overbridge; • A43 Northampton Road, permanent diversion to a new offline overbridge; and • Radstone Road, permanent diversion to a new offline overbridge. 2.3.25 Temporary impacts on roads, should they be identified, will be reported in the formal ES. Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions 2.3.26 Proposed footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions are shown on maps CT‑06-061 to CT‑06-068 and shown in Table 3.

Name Location Permanent reinstatement or diversion

Route Approximate additional journey length14

BHA/2/2 Barton Hartshorn Footpath remains open during construction with slight 200m (Public footpath) diversion during some construction activity, prior to permanent diversion.

213/7/10 Barley Fields Slight offline temporary diversion. Negligible (Public bridleway)

213/4/10 Widmore Farm Along new Widmore Farm access overbridge. 150m (Public bridleway)

303/7/10 Featherbed Lane Permanent diversion along eastern side of HS2 100m (Public footpath) alignment to meet Featherbed Lane.

303/4/20 Hollow Barn Permanent diversion over an offline overbridge. 50m (Public bridleway)

303/5/10 Viaduct at Diversion under viaduct near Westbury. 100m (Public bridleway) Westbury

WBB/17/1 South of Diversion over an offline overbridge. Negligible (Public footpath) Turweston

TUW/3/2 Turweston Diversion to Turweston Road and back via bridleway 300m (Public footpath) TUW/4/2.

TUW/4/2 Turweston Diversion over an online overbridge. Negligible (Public bridleway)

TUW/5/1 Turweston Permanent diversion along farm access track. Negligible (Public footpath)

TUW/9/2 Turweston Permanent diversion along Turweston Road over Negligible (Public footpath) green bridge.

TUW/7/1 Turweston Diversion beneath viaduct. Negligible (Public footpath)

22 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

Name Location Permanent reinstatement or diversion

Route Approximate additional journey length14

BD/008 Turweston Diversion beneath viaduct. Negligible (Public footpath)

BD/007 and BD/010 Turweston Diversion through an underpass beneath A43. 200m (Public bridleways)

AX16AX/016 Radstone Diversion over an online overbridge. Negligible (Public bridleway)

AX/015 Radstone Diversion over an offline overbridge. 100m (Public footpath)

AX/007 Radstone Diversion via Radstone Road. 300m (Public footpath)

AX/018 and AX/019 Radstone Diversion via combined offline bridleway/ 500m (Public bridleway) accommodation overbridge. AX/005 (Public footpath)

Table 3: Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions14 Restricted accesses

2.3.27 There would be no restricted accesses in the local area. Main construction works – Earthworks Earthworks

2.3.28 Major earthworks in the area would include: • A railway cutting of approximately 4km, with a depth of 5-10m, between Barton and Mixbury; • Road embankments to the east and west of the Proposed Scheme, to lift the A4421 over the route; • Railway embankments to lift the Proposed Scheme on to viaduct across the River Great Ouse west of Westbury; • A railway cutting of approximately 2km, with a depth of up to 20m, to the east of Turweston; • A railway cutting of approximately 1.5km, with a depth of up to 20m, to the north of Brackley; • Road embankments to the east and west of the Proposed Scheme for the A43 realignment; and • A railway cutting of approximately 1.3km, with a depth of up to 10m, to the west of Radstone; and associated landscaping earthworks.

2.3.29 Works would be carried out in a sequence, taking due consideration of the impacts of road and footpath closures, maintain flows within watercourses; and to reduce vehicle movements by road.

14 Diversions of less than 50m are reported as negligible in this table.

23 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

2.3.30 During design development, consideration has been given to the movement of materials. Wherever possible, excavated material would be moved directly from the area of excavation to areas of the works where fill material is required. Some processing and temporary stockpiling of fill material may be necessary if direct placement into the permanent works is not possible. Some material may require crushing and/or screening to render it acceptable for use elsewhere. Main construction works – Structures Key overbridges and embankments

2.3.31 Construction of the main structures within this area will be served by the Brackley South cutting site compound and various satellite compounds, see above.

2.3.32 Work for these would be constructed in five general phases, as follows:

• Phase 1: Assembly and commissioning of compounds would be followed by site setup works, including ground profiling, erection of workforce temporary buildings and the assembly of specialised construction plant; • Phase 2: Enabling works would include road diversions, utility diversions and temporary works; • Phase 3: The construction of the railway, embankments and cuttings, and a number of roads, footpaths and watercourses that cross the railway. Several key structures would also be constructed: the A43 at Brackley, A421 London Road, A422 Brackley Road, A4421 at Newton Purcell and a green overbridge at Turweston; • Phase 4: After the completion of the last structure, the area would be demobilised, cleared of all construction plant and associated construction compounds. This would be followed by land reinstatement. After demobilisation the auto-transformer stations would be installed; and • Phase 5: The installation and commissioning of new tracks to serve the Proposed Scheme. Rail infrastructure fit out

2.3.33 The principal elements of rail infrastructure to be constructed are track, overhead line equipment, communications equipment and power supply. The installation of track in open areas would be of standard ballasted track configuration, comprising principally of ballast, rail and sleepers. Further details are set out in Volume 1. Power supply

2.3.34 HS2 trains would draw power from overhead line equipment, requiring feeder stations and connections to the 400kV National Grid network. In addition to feeder stations, smaller auto- transformer stations would be required at more frequent intervals. The anticipated locations of proposed auto-transformer stations are:

• An auto-transformer station and access track at Tibbets Farm near Mixbury; and • An auto-transformer station and access track to the south-west side of the A43 overbridge. 2.3.35 The locations are shown on maps CT‑06-061 to 068. Landscaping and permanent fencing

2.3.36 Landscaping (i.e. earthworks and seeding and planting) would be provided to address visual and noise impacts, as well as to provide screening for intrinsically important ecological habitats and heritage features. Where appropriate, the engineering embankments and/or

24 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

cuttings would be reshaped to integrate the alignment sympathetically into the character of the surrounding landscape. The planting would reflect tree and shrub species native to the Newton Purcell to Brackley landscape. Opportunities for ecological habitat creation would be considered.

2.3.37 Permanent fencing would be erected and will be shown on plans to accompany the formal ES. Construction programme

2.3.38 A construction programme that illustrates indicative periods for each core construction activity in this area is provided in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Indicative construction programme for the area Commissioning

2.3.39 Commissioning is the process of testing the infrastructure to ensure that it operates as expected. This would take place in the year prior to opening. Further details are provided in Volume 1.

25 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

2.4 Operation of the Proposed Scheme 2.4.1 In this area, HS2 trains would run at speeds up to 360kph. During Phase One of HS2, up to 14 trains per hour (tph) would pass in each direction. This would increase to a potential maximum of 18tph in each direction should Phase Two also become fully operational.

2.4.2 The trains would be either 200m (one-unit train) or 400m (two-unit trains) long. They would run between the hours of 05:00 and 24:00 (Monday to Saturday) and between 08:00 and 24:00 (Sunday). When required, line inspections and maintenance would be conducted outside those operating hours.

2.4.3 The operation of the Proposed Scheme is described in more detail in Volume 1. 2.5 Community forum engagement 2.5.1 HS2 Ltd’s approach to engagement on the Proposed Scheme is set out in Volume 1.

2.5.2 A series of community forum meetings and discussions with individual landowners, organisations and action groups were undertaken. Community forum meetings were held on: • 26 March 2012 at Brackley Town Hall; • 20 June 2012 at Brackley Town Hall; • 5 September 2012 at Westbury Sports Pavilion; • 7 November 2012 at Westbury Sports Pavilion; and • 20 February 2013 at Westbury Sports Pavilion.

2.5.3 In addition to HS2 Ltd representatives, attendees at these community forum meetings typically included local residents (and residents groups), public representatives, representatives of local authorities and parish and district councils, action groups, affected landowners and other interested stakeholders.

2.5.4 The main themes to emerge from these meetings were: • Effects of the Proposed Scheme on the adjacent settlements, including the increased impact following revisions to the route which lessen the impact on Brackley in comparison with the original proposals; • The effects on remains of an ancient settlement in the area; • The effects on local equestrian activities; • Noise effects throughout the valley and particularly at Turweston; • The effects on the local SSSI and wildlife site at Turweston; • The visual impacts of viaducts on the local landscape and visual intrusion of overhead power lines; • Disruption of footpaths and bridleways, request for reinstatement of all rights of way and the need for land bridges for bridleways to avoid horses being startled; • How HS2 Ltd will enforce the CoCP. Notably, how construction traffic will be managed and whether local works on roads would be required to make them suitable; • Permanent road realignment proposals, including a request for assurance that these would not increase distance/journey times; • Noise including from the viaduct at Westbury. Identification of the need to understand mitigation methods for noise including new technologies; and

26 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

• Impacts on the community, including queries over compensation proposals and the value of the voluntary purchase zone (VPZ). The need for greater general clarity regarding the proposed new hardship scheme and queries regarding a number of specific variables associated with the hardship scheme. 2.6 Route section main alternatives 2.6.1 The main strategic alternatives to the Proposed Scheme are presented in Volume 1. The main local alternatives considered for the Proposed Scheme within the local area are set out within this section. Since April 2012, as part of the design development process, a series of local alternatives have been reviewed within workshops attended by engineering, planning and environmental specialists. During these workshops, the likely significant environmental effects of each design option have been reviewed. The purpose of these reviews has been to ensure that the Proposed Scheme draws the right balance between engineering requirements, cost and potential environmental impacts. Tunnel past Turweston

2.6.2 The Proposed Scheme would pass Turweston in a cutting approximately 2.3km long with a depth of up to 20m. The January 2012 announced route included a similar alignment, although there have been some minor changes to vertical alignment. The Parish Council suggested alternative proposals for this section of the route.

2.6.3 Three options were evaluated: • Option A: The Proposed Scheme, with the route in cutting adjacent to Turweston; • Option B: A ‘cut-and-cover’ or green tunnel; and • Option C: A mined tunnel.

2.6.4 HS2 Ltd acknowledges that there could be environmental benefits from eitherOption B or C – in the case of Option B the reinstatement of more land for use during the operation of the project, or in the case of Option C the avoidance of any surface impacts altogether. Both Option B and C would have lower permanent visual effects compared with Option A.

2.6.5 In addition, Options B and C would result in a decrease in noise impacts for receptors in the southern half of Turweston. However, for both options there would remain noise effects due to trains crossing the Turweston viaduct after they come out of the tunnel.

2.6.6 Option A would involve the excavation of the cutting from the surface. Option B would have a similar construction approach and so similar construction impacts. However, the reinstatement of land over the cutting to form a green tunnel for Option B would allow for restoration of the area, including the reinstatement of agricultural land, ecological habitats and PRoW.

2.6.7 Option C would deliver similar operational benefits to Option B, but would have a reduced environmental impact as it would avoid demolition of the properties associated with Options A and B. It would also retain existing landscape features, agricultural land, ecological features and PRoW. However, for Option C there would be more intense construction activity concentrated at the tunnel portals, and for a longer duration, than for Option A and B.

2.6.8 In order to construct Option C, the alignment would need to be sufficiently low to achieve an approximately 20m cover above the tunnel. As a consequence, the viaducts at either end of the tunnel would be lower providing some minor reduction in visual impacts.

2.6.9 Both Options B and C would be significantly more expensive than Options A.

27 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley

2.6.10 On balance the potential environmental benefits of Options B and C were not considered sufficient to justify the significant additional costs. Therefore Option A was adopted in the Proposed Scheme. Enclosed viaduct at Westbury

2.6.11 The Proposed Scheme would use a viaduct to pass over the River Great Ouse, at Westbury. The viaduct would be approximately 10 metres high and 250m long. The route announced in January 2012 also included a viaduct of similar proportions in this location. Westbury Parish Council has proposed an alternative option that the viaduct be covered or enclosed.

2.6.12 The proposal to cover or enclose the viaduct was suggested in order to remove views of the railway and to reduce potential noise effects. However, HS2 Ltd has not adopted artificial above ground covering along the route where it is at surface or already on elevated structures (e.g. embankment or viaduct) due to the associated additional costs and environmental impacts.

2.6.13 In this location the enclosure of the viaduct would require significant additional engineering works. In particular, the size of the enclosure to provide the required aerodynamic performance would require an increase in bridge width and a much more substantial support structure. Enclosure of the viaduct would in effect create a tunnel and would require inclusion of appropriate measures to mitigate pressure waves created by trains. These would increase construction complexity and time, with increased construction and maintenance costs for the structure.

2.6.14 The size and visual appearance of an enclosed structure would be difficult to mitigate with the result that the visual intrusion of a covered viaduct could be as significant as the impacts without it.

2.6.15 With regard to noise effects, the Proposed Scheme incorporates noise barriers to provide noise attenuation; as part of the on-going design and assessment work, the mitigation proposals for this section of the scheme will continue to be refined.

2.6.16 Given these issues it is not considered desirable to enclose the railway across the viaduct and this proposal has not been investigated further as part of the Proposed Scheme design work.

2.6.17 For these reasons HS2 Ltd has not adopted this request in the Proposed Scheme. 2.7 Proposals for further consideration 2.7.1 The following community proposals are also being considered, pending further assessment prior to issue of the formal ES:

• Featherbed Lane – Currently the Proposed Scheme would require a temporary closure of Featherbed Lane whilst the new online overbridge is constructed. This would mean a diversion for people wanting to travel between Mixbury and Westbury and Fulwell via local roads including the A4212 London Road and Fulwell Road. A proposal has been put forward that access be retained at Featherbed Lane during construction. Work is on-going to evaluate this proposal. • Cycleway between Westbury and Brackley – The local community at Westbury has requested that HS2 Ltd include a cycleway from Westbury to Brackley as an additional item in the Proposed Scheme. This would be a wider community benefit as there is not currently a cycleway in this area. This has not been included within the Proposed Scheme at this time but is still under consideration. If included, the cycleway will be reported in the formal ES.

28 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Newton Purcell to Brackley Part C: Environmental topic assessments

29 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Agriculture, forestry and soils 3 Agriculture, forestry and soils 3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of the impacts and the likely significant effects to agriculture, soils and forestry arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. The section covers soils, agricultural land quality, farm enterprises and forestry and agri-environment schemes. 3.2 Policy framework 3.2.1 Policy EN16 of the Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan seeks to prevent development on the best and most versatile (BMV) agricultural land unless there is an overriding need for that development. Policy EN16 states that where development does need to occur on agricultural land, then land in Grades 3b, 4 and 5 should be used in preference to higher-quality land. Saved Policy G3 in the South Northamptonshire Local Plan affords similar policy protection to prevent the irreversible loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land.

3.2.2 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit’s Joint Core Strategy Policy R2 also seeks to protect the best and most versatile agricultural land. Policy C6 relating to HS2 requires the proposal to minimise adverse impacts on the environment and avoid severance of agricultural holdings. 3.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 3.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the farm impacts and agricultural land quality assessments are set out in Volume 1.

3.3.2 There are no additional topic specific assumptions or limitations in this area. 3.4 Environmental baseline 3.4.1 This area covers approximately 11.8km of the Proposed Scheme, through a gently undulating land form between altitudes of around 95 to 125 metres above ordnance datum (AOD). The River Great Ouse and its tributaries are significant features of the area.

3.4.2 The underlying geology is predominantly limestone and sandstone of the Great Oolite group, with large areas of superficial glacio-fluvial deposits of sand and gravel.The geology changes from mudstone to sandstone and limestone with increasing altitude from the river valleys, whilst the river channels are developed on alluvium overlying the Whitby Mudstone formation.

3.4.3 The National Soil Map shows six soil associations (groups of soils with similar characteristics) present within the local area.

3.4.4 Most of the area has soils of the Aberford association, which is typically well-drained, fine loamy soil overlying limestone. To the south-west is a relatively small area of the Hucklesbrook association, which is characterised by well-drained coarse loamy or sandy soils overlying gravel.

3.4.5 In the south are soils of the Bishampton 2 and Essendon associations, which collectively consist of loamy or clayey topsoils over clayey subsoils. Moderately well-drained Bishampton 2 soils occur on the slopes, while Essendon soils occur on the high, flat land in the area and are typically imperfectly to poorly drained.

30 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

3.4.6 The floodplain of the River Great Ouse supports the Fladbury 1 and Ragdale associations, which are wet, clayey and poorly to very poorly drained.

3.4.7 Published national mapping shows the area to comprise mostly good to moderate Grade 3 quality agricultural land, although a large proportion of poor-quality Grade 4 agricultural land is also found, associated with land adjacent to the river channels. Detailed ALC data show that land quality is generally high in the south of the section around Newton Purcell and Finmere, with Grade 2 and some Subgrade 3a agricultural land. The land on moderate slopes on the outskirts of Brackley is also of high quality (Grades 1, 2 and 3a) and overlies an area of the Aberford soils. Based on available data supplemented by field survey the quality of the agricultural land in the study area has been assessed as 14% Grade 2, 53% Subgrade 3a and 33% Subgrade 3b.

3.4.8 The probable quality of agricultural land in the wider 4km study area is shown on the Defra “Likelihood of Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land” map.15 This indicates that the majority of agricultural land is predicted to have a 20% to 60% likelihood of being of BMV quality. Accordingly the land in the 200m-wide study area is of proportionately better quality (see map CT‑02-13).

3.4.9 The land is mainly in arable use, interspersed with blocks of grassland. Surveys have identified 18 holdings in the study area. They range in size from 2.8ha to over 1,000ha, and include the Shelswell Estate at Newton Purcell.

3.4.10 Also within the study area are two farm shops, one that appears to be occasional at Newton Purcell and one at Turweston as well as one farm-based holiday letting business (Ilett’s Farm). There is an equine stud and a polo pitch on two of the holdings at Turweston and a point-to- point racecourse at Whitfield. Holdings affected by the Proposed Scheme are summarised in Table 4.

15 Defra (2005) Likelihood of Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land.

31 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

Holding Primary farming activities16

Manor Farm, Newton Purcell Arable

Shelswell Estate, Newton Purcell Arable

Warren Farm, Newton Purcell Equestrian grazing

Oaks Farm, Newton Purcell No data available

Tibbetts Farm, Mixbury Arable

Westbury Mill Farm, Westbury Arable

Grovehill Farm, Brackley Equestrian grazing

Unnamed land at Brackley Arable

Oakley Farm, Brackley Arable

Whitfield House Farm, Whitfield Beef, Sheep

Oatleys Farm, Turweston Equestrian grazing

Turweston Glebe, Turweston Beef, Sheep

Bellabeg, Turweston Equestrian

Unnamed land at Turweston Arable

Versions Farm, Turweston Beef, Sheep

Manor Farm Whitfield No data available

Ilett’s Farm, Brackley Dairy

Radstone Manor, Radstone Arable

Table 4: Holdings affected by the Proposed Scheme16

3.4.11 There are a number of small blocks of non-commercial woodland in the study area, many associated with former railway alignments and highways. A commercial block of poplars has recently been planted at Tibbets Farm.

3.4.12 Most of the land is entered in the Entry Level Environmental Stewardship Scheme, which encourages environmental management practices such as hedgerow management, buffer strips and low input grassland. The whole of the area is designated as a nitrate vulnerable zone, within which measures have been introduced to reduce the potential for nitrogen losses from agricultural sources into watercourses.

3.4.13 In assessing the impact of the Proposed Scheme on farms it is important to recognise that the ability of a farm to adapt to change depends, in part, upon the size of the holding, its layout and fragmentation (both before and after the Proposed Scheme) and the enterprises operated. In this local area there is a dairy farm, which is likely to be of high sensitivity to change, 11 farms likely to be of medium sensitivity and six holdings likely to be of low sensitivity. The equestrian activities undertaken – the horse breeding, polo and point-to-point racing – can be highly sensitive to loss of land, and/or noise and dust. 3.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

3.5.1 HS2 Ltd would require all of its contractors to comply with the CoCP, which would include the following measures:

16 Non-commercial holdings are indicated.

32 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

• Measures to maintain farm access and avoid traffic over land which is used temporarily during construction; • Ensuring that each affected farm holding would receive specific and relevant liaison regarding the construction activities that would affect the holding; • Ensuring that agricultural land and corresponding soil quality can be reinstated post construction where this is the agreed end use; • Ensuring that the impacts on infrastructure and livestock for individual farm holdings would be reduced as far as reasonably practicable; • Ensuring that there is appropriate access provided to areas of severed land during and post-construction; and • Ensuring the appropriate handling and conservation of soil stockpiles to allow them to be re-used without any substantive reduction in long-term productive capability.

3.5.2 Soil resources would be stripped at the outset of the construction phase and stored. Where land is required temporarily for construction of the Proposed Scheme, stored soils would be used to reinstate those sites to a pre-construction agricultural condition. Soils removed from the area of permanent works would be utilised, where reasonably practicable, in the construction of the Proposed Scheme. The soil associations affected most extensively by temporary works are Arrow and Brockhurst 1, although they differ in their sensitivity to disturbance and would require separate handling and storage to ensure that any effect is negligible, and therefore not significant.

3.5.3 Aspects of the Proposed Scheme that would assist to reduce effects on agricultural resources include: • Four dedicated or shared agricultural crossings to enable access to severed agricultural land for Shelswell Estate, Tibbets Farm, Ilett’s Farm and Radstone Manor Farm; and • Agricultural access under the Westbury and Turweston viaducts.

3.5.4 Loss of forestry land would be mitigated by replanting in nearby locations. Such locations would include areas of agricultural land that are no longer agriculturally viable as a result of severance caused by the Proposed Scheme. The loss of forestry land would remain a significant effect during the construction phase, but would reduce to insignificant as planting matures.

3.5.5 The agricultural land quality in the area is mixed, with two-thirds of the land affected likely to be of BMV quality. Whilst much of this will be restored after construction, the effect would still be significant and adverse, both temporarily and permanently.

3.5.6 During construction 14 farms would be likely to experience a significant effect in terms of property demolition, land loss and severance. Based on the information currently available, it is likely that the following holdings would experience significant effects during construction: • Warren Farm, Newton Purcell, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Oaks Farm due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed and the demolition of farm buildings; • Tippetts Farm, Mixbury due the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Westbury Mill Farm due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed;

33 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

• Oakley Farm due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Whitfield House Farm due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Oatleys Farm due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed and the loss of a polo pitch; • Turweston Glebe due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Bellabeg would cease due to the loss of land and all the farm and residential buildings; • Unnamed land at Turweston due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Versions Farm due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Manor Farm Whitfield due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed and the loss of a recently constructed point-to-point course; • Iletts Farm due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed, the demolition of farm and residential buildings and severance; and • Radstone Manor due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed and severance.

3.5.7 The diversified holiday letting business (at Ilett’s Farm) would be likely to cease due to demolition during construction.

3.5.8 There are potentially noise or dust sensitive enterprises in the study area, including the equestrian enterprises at Turweston, and there could be some adverse effect from noise affecting the enjoyment of horse riding in the area.

3.5.9 The construction process could lead to transportation of weed seeds and plants along the route. Since the land affected is largely in agricultural use there is the potential for the spread of existing weeds; particularly invasive and damaging weeds as listed in the Weeds Act 1959 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.17,18 Defra has powers to require occupiers of land on which they are growing to take action to prevent their spreading. Application of control measures within the CoCP would regulate this potential effect. Likely residual significant effects

3.5.10 Although the mitigation outlined above would reduce effects, permanent residual significant effects would remain in this area, including a significant permanent loss of best and most versatile agricultural land.

3.5.11 At the height of construction there would be a significant effect on 14 holdingsdescribed ( and reported above) but following the construction phase it is anticipated that much of the land would be restored and returned to agricultural use and the permanent effects would be reduced. One holding would be likely to cease during construction due to residential demolition and land loss (Bellabeg) and 17 holdings would remain post construction. Based on available data there would be significant permanent residual effects for: • Warren Farm, Newton Purcell due to the proportion of the holding that would be permanently removed; • Oaks Farm due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be permanently removed and the demolition of farm buildings;

17 Weeds Act 1959 (7 & 8 Eliz II c. 54). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 18 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (c.69). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

34 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

• Whitfield House Farm due to the proportion of the holding that would be permanently removed; • Oatleys Farm due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be permanently removed and the loss of the polo pitch; • Manor Farm Whitfield due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be permanently removed and the loss of the point-to-point course; • Ilett’s Farm due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be permanently removed, the demolition of farm and residential buildings and severance; and • Radstone Manor due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be permanently removed and severance.

3.5.12 Based on current data, the other holdings would be unlikely to experience significant permanent residual effects. Further mitigation

3.5.13 No further mitigation is currently proposed. 3.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

3.6.1 All run-off from the operational area would be captured in designated drainage arrangements capable of control prior to discharge to watercourses.

3.6.2 Comparison with other railway and highway land indicates that all corridors of transport infrastructure have the potential to support weed growth which may prejudice agricultural interests where weeds can spread to adjoining land.

3.6.3 The potential for the establishment and spread of weeds from the operational area would be addressed through the adoption of an appropriate land management regime by the network operator which identifies and remedies areas of weed growth which might threaten adjoining agricultural interests. Likely residual significant effects

3.6.4 There are not considered to be any significant residual effects associated with the operation of the Proposed Scheme.

35 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Air quality 4 Air quality 4.1 Introduction 4.1.1 This section of the report provides an assessment of the impacts and likely significant effects on air quality arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme, covering nitrogen dioxide (NO2), fine particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5) and dust.19 Emissions of these pollutants are typically associated with construction activities and equipment and road traffic. 4.2 Policy framework 4.2.1 Policy 36 of the East Midlands Plan aims to encourage plans, programmes and proposals that contribute to reducing air pollution in the region.

4.2.2 Policy EN5 of the Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan seeks to prevent development that would have an adverse impact on air quality, including that caused by traffic generation and Saved Policy ENV1 of the Cherwell Local Plan seeks to prevent development that would cause materially detrimental levels of air pollution. Aylesbury Vale District Local Plan Saved Policies GP.8 and GP.95 seek to protect public amenity, preventing development that would unreasonably harm any aspect of the amenity of nearby residents. Saved Policy G3 of the South Northamptonshire Local Plan seeks to prevent development that is likely to cause problems of air pollution.

4.2.3 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit’s Joint Core Strategy Policy BN9 requires development to demonstrate that they provide opportunities to minimise and where possible reduce pollution, maintaining or improving air quality in accordance with national air quality standards and best practice. Policy C6 relating to HS2 requires the proposal to minimise adverse impacts on the environment and manage the construction to minimise the impact on communities and the environment.

4.2.4 In addition, local and regional guidance relevant to this assessment includes South Northamptonshire Air Quality Updating and Screening Assessment 2010; Cherwell District Air Quality Updating and Screening Assessment 2010; and Aylesbury District Air Quality Progress Report 2010. 4.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 4.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the air quality assessment are set out in Volume 1.

4.3.2 There are no additional topic specific assumptions or limitations in this area. 4.4 Environmental baseline 4.4.1 The environmental baseline reported in this section represents the environmental conditions identified within the study area. The air quality is typical of rural areas in Buckinghamshire and Northamptonshire, where sources of airborne pollution are few and are largely confined to road traffic in towns and on the major roads.

4.4.2 Estimates of background air quality have been obtained by Defra for 2011 and future years (2017 and 2026). These data are estimated for 1km grid squares for nitrogen oxides (NOx), NO2, PM10 and PM2.5.

19 PM2.5 and PM10 describe two size fractions of airborne particles that can be inhaled and therefore are of concern for human health. The designations refer to particles of less than 2.5 and 10 microns in diameter.

36 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Air quality

4.4.3 There are no automatic monitoring stations present in the area operated by any of the local authorities and diffusion tube sites measuring concentrations of NO2 are restricted to a small number of roadside locations outside the study area.

4.4.4 The available data indicate that the area currently experiences concentrations of NO2, PM2.5 and PM10 that meet limit values and national objectives. This view is supported by all the local authorities’ most recent Review and Assessment reports, which conclude that there are no requirements for Air Quality Management Areas in the study area.

4.4.5 The nearest Air Quality Management Areas declared for NO2 are in Towcester and Aylesbury. Both of these towns are too far from the proposed route and proposed construction routes to be affected by construction activities and associated traffic.

4.4.6 Potential receptors are primarily those residential properties close to construction activity and alongside roads where traffic flows would change as a consequence of construction activity or re-alignment of roads. Notable receptors in close proximity to construction activity are residential properties at Barleyfields Farm, Station Cottages, Tibbets Farm, Sundale and Hall Farm. In addition, the route crosses the Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI, approximately 1km north of Brackley, whose calcicolous plants are sensitive to nitrogen and dust deposition. 4.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

4.5.1 Impacts from the construction of the Proposed Scheme could arise from dust-generating activities and emissions from construction traffic. As such, the assessment of construction impacts has been undertaken for human receptors sensitive to dust and exposure to NO2 and PM10, as well as ecological receptors sensitive to dust and nitrogen deposition.

4.5.2 Air quality would be controlled and managed during construction through the route-wide implementation of the measures set out in Section 7 of the draft CoCP, where appropriate. Measures would include: • Contractors being required to control dust, air pollution, odour and exhaust emissions during construction works; • Inspecting and monitoring undertaken after consultation with Aylesbury Vale, Cherwell and South Northamptonshire District Councils to assess the effectiveness of the measures taken to prevent dust and air pollutant emissions; • Cleaning (including watering) of haul routes and designated vehicle waiting areas to suppress dust; • Keeping soil stockpiles away from sensitive receptors (including historical features), watercourses and surface drains where reasonably practicable, also taking into account the prevailing wind direction relative to sensitive receptors; • Using enclosures to contain dust emitted from construction activities; and • Undertaking soil spreading, seeding and planting of completed earthworks.

4.5.3 In the Newton Purcell to Brackley area, dust-generating activities would comprise construction activities related to the viaducts at Westbury and Turweston, the overbridge across the A43 and a series of cuttings and embankments. Construction activities at these sites with a potential to generate dust emissions include: earthworks required for the preparation of the ground; bulk excavation; processing and stockpiling of fill materials; construction of structural embankments; landscaping; the construction and the use of

37 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Air quality

construction compounds; construction of permanent replacement road infrastructure and bridges; and potential track out of mud and dirt from the site onto local roads.

4.5.4 The assessment of effects arising from dust emissions during construction has concluded that the impact would be negligible for residential receptors and minor adverse for the Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI. None of these effects would be significant.

4.5.5 Construction activity could also affect local air quality through the additional traffic generated on local roads as a result of construction traffic routes and changes to traffic patterns arising from temporary road diversions. Examination of the changes in traffic flows for017 2 along the affected roads has shown that they are too small to meet the criteria required for further assessment and consequently it has been concluded that any additional contribution from construction traffic would have no significant effects. Likely residual significant effects

4.5.6 The methods outlined within the draft CoCP to control and manage potential air quality effects are considered effective in this location. Hence, residual effects would not be considered likely. 4.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

4.6.1 Impacts from the operation of the Proposed Scheme relate mainly to changes in the nature of traffic. There are no direct atmospheric emissions from the operation of trains that would cause an impact on air quality.

4.6.2 Traffic data in the Newton Purcell to Brackley area have been screened to identify roads that required further assessment and to confirm the likely effect of the change in emissions from vehicles using those roads in 2026.

4.6.3 There are no changes that meet the criteria for undertaking further and detailed assessment and consequently it has been concluded that there would be no significant effects. Likely residual significant effects

4.6.4 No residual effects would be anticipated for air quality in this area during operation of the Proposed Scheme.

38 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Community 5 Community 5.1 Introduction 5.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of impacts and likely significant effects on local communities resulting from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. 5.2 Policy framework 5.2.1 A number of policies at the local level afford protection to community facilities, social infrastructure, open space and public rights of way. They seek to: • Prevent the loss of community buildings, facilities and services (Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan Policy S26, Cherwell Local Plan Saved Policy S29, Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policies GP.32 and GP.93, and South Northamptonshire Local Plan Policy R4); • Prevent the loss of open space and deal with its re-provision (Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan Policies R7 and R7a, and Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policy GP.88); • Prevent the loss of allotments in the district (Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan Policy R17, and Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policy GP.92); and • Ensure the safeguarding of public rights of way or suitable alternatives where severance/ diversion is necessary (Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan Policy R4 and Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policy GP.84).

5.2.2 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit’s Joint Core Strategy20 Policy RC1 seeks provision of services, facilities and infrastructure in rural areas. Policy C6 seeks to minimise adverse impacts on the environment, the local economy and local communities and maximise any benefits that arise from the ProposedScheme.

5.2.3 Within the South Northamptonshire District Council area there are a number of housing allocations in the Brackley area taken from the South Northamptonshire Local Plan. These areas, which are allocated for the building of additional residential units include: • Three sites at Halse Road – 7.1ha, 4.0ha and 1.0ha. 5.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 5.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the community assessment are set out in Volume 1.

5.3.2 There are no additional topic specific assumptions or limitations in this area.

5.3.3 For this area it is assumed that effects relating to severance of public rights of way (PRoW) (public footpaths and bridleways) and highway and pedestrian diversions are assessed within the traffic chapter. However, where PRoW are considered a destination in themselves as a recreational resource, they are considered within this community assessment. Within the Newton Purcell to Brackley area this includes the Westbury Circular Ride. Where impacts on open space and PRoW are considered, these have been informed by open space and PRoW usage and quality surveys. 5.4 Environmental baseline 5.4.1 The study area includes the area of land within the construction boundary (comprising of the temporary and permanent land take), as well as a suitable additional area as relevant to inform the respective environmental topics upon which the assessment is based.

20 West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit (2012) Joint Core Strategy.

39 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Community

5.4.2 The baseline study area and baseline data will be further refined in light of on-going assessment work as part of the formal ES process.

5.4.3 The area is predominantly rural in character. The route would run from the south of Newton Purcell, passing the villages of Mixbury and Turweston and the town of Brackley to the west, and the villages of Finmere and Westbury to the east. It would finish to the north of the village of Radstone. Outside the small communities, there are scattered pockets of rural properties in areas utilised primarily for agriculture. The town of Buckingham is located approximately 6km to the east of the alignment.

5.4.4 The route is mainly in cutting but there are also some sections of embankment and viaduct. This baseline summarises the community resources in the study area in relation to the design features along the route. A4421 overbridge and realignment

5.4.5 The Old Rectory Dental Practice is found in Newton Purcell, just outside of the temporary land take. Near to this, and still outside of the temporary land take, to the south of Lamas Close, lies St Michael’s Church.

5.4.6 The Shelswell Inn, north of Newton Purcell on the A4421, lies within the temporary land take.

5.4.7 Local footpaths, both of which would cross the route, comprise: • Footpath 213/7/10, which connects Finmere with Newton Purcell and the site of the medieval village of Shelswell (via a number of other footpaths); and • Footpath 213/4/10, which connects Finmere with footpaths that lead through the Mixbury Plantation and Diggings Wood. The route east of Mixbury

5.4.8 The footpath 303/7/10 connects the village of Finmere with the village of Mixbury (via Church Lane) and would cross the route. Mossycorner Lane (which is a designated bridleway) branches north, off Church Lane near Mixbury, and would pass through permanent and temporary land take before it connects with the Westbury Circular Ride within the temporary land take (nearer the Brackley Road construction site). The Westbury Circular Ride (a promoted route including bridleway) then continues into Westbury, thereby connecting Mixbury with Westbury.

5.4.9 Mossycorner Lane passes through Mossycorner Spinney, a privately owned woodland. A422 Brackley Road realignment and construction site

5.4.10 The Beachborough Independent School for nursery to 13-year-olds is found in Westbury, outside of the permanent and temporary land take, and at the edge of the study area. It has provision for 300 pupils, some of whom board at the school. Surrounding the school are a number of cricket pitches (including cricket net provision and pavilion), four tennis courts and an athletics track.

5.4.11 The Westbury Cricket Club lies just south of Brackley Road as it enters Westbury. It falls just outside the temporary land take. To the north of Brackley Road in this same area are a number of allotment plots, all falling outside of the temporary land take but within the study area. A small playground lies between the cricket ground and Main Street, with a climbing frame and swings.

5.4.12 Along Main Street in Westbury, is the Westbury Village Club, which would be outside the permanent and temporary land take but within the study area.

40 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Community

5.4.13 The Westbury Circular Ride, a sign-posted footpath and bridleway, would run through the permanent and temporary land take, linking Westbury with footpaths into Brackley. It also passes through woodland west of Westbury, which itself lies within the permanent and temporary land take (and through which the Great Ouse River also runs). The right of way passes through this woodland which is one of only a few patches of small woodland in an area of wider countryside, although the woodland is not publicly accessible.

5.4.14 Footpath WBB/17/1 would cross the route permanent and temporary land take just to the south of the A422 Brackley Road. These footpaths provide a connection between Westbury and Brackley. Turweston utilities diversion and cutting works

5.4.15 The Turweston Village Hall would lie outside of the permanent and temporary land take, although at the edge of the study area. It holds various classes for the local community and is also the location of Tiddlywinks Nursery School.

5.4.16 A large part of the playing field in Turweston, which includes a cricket ground, football pitch and a basketball court, would lie within the temporary land take with a small part of the north- eastern corner falling within the permanent land take. A playground is found in the south-west corner of the playing field, which would not fall into the permanent land take or temporary land take. The Stratton Arms pub lies next to the playing field, outside of the permanent and temporary land take but within the study area.

5.4.17 St Mary’s Church, lying west off Main Street in Turweston, would not be within the permanent land take or temporary land take but lies at the very edge of the study area.

5.4.18 Footpaths TUW/3/1 and TUW/3/2 provide a connection from Westbury and Turweston (also bisecting the Westbury Circular Ride south of Turweston). They would pass through the permanent and temporary land take. Further north along the route, the Westbury Circular Ride crosses TUW/3/2 within Turweston, just before it branches into another footpath (TUW/5/1) that heads south-east. The Westbury Circular Ride meanwhile continues north-east (through the temporary land take) and connects to Ash Furlong Lane.

5.4.19 To the north of Turweston, the footpath TUW/7/1 would cross both the permanent and temporary land take as it connects Turweston with the village of Whitfield. The footpath runs alongside an area of woodland and scrubland, north of Turweston Manor for approximately 1.4km (although the site is privately owned). A43 Northampton Road overbridge

5.4.20 On the other side of the route, within the village of Whitfield, the St John the Evangelist Church, lies off The Avenue, along with Whitfield Village Hall. Both these facilities would lie outside of the permanent and temporary land take but within the study area. Also in Whitfield is The Sun Inn, a public house on Farrer Close (just off The Avenue).

5.4.21 South west of the village of Whitfield lies Whitfield Racecourse. Part of the western section of this racecourse would lie with the permanent and temporary land take as the proposed route would pass through it. The racecourse has been operating since 2009 and plays host to a variety of local and national fixtures as well as horse shows.

5.4.22 Footpath BD/008 runs roughly parallel to the A43 Northampton Road, but to the south. It connects the village of Whitfield with Brackley, and passes through the permanent and temporary land take.

5.4.23 The bridleway BD/010, originating in Turweston, connects with bridleway BD/007 at the A43 and would therefore pass through the temporary land take. BD/007 then connects with both

41 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Community

bridleway AX/016, which would cross the route and runs adjacent to Fox Covert, and also AX14, which runs parallel to the route within the temporary land take until it connects with Radstone Road. This network of bridleways and footpaths connect Turweston with Radstone. Radstone Road realignment

5.4.24 The Church of St Lawrence at Radstone is a Grade 1 listed building and serves Radstone and surrounding area.

5.4.25 The group of footpaths and bridleways mentioned in the section above (A43 Northampton Road overbridge) would also be within the permanent and temporary land take associated with these works. In addition footpaths AX/015 and AX/007 would cross the route in the vicinity of Radstone, along with bridleways AX/019, AX/018 and AX/005 (the latter two connecting Radstone via the bridleway AN38 with the village of Halse).

5.4.26 To the north-west of Radstone, footpaths AN20 and AX6, along with bridleway AN37 run roughly parallel to the route through the temporary land take. 5.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation Residential property

5.5.1 The Proposed Scheme would result in the demolition of four dwellings overall in the Newton Purcell to Brackley area as described below: • Station House on the A4421 in Newton Purcell would be demolished as part of the construction of the new A4421 overbridge. This would be a minor adverse effect on the community of Newton Purcell; • Two dwellings (Parkside and Bellabeg Stables, which includes a residential property) would be demolished for the construction of the cutting at Turweston. This would be a minor adverse effect on the community of Turweston; and • Ilett’s Farm on Northampton Road would be demolished for the construction of the cutting at Brackley. This would be a minor adverse effect on the community at Brackley.

5.5.2 The effects on communities are not considered to be significant as the demolitions comprise a maximum of two properties in any location. Community infrastructure

5.5.3 In Turweston approximately 40% of a playing field would be required temporarily for the diversion of utilities (electricity) and construction of cutting for the Proposed Scheme. The playing field includes a children’s playground, football pitch and a basketball post and is a well-used resource for residents of Turweston. The remaining section of the field (which would include the playground) would remain available for use throughout construction, and the majority of the playing field (with the exception of approximately 1,600m2 in the north eastern corner) would be reinstated on completion of the works. However, as the construction of the cutting would take approximately 17 months; beginning in year three of the construction programme and with no comparable local alternatives (the nearest facility is in Brackley), the effect on the community of Turweston would be moderate adverse and is, therefore, significant.

5.5.4 South west of the village of Whitfield lies Whitfield Racecourse. The Proposed Scheme would cross through the western section of the racecourse site resulting in the permanent loss of approximately a quarter of its length. Given that the viability of the racecourse would be

42 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Community

permanently compromised and there are not any local alternatives, and pending the outcomes of on-going discussions, the effect on the local communities ofWhitfield and Brackley would be moderate adverse. Public rights of way and open space

5.5.5 The Westbury Circular Ride would be crossed twice by the Proposed Scheme, once south-west of Westbury and once at Turweston, but appropriate temporary and permanent diversions would be put in place as part of the scheme to mitigate this. As such, there would be no significant adverse effects on PRoW associated with land take or isolation. There would also be no significant adverse effects on other open spaces due to land take or isolation. Amenity

5.5.6 In the formal ES the incidence of significant effects, including in-combination effects, on community amenity will be assessed. Likely residual significant effects

5.5.7 The temporary and permanent loss of land at the playing field inTurweston and the permanent loss of a section of Whitfield Racecourse would be residual significant effects in the absence of further mitigation.

5.5.8 Multiple (in-combination) community effects will be considered, and where significant reported in the formal ES. 5.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

5.6.1 Within this study area, effects on the community resulting from the operation of the Proposed Scheme could potentially arise from changes to amenity.

5.6.2 The assessment of effects on amenity will draw upon other technical disciplines e.g.( air quality, noise and vibration, visual, transport and traffic). The presence of in-combination impacts from these other disciplines could result in significant amenity effects on a number of community facilities and resources in the area. This will be reported in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

5.6.3 Multiple (in-combination) community effects will be identified as part of the formal ES.

43 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Cultural heritage 6 Cultural heritage 6.1 Introduction 6.1.1 This section of the report presents a summary of the impacts and likely significant effects on heritage assets and the historic environment as a result of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. Heritage assets comprise: • Archaeological and palaeo-environmental remains; • Historic landscapes; and • Historic buildings and the built environment. 6.2 Policy framework 6.2.1 Various policies exist at the local level that seek to protect, preserve and enhance heritage assets including Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas, sites of archaeological importance, historic parks and gardens, such as: • Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan Policies EN39, EN40, EN43 and EN47; • Cherwell Local Plan Saved Policies C18, C23 and C25; • Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policies GP53, GP59 and GP6; and • South Northamptonshire Local Plan Policies EV9, EV10, EV11 and EV19.

6.2.2 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit’s Joint Core Strategy Policy C6 states that the design and construction of the Proposed Scheme must minimise adverse impacts on the environment, the local economy and local communities. In addition Policy BN5 seeks to preserve and enhance features of the historic environment.

6.2.3 In addition, local and regional guidance relevant to this assessment includes: Aylesbury Vale Landscape Characterisation; Northamptonshire Historic Landscape Characterisation 2007; and Buckinghamshire Historic Landscape Characterisation 2006.21,22,23 6.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 6.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the cultural heritage assessment are set out in Volume 1.

6.3.2 No further assumptions have been made for the assessment specifically for this area. 6.4 Environmental baseline 6.4.1 Human activity through all periods within the study area has largely been concentrated along the principal valley systems, including the valley of the Great Ouse. Drift deposits of alluvium are recorded within the Great Ouse valley and its tributaries, and there is the potential for waterlogged and other deposits of palaeo-environmental interest in these areas. Prehistoric settlement in the study area was probably focused on the higher ground overlooking these valleys, including the watersheds between the Great Ouse, Tovey and Cherwell. Prehistoric settlement has been recorded at Finmere Quarry, a multi-period site that includes Bronze Age and Iron Age and Roman phases of settlement. A Roman road running between Alcester and Towcester is also recorded within the study area.

21 Aylesbury Vale District Council (2008), Landscape Characterisation. 22 Northamptonshire County Council (2007) Historic Landscape Characterisation. 23 Buckinghamshire & Milton Keynes (2006) Historic Landscape Characterisation.

44 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Cultural heritage

6.4.2 The medieval landscape was characterised by open strip fields, nucleated settlements and rural manors. By the time of the Norman Conquest the present settlement pattern had probably developed, focused on the settlements at Newton Purcell, Finmere, Westbury, Turweston, Whitfield, Brackley and Radstone. The landscape pattern of open fields remained in place until the post-medieval period, when the current pattern was established as a result of parliamentary and piecemeal enclosure.

6.4.3 Within the area of study only the following designated and non-designated assets are recorded. Designated assets

6.4.4 Designated assets are represented on maps CT‑01-31 to CT‑01-34.

6.4.5 No designated assets lie within the temporary land take or permanent land take.

6.4.6 The following designated features are located within the draft ZTV (see section 9.3): • The scheduled monument of Beaumont Castle; • The Church of St Lawrence at Radstone, a Grade I listed building; • Four Grade II* listed buildings (Church of All Saints at Mixbury; the Church of St Augustine at Westbury; Church of St Mary at Turweston; and Turweston House); • Four conservation areas (Mixbury; Brackley; Westbury; and Turweston); and • Fifty-two Grade II listed buildings (18 within the historic settlement at Turweston; 11 at Finmere; eight at Westbury; seven at Newton Purcell; four at Mixbury; three at Whitfield; and one farm building). Non‐designated assets

6.4.7 Within the area of permanent and temporary land take the following assets have been identified: • Potential buried archaeological remains of medieval date at Radstone; • Potential buried archaeological remains of Roman date at Newton Purcell; • Potential buried archaeological remains of prehistoric and Roman date at Brackley Fields; • Potential buried archaeological remains of prehistoric, Roman and Saxon date at Sundale Farm; • Potential buried archaeological remains of prehistoric, Roman and Saxon date to the east and north of Fox Covert; • The remains of a post-medieval windmill at Turweston; and • Ilett’s Farm, a 19th century farm building. 6.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

6.5.1 The construction works have the potential to affect heritage assets. Impacts would occur to assets within the construction boundary, as well as the settings of heritage assets within the ZTV.

6.5.2 The draft CoCP sets out the provisions that would be adopted to control effects on cultural heritage assets. The provisions include:

45 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Cultural heritage

• Management measures to control damage to assets that are to be retained within the area of temporary land take and the preparation of project wide principles, standards and techniques for works affecting heritage assets; • A programme of archaeological investigation and recording to be undertaken prior to construction works affecting the assets; and • A programme of historic building investigation and recording to be undertaken prior to modification or demolition of the assets.

6.5.3 In addition the following measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme to avoid or reduce impacts on heritage assets: • The siting of the Proposed Scheme within cutting as it runs past Newton Purcell, which will help to screen views from the historic core of the village including the Church of St Michael and the other listed buildings; • Limitations to landscape earthworks and the alignment of the overbridge at Widmore to avoid direct impacts to the Grade II Listed Widmore Farm; and • Provision of earthwork bunds to partially screen views of the Proposed Scheme from the Grade I Listed Church of St Lawrence at Radstone.

6.5.4 Assets that would experience a significant physical effect in this area are: • Ilett’s Farm, a non-designated building of low heritage value, which would be demolished; • Removal of potential buried archaeological remains of prehistoric to post-medieval date, of moderate value, at: ȃȃ Radstone; ȃȃ Newton Purcell; ȃȃ Brackley Fields; ȃȃ Sundale Farm; ȃȃ North and east of Fox Covert; and ȃȃ Turweston.

6.5.5 The settings of the following specific heritage assets would experience significant effects: • The Grade II listed Widmore Farm, which would be affected by changes to the character and context of its surroundings; • Listed buildings within the historic settlement of Turweston, which will be affected through changes to their outlook over the surrounding landscape; and • The Church of St Lawrence, within the historic settlement of Radstone, which will be affected by the introduction of the Proposed Scheme into the adjacent rural landscape, changing the character and context.

6.5.6 The construction of the Proposed Scheme would not have an impact on any other identified heritage asset within the permanent and temporary land take and would not have an impact on the setting of any other designated asset identified with theZTV. Likely residual significant effects

6.5.7 The impacts of the construction phase on the heritage assets through setting changes are temporary, and therefore not considered to result in residual significant effects.

46 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Cultural heritage

6.5.8 Although a programme of archaeological and historic building investigation and recording contributes to knowledge gain, such works would not fully mitigate the effect or reduce the impact on heritage assets. The following effects would therefore remain: • The demolition of 19th century Ilett’s Farm; and • Potential removal buried archaeological remains of prehistoric to medieval date at the locations described above. Further mitigation

6.5.9 No further mitigation measures have been identified at this time. 6.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

6.6.1 There would be no effects on buried archaeological remains arising from operation.

6.6.2 The introduction of the Proposed Scheme into an area of existing open landscape has the potential to introduce impacts on the setting of the heritage assets. The Proposed Scheme includes elevated sections on embankment and viaduct, together with re-alignment of the existing highway infrastructure.

6.6.3 The following specific heritage assets would experience significant effects through changes to their setting: • The presence of a new overbridge close to the Grade II listed Widmore Farm which will change the context of the structure; and • The presence of a large overbridge at Radstone, close to the Grade I listed Church of St Lawrence, affecting its outlook across the surrounding landscape. Likely residual significant effects

6.6.4 Even with earthworks and planting, the presence of the Proposed Scheme will result in a significant residual effect at the Church of St Lawrence at Radstone, where the context of the church and surrounding settlement will be permanently altered. Further mitigation

6.6.5 No further mitigation measures have been identified at this time.

47 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Ecology 7 Ecology 7.1 Introduction 7.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of the predicted impacts and significant effects upon species and habitats as a consequence of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. This includes effects upon sites recognised or designated on the basis of their importance for nature conservation. 7.2 Policy framework 7.2.1 The following local policies seek to protect and enhance ecological resources: • Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan Policy EN24 and Cherwell Local Plan Saved Policy C1 aim to prevent development that would result in damage to or loss of areas of designated wildlife importance and sites of ecological value; • Policy EN22 of the Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan seeks to retain and enhance features of nature conservation value, whilst Saved Policy C2 of the Cherwell Local Plan and EN25 of Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan seek to prevent development that would adversely affect protected species or habitats; • Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policies GP.40 and GP.39 seek to retain trees and hedgerows of wildlife importance and protect them during construction; and • South Northamptonshire Local Plan Saved Policy G3 seeks to prevent development that would adversely affect sites of nature conservation value, and provides specific protection for County Wildlife Sites in Policy EV24. Saved Policy EV25 seeks to prevent development that would adversely affect the nature conservation or value of dismantled railways or waterways.

7.2.2 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit’s Joint Core Strategy Policy C6 states that the design and construction of the Proposed Scheme will be expected to deliver high quality design and minimise the impact on the environment. In addition Policies BN1, BN2 and BN3 seek to manage and enhance green infrastructure, biodiversity and woodland areas.

7.2.3 In addition, regional guidance relevant to the assessment is provided in the Buckinghamshire & Milton Keynes Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP).24 7.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 7.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the ecological assessment are set out in Volume 1.

7.3.2 The current assessment draws on existing information gathered from national organisations and from regional and local sources including: • For Buckinghamshire, data were received from Buckinghamshire County Council, the Berks, Bucks and Oxon Wildlife Trust, the North Bucks Bat Group and the Buckinghamshire Amphibian and Reptile recorder; • For Oxfordshire, data were received from Oxfordshire County Council, the Thames Valley Biological Records Centre and the Banbury Ornithological Society; and

24 Buckinghamshire & Milton Keynes (2009) Buckinghamshire & Milton Keynes Biodiversity Action Plan.

48 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Ecology

• For Northamptonshire, data were received from Northamptonshire County Council, the Central Area Anglian branch of the Environment Agency, the Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northampton Wildlife Trust, and the Northamptonshire Biodiversity Records Centre.

7.3.3 Field surveys undertaken to date have been limited to locations where landowner permission has been obtained or areas accessible to the public. They include (but are not limited to): habitat and hedgerow surveys; badger surveys; breeding bird surveys, and bat activity surveys.

7.3.4 Surveys will continue during 2013 and will include (but are not limited to) the following, subject to access: • The continuation of the surveys listed in paragraph 7.3.3 above; • Fish surveys, River Corridor Surveys, and River Habitat Surveys in the River Great Ouse; and • Ditch vegetation surveys in the Chetwode and Brackley areas. 7.4 Environmental baseline 7.4.1 This section presents the environmental baseline that is relevant to the consideration of impacts and effects reported in Sections 7.5 and 7.6. Details of the environmental baseline for the full search areas investigated in support of the ecological assessment will be provided in the formal ES.

7.4.2 Land within and adjacent to the Proposed Scheme in this area mainly consists of arable and pasture with numerous intact hedgerows. There are two disused railways near Westbury, one near Helmdon and several woods close to the Proposed Scheme. Wetland habitats include the River Great Ouse, and grazing marsh near Turweston.

7.4.3 Statutory and non-statutory designated sites are shown on maps CT‑01-31 to CT‑01-34 and CT‑02-13.

7.4.4 One SSSI is present within 500m of the Proposed Scheme, namely the Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI, which would be crossed by the Proposed Scheme near the village of Radstone. The site is designated for lowland calcicolous grassland, a habitat of principal importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006)25 and is also a local BAP habitat. It supports locally scarce plant species and invertebrates and is particularly important for butterflies including the small blue, a species of principal importance. This is the last known site for this species in Northamptonshire. The SSSI is also important for the nationally scarce wood white and five nationally declining butterfly species. It is of national value based on the features for which it is designated.

7.4.5 Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) and Biological Notification Sites (BNS), which are located within the extent of or adjacent to the Proposed Scheme or are considered potentially subject to significant effects, are relevant to the assessment. There are two such sites in this area of the route: • Turweston Manor Grassland LWS – The southern end of the LWS lies within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. It is located near Turweston and designated for floodplain grazing marsh and lowland calcareous grassland, both habitats of principal importance and local BAP habitats; and • Fox Covert (Whitfield) LWS – The southern end of the LWS lies within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. It is located south of Radstone village and designated for its woodland, which has a moderately diverse flora dominated by ash, field maple and bluebells.

25 Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (2006 Chapter 16). Natural England.

49 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Ecology

7.4.6 In addition, the Proposed Scheme would cross the former Great Central Main Line (GCML) railway near the village of Westbury, parts of which (yet to be confirmed) are designated as an Oxfordshire District Wildlife Site (DWS). The DWS supports calcicolous grassland, scrub and scattered trees, and is important for butterflies and other invertebrates.The site is considered to be of district/borough value.

7.4.7 Other habitats located outside of the designated sites identified above and which are relevant to the assessment include the following: • Watercourses – the River Great Ouse is an important habitat corridor in the arable landscape, and may qualify as a habitat of principal importance and local BAP habitat. The route crosses three sections of the river, which in its entirety is considered to be of county/ metropolitan value. There are also two further watercourses – the Radstone Brook and Mossycorner Spinney – that are considered to be of local/parish level; • Hedgerow – the area supports a large number of hedgerows. Many are likely to qualify as a habitat of principal importance and as a local BAP habitat. Some also meet the wildlife and landscape criteria specified in the Hedgerows Regulations (1997).26 As most hedgerows are intact and provide continuity across the landscape the hedgerow network is considered likely to be up to district/borough value; • Woodland – in addition to Fox Covert (Whitfield) LWS there are three areas of lowland deciduous woodland, a habitat of principal importance and a local BAP habitat, which lie within or partly within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. They are the Finmere Plantation, the Grassy Plantation and an unnamed wood immediately south of the Grassy Plantation. Cumulatively, these woodlands are considered likely to be of local/parish value; • Grassland – there are small areas of semi-improved grassland around Westbury and Turweston. From existing data they are considered unlikely to be of more than local/parish value; and • Ponds – there are low numbers of ponds in the area, most are located near Finmere. Few are likely to qualify as a habitat of principal importance and a local BAP habitat, and from existing data they are considered unlikely to be of more than local/parish value.

7.4.8 A summary of the likely value of species located outside of the designated sites identified above and covered by the assessment is provided in Table 5.

Resource/ Value Rationale Receptor

Bats Unlikely to be All species and their roosts are listed under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as more than regional amended) (WCA) and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010 as amended). A large Natterer’s bat roost is present close to the route, and serotine bats (which are rare in Northamptonshire) have been recorded. Only low numbers of common species of bats have been recorded during surveys carried out by HS2 Ltd. Habitat suitable for foraging bats, particularly the disused railways, river corridors and woodland, is present in the area. (Based on existing data, Barbastelle bat is considered unlikely to occur).

Otter Up to county/ Otters are listed under the WCA and the Conservation of Habitats and Species metropolitan Regulations (2010, as amended). The River Great Ouse has suitable habitat and there are historic records for this species close to the Proposed Scheme. The river is considered likely to support this species.

26 The Hedgerows Regulations 1997 (1997 No. 1160). London. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

50 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Ecology

Resource/ Value Rationale Receptor

Hazel Up to county/ Hazel dormice are listed under the WCA and the Conservation of Habitats and dormouse metropolitan Species Regulations (2010, as amended). Hazel dormice are rare in Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire and Northamptonshire; the habitat suitable for this species is uncommon and there are few records in this area. Dormice are considered unlikely to be present.

Birds Unlikely to be Breeding birds are protected under the WCA. There is extensive suitable habitat for more than district/ breeding birds around Turweston. Records for species of principal importance include borough reed bunting, grasshopper warbler, song thrush and yellowhammer. The WCA Schedule 1 species hobby has also been recorded during recent surveys.

Great crested Unlikely to be Great crested newts are listed under both the WCA and the Conservation of Habitats newt more than district/ and Species Regulations (2010, as amended). Two known populations (peak counts of borough 44 and 10) and habitat suitable for great crested newts are present near the village of Finmere.

Water vole Unlikely to be Water voles are listed under the WCA. Habitat suitable for them exists along the more than district/ watercourses/drainage ditches but there are few records that confirm presence close to borough the Proposed Scheme.

Fish Unlikely to be Many species are listed under the WCA. There are few records for brown trout in the more than district/ River Great Ouse. borough

Aquatic Unlikely to be The River Great Ouse is likely to support an assemblage of macro-invertebrates. Ponds invertebrates more than district/ may also be important. White-clawed crayfish are not known to be present in the area, borough based on current data, and there is suitable habitat and records in the same catchment for signal crayfish.

Terrestrial Unlikely to be Grassland, woodland and scrub suitable to support invertebrates are present in this area invertebrates more than district/ along the disused railways and close to Turweston. Small heath and wall butterflies have borough been recorded near Turweston and Mixbury; both are species of principal importance.

Badger Unlikely to be Suitable habitat for badgers is extensive and there is evidence of the presence of more than local/ badgers. parish

Reptiles Unlikely to be Historic records and survey data suggest small numbers of reptiles present, including more than local/ grass snakes. parish

Plants Unlikely to be Habitat suitable for scarce or notable plants is present in woodland, along the disused more than local/ railways, and in areas of grassland and scrub but there are few records. parish

Table 5: Preliminary evaluation of likely value of protected and/or notable species occurring within this section of the route

7.4.9 There are no anticipated environmental changes sufficient to alter the value of any receptor stated in the baseline above. This baseline is therefore not likely to change before construction. 7.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

7.5.1 The following section considers the impacts and effects on ecological receptors as a consequence of construction of the Proposed Scheme. All assessments made are provisional, based on the preliminary assessment of baseline value as presented in Section 7.4 of this report.

7.5.2 The following measures have been identified as part of the design of the ProposedScheme and avoid or reduce impacts on features of ecological value:

51 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Ecology

• Raising the vertical alignment of the Proposed Scheme over the River Great Ouse at Westbury viaduct and Turweston viaduct, which would help avoid the need for a pier to be constructed in the channel; • Creating approximately 11ha of calcicolous grassland next to Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI to address habitat loss and fragmentation of the SSSI; and • Constructing a green overbridge at Turweston, which amongst other benefits would provide a safe crossing point for wildlife.

7.5.3 The assessment assumes implementation of the measures set out within the draft CoCP, which includes translocation of protected species where appropriate.

7.5.4 Based on habitat loss, fragmentation, and the potential for the loss of roosts there is the potential for an adverse effect on bats. This could particularly affect breeding populations of Natterer’s bats near Radstone or species that use the disused railways. Pending further data from 2013 surveys impacts could result in a permanent adverse effect on bat conservation status that is significant at up to the regional level.

7.5.5 Land take for construction and for works relating to an embankment south of the River Great Ouse at Turweston would remove 4.6ha (31%) of Turweston Manor Grassland LWS. Moreover, construction of the embankment could permanently change water flows across the floodplain. Habitat loss and the possible changes in the hydrological regime would result in a permanent adverse effect on the site integrity that is significant at the county/metropolitan level.

7.5.6 The south-western 0.65ha (38%) of Fox Covert (Whitfield) LWS would be removed during construction. Due to increased edge effects, the retained fragments would be of reduced ecological value. Habitat loss of this extent would result in a permanent adverse effect on habitat integrity that is significant at the county/metropolitan level.

7.5.7 An increase in disturbance such as light and noise, and habitat loss from construction activities at three locations along the River Great Ouse may disturb and prevent otters moving along the river. Impacts would be temporary but could isolate and sever breeding populations, which would result in an adverse effect on otter conservation status that is significant at up to county/metropolitan level.

7.5.8 Construction would take about 3km of the former GCML, of which a part (yet to be confirmed which section) is designated as a DWS. Habitat loss could result in the fragmentation of the two remaining sections of the DWS resulting in a permanent adverse effect on the site integrity that is significant at the district/borough level.

7.5.9 The loss of approximately six ponds suitable for breeding great crested newts near Finmere may affect this species. Vegetation clearance could also remove or fragment suitable terrestrial habitat, which could isolate breeding and foraging ponds outside the Proposed Scheme from one another. Habitat loss could result in permanent adverse effect on great crested newt conservation status that is significant at up to the district/borough level.

7.5.10 The route would cross approximately 100 hedgerows; this would fragment the hedgerow network and cause losses totalling up to 26km (worst case i.e. assuming complete loss within and at the boundary of the Proposed Scheme). Commitments in the draft CoCP to reinstate hedges through planting and translocation will reduce the extent of effects and reinstate connectivity either side of the route, but not over it. New planting could not replace any Important Hedgerows that would be lost. There would therefore still be a permanent adverse effect on hedgerow conservation status that would be significant but at the local/parish vel.le

52 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Ecology

7.5.11 The Proposed Scheme would take 1.9ha (11%) of the Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI south of Brackley cutting leading to loss of calcicolous grassland and scrub. It would isolate 16% of the SSSI south of the route from the remainder. However, replacement habitat of over five times the area lost would be provided next to the Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI. This would mitigate for that lost and would provide a net increase the amount of calcicolous grassland and scrub in the area. The new habitat would be sown with seed collected from the SSSI, and a management regime would be put in place to ensure development of habitats similar to those for which the SSSI is designated.

7.5.12 After maturation of the new grassland and scrub (approximately 5 to 10 years) the impact of habitat loss on the SSSI would reduce to a level that is not significant.

7.5.13 A summary is provided in Table 6. Local/parish effects, which in combination may be significant, will be described in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

7.5.14 Taking into account mitigation proposed in the design of the Proposed Scheme set out above, anticipated significant residual ecological effects during construction are detailed inTable 6.

Resource/Receptor Residual effect Level at which the effect would be significant

Bats Permanent adverse effect on conservation status due to roost Up to regional loss, habitat loss and fragmentation.

Turweston Manor Grassland Permanent adverse effect on site integrity due to loss of 4.6ha County/metropolitan LWS (31%), and changes to hydrological regime.

Fox Covert (Whitfield) LWS Permanent adverse effect on site integrity due to loss of 0.65ha County/metropolitan of the woodland from LWS (38%).

Otter Temporary adverse effect on conservation status due to Up to county/metropolitan fragmentation of river habitat and isolation of populations.

Former GCML DWS Permanent adverse effect on site integrity due to habitat loss and District/borough fragmentation of remaining DWS.

Great crested newt Permanent adverse effect due to potential habitat loss and Unlikely to be more than fragmentation. district/borough value

Table 6: Significant residual construction effects on ecological receptors within this section of the route Further mitigation

7.5.15 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include: • Mitigation for any changes in water flows which are likely to occur at Turweston Manor Grassland LWS. This could include directing a portion of rail drainage to the LWS to replace any groundwater seepage. HS2 Ltd is exploring the best available options and the results would be reported in the formal ES; • Further habitat creation to address habitat loss at Turweston Manor Grassland LWS; • Mitigation for the loss of woodland at Fox Covert (Whitfield) LWS; • Mitigation for increased disturbance and severance of otter habitat, including the retention of existing riparian habitat along the Great River Ouse, and the use of fencing and other features to guide otters along the corridors; • Provision of measures to facilitate the passage of species across the route where significant foraging or commuting routes would be disturbed;

53 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Ecology

• In order to mitigate the effects on great crested newts, HS2 Ltd will translocate animals to receptor sites of sufficient size with newly created ponds that will be as close as possible to existing populations and in areas of suitable terrestrial habitat; and • Provision of alternative roosting habitat for bats, where appropriate. 7.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

7.6.1 The following section considers the potential effects on ecological receptors during operation of the Proposed Scheme. Assessments made are provisional, based on the preliminary assessments of baseline value presented in Section 7.4 of this report.

7.6.2 The following measures have been identified as part of the design of the ProposedScheme in order to avoid or reduce impacts on features of ecological value: • Raising the vertical alignment of the Proposed Scheme over the River Great Ouse on viaducts at Westbury and Turweston, which will allow the passage of wildlife along the river; and • Constructing a green overbridge at Turweston, to provide a safe point for wildlife to cross the Proposed Scheme.

7.6.3 The assessment assumes that these measures will be implemented; however, they will be subject to refinement following further survey and assessment work and in response to the consultation on this draft ES.

7.6.4 The southernmost 16% of the Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI would be fragmented increasing the potential risk of butterflies associated with being struck by trains or possibly harmed by turbulence. The provision of replacement calcicolous grassland adjacent to the SSSI (see section 7.5.2) would encourage species for which the SSSI is designated to remain on the northern side of the Proposed Scheme and not cross the route. The removal of line-side vegetation would further discourage species crossing the route. After maturation of the new grassland and scrub (approximately 5 to 10 years) the risk to the designated species would reduce to a level that is not significant.

7.6.5 Bats, particularly Natterer’s and Serotines near Radstone, are at risk of being struck by trains or possibly harmed by turbulence. The positioning of the route in cutting at this location and the provision of linear planting (new movement corridors) leading to crossing points would reduce the potential risk to bats. Losses of individual bats are therefore unlikely to result in a permanent adverse effect on bat conservation status that is significant at the regional vel,le and effects are likely to be of district/borough significance.

7.6.6 A summary is provided in Table 7. Local/parish level effects, which in combination may be significant, will be described in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

7.6.7 Taking into account mitigation proposed in the design of the Proposed Scheme set out above, anticipated significant residual ecological effects during operation are summarised inTable 7 below.

54 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Ecology

Resource/Receptor Residual effect Level at which the effect would be significant

Bats Permanent adverse effect on conservation status due to District/borough infrequent mortality

Table 7: Significant residual operational effects on ecological receptors within this section of the route Further mitigation

7.6.8 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include: • Provision of measures to facilitate the passage of species across the route where significant foraging or commuting routes would be disturbed.

55 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Land quality 8 Land quality 8.1 Introduction 8.1.1 This section provides a summary of the likely impacts and significant effects to land quality and geology, as a result of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. Consideration is given to land that contains contamination and land that has special geological significance, either from a scientific, mining or mineral resources point of view, including: areas of current underground or opencast mining and areas of designated mineral resources.

8.1.2 Areas of land have been identified, both within and adjacent to construction areas, that could affect or be affected by the construction of the route because they are contaminated (for example contaminated soils may need to be removed or the construction may alter existing contamination pathways). Each of these areas has been studied in order to determine the scale of any potential impacts caused by existing contamination and what needs to be done to avoid significant consequences to people and the wider environment. In addition, a review has been undertaken to establish whether the operation of the Proposed Scheme would lead to contamination of its surroundings and what needs to be done to prevent such contamination. This process is known as a contamination risk assessment. 8.2 Policy framework 8.2.1 The Minerals Development Plans for Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire contain no policies relevant to land quality.

8.2.2 Policy EN17 of Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan seeks to ensure that where development takes place on contaminated land, adequate measures are implemented to remove contamination risks and prevent contamination of water resources. In addition, South Northamptonshire Local Plan Saved Policy G3 seeks to ensure that land quality is taken into account in development proposals.

8.2.3 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit’s Joint Core Strategy Policy C6 states that the design and construction of the Proposed Scheme must minimise adverse impacts on the environment. In addition Policy BN9 seeks to ensure the remediation of contaminated land so as not to pose a risk to health and the environment. 8.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 8.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the land quality assessment are set out in Volume 1.

8.3.2 Engagement has been undertaken with Cherwell, Aylesbury Vale and South Northamptonshire District Councils regarding land contamination and Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Northamptonshire County Councils with regards to mineral policy. 8.4 Environmental baseline Geology

8.4.1 Geological mapping shows a large area of made ground27 likely associated with Finmere quarry landfill to the south west of Finmere. There is a smaller area of artificial deposits

27 ‘Made ground’ is a term given to any man-made or artificial deposits. It may be derived from a variety of materials including entirely natural products such as quarried stone, sand, gravel or clay or from the residues of industrial processes (such as ash or clinker) or a mixture of materials. It is frequently used interchangeably with the term ‘fill’.

56 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Land quality

located east of Turweston at Bellabeg. A cover of made ground may also be present in built up areas of the route section as a result of previous cycles of development, both on and off-site.

8.4.2 Superficial drift deposits28 for the majority of the route section consist of Glacial Till, described as stony clay with flint and chalk pebbles; Glaciofluvial deposits, described as sand and gravel; and Head Deposits, described as stony and silty clay. River Alluvium, described as clay generally underlain by gravel and associated with the River Great Ouse, is also present.

8.4.3 The underlying bedrock geology consists mainly of the limestone or limestone and mudstone formations of the Great Oolite Group, specifically from south to north: the Cornbrash Formation, ForeSt Marble Formation, White Limestone Formation, Taynton Formation, Rutland Formation and the Blisworth Limestone Formation. Horsehay Sand Formation, also of the Great Oolite Group (sand and sandstone) is present west of Westbury.

8.4.4 The Whitby Mudstone Formation is the bedrock geology underlying the area of the River Great Ouse. Groundwater and surface water

8.4.5 There are four categories of aquifer identified within the study area.The White Limestone, Taynton Limestone and Blisworth Limestone Formations have been designated by the Environment Agency (EA) as Principal Aquifers. The Cornbrash, ForeSt Marble and Horsehay Sand Formations have been designated Secondary A aquifers. Glaciofluvial Deposits have been designated as Secondary A aquifers. The Rutland Formation has been designated as a Secondary B aquifer; and Head Deposits have been designated as a Secondary (undifferentiated) aquifer. The Whitby Mudstone Formation has been designated unproductive.

8.4.6 A search for groundwater and surface water abstractions in the study area confirmed that there are: • No groundwater abstractions for public water supply or other licensed abstractions within 1km of the route and the route section would not be located within a source protection zone (SPZ); and • Two water wells are listed within 500m of the route for which the data obtained is insufficient to confirm if they are licensed or unlicensed, or unused/abandoned groundwater abstractions.

8.4.7 The route would cross the River Great Ouse at two locations, north of Turweston and west of Westbury (see map CT‑04-13).

8.4.8 Groundwater and surface water resources are discussed in more detail in Section 13, Water resources and flood risk. Current and historic land use

8.4.9 The higher risk sites (both historic and current land uses) identified by the assessment are shown on map CT‑03-30 to CT03-34.29

8.4.10 There are some potential contamination sources that may have impacted soils or groundwater (at least locally) within the search area. There are currently two licensed landfills within 100m of the route including Finmere railway cutting (which underlies the route) and

28 ‘Superficial deposit’ is a term given to a geological deposit or formation that was laid down during the Quaternary period (within the previous 2,600,000 years). Such deposits were largely formed by fluvial (river) and glacial or periglacial processes including wind-blown deposits known as ‘loess’. 29 The definition of ‘higher risk’ sites in this instance relates to the contamination potential of the source, the type of construction works that are proposed at that location (e.g. tunnel, cutting or embankment) and the proximity of receptors (e.g. people, groundwater bodies etc.).

57 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Land quality

Finmere Quarry (located adjacent to the route), both at the southern end of the route section. Mixbury Railway Cutting (inert and household), 50m west of the route but east of Mixbury and Radstone Turn (inert waste), west of Whitfield are historical landfills within the study area. The area within the route alignment has been historically quarried for sand, gravel and clay with associated brick and tile manufacturing. The route would run parallel to a disused railway for the first 3km and would cross a disused railway at two locations, southwest of Mixbury, and northeast of Brackley (Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI).

8.4.11 A former military airfield, currently Turweston Aerodrome, is located east of Turweston (See map CT‑03-30 Grid Ref A10 to B6). A petrol station, northeast of Brackley is located outside the land take area.

8.4.12 There is currently a recommendation for the approval of planning permission for the extension to the life and development of Finmere Quarry Landfill. Contaminants commonly associated with these potential sources could include unknown fill materials, asbestos, fuels, oils, metals, semi-metals and other organic and inorganic chemicals. Landfill sites may be emitting landfill gases such as carbon dioxide or methane.

8.4.13 In the rural areas of the route where land use is primarily agricultural, and has not changed significantly over the years, historical activities that might give rise to potential land contamination are likely to be very localised and largely unrecorded. Mining/mineral resources

8.4.14 Finmere Quarry is located immediately to the east of the route, within a borrow pit area and is noted to have two planning applications recommended for approval in December 2012. Both applications are for the extension of the life of the development of the consented extension to Finmere Quarry. For the first, located west of Finmere Quarry, extraction of minerals (sand and gravel) shall cease by 31 December 2016 and the deposit of waste shall cease by 31 December 2018. For the second, located south of Finmere Quarry, extraction of minerals shall cease by 31 December 2017 and deposit of quarry reject materials shall cease by December 2018, with restoration completed by 31 December 2019.

8.4.15 The area between Finmere and Mixbury has been designated by Oxfordshire County Council as a Mineral Consultation Area for sand and gravel resources and is currently being extracted as part of Finmere Quarry.

8.4.16 There are two mineral safeguarding areas within 250m of this route section as designated by Northamptonshire County Council, both for sand and gravel resources. The first is located to the south of the route, northeast of Brackley, and the second underlies the route at the northern end of the study area, extending into CFA15. Geo-conservation resources

8.4.17 There are no geological conservation resources identified within the study area. Receptors

8.4.18 Contaminated land can affect people living or working on or adjacent to the route of the Proposed Scheme, surface and groundwater in the vicinity (including the River Great Ouse), the nearby farmland or ecological resources and the built environment.

58 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Land quality

8.5 Construction Land contamination Assessment of impacts and mitigation

8.5.1 The route would be constructed mainly in cutting with sections of embankment to the west of Westbury and east of Brackley. There would be two short viaducts, Westbury viaduct over the River Great Ouse and Turweston Viaduct. The route follows a disused railway at the southern end of this area. Two auto-transformer stations – at Tibbets Farm and south of the A43 – would both be located on undeveloped greenfield sites.

8.5.2 There would be one main construction site compound and seven satellite construction sites in this area at spacings along the line typically 1-3km.

8.5.3 The draft CoCP sets out the measures and standards of work that would be applied to the construction of the Proposed Scheme. Its requirements would involve detailed ground investigations in order to confirm the full extent of areas of contaminated land. Measures would include: • Methods to control waste, dust and vapours; • Methods to control spillage and prevent contamination of adjacent areas; and • Methods for the management of unexpected contamination.

8.5.4 For the majority of sites, the construction phase is expected to have no significant effect. However, where construction activities could directly encounter contaminated materials (such as in cuttings, culverts and activities that require piling, such as road bridges), there is a potential for soil disturbance and mobilisation of contaminants. Sites where this may occur include Finmere Railway Cutting Landfill and the disused railway along the route, where temporary minor adverse effects may be experienced. Measures as outlined in the draftCoCP would be implemented to manage effects.

8.5.5 During construction of cutting across Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI, there is an increased likelihood of mobilising contaminants from the former railway (and especially if it has been in-filled), which could affect surface water receptors in this area and might cause windblown dusts to affect the remainder of the SSSI. However such effects would be mitigated by the application of the requirements of the CoCP, and are not considered to be significant.

8.5.6 The landfill area at Mixbury railway cutting is located close to the edge of an area of earthworks for constructing the HS2 railway cutting. It is possible that contaminants or ground gases could have leached from the railway cutting to the new construction area and this would need to be carefully considered prior to earthworks in this area. However, the effect is unlikely to be significant due to the application of measures set out in the draft CoCP.

8.5.7 At the former sand pit to the west of Finmere Quarry Landfill the excavation of cutting has the potential to expose contaminants from the fill, which would not necessarily be remediated as part of the scheme. However, measures embedded in the design may include vents and barriers to control landfill gases, should these need controlling, associated with works near landfill sites. With these measures in place, no significant effect would be expected associated with landfill gases.

8.5.8 It is considered unlikely that additional remediation works would be required over and above the mitigation measures contained as standard within the draft CoCP.

59 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Land quality

Likely residual significant effects

8.5.9 Long-term beneficial effects would occur where the construction of the route would result in an improvement, such as the removal of contaminated soils or the placement of a barrier to break any possible landfill gas contaminant linkages e.g. at Finmere RailwayCutting where infill material is likely to be fully removed during construction. This would be a significant positive effect. Further mitigation

8.5.10 It is considered unlikely in the majority of sites that remediation works would be required over and above the mitigation measures contained as standard within the draft CoCP. However, following works at landfill locations such as Mixbury Railway Cutting and Finmere Railway Cutting, if all contaminated materials are not removed at the time of construction, it may be necessary to install ground gas venting and/or capture and protection measures and leachate control measures. In addition, if the landscape mitigation measures next to Mixbury Railway Cutting are likely to involve using large volumes of soil within earth bunds, it should be considered that this could have an effect on the ground gas regime around this landfill. Mining/mineral resources Assessment of impacts and mitigation

8.5.11 There are two planning applications outstanding for sand and gravel extraction extensions at Finmere Quarry, which are for completion of extraction at the end of 2016 and 2017 (both before the commencement of construction of the Proposed Scheme). Hence it is not expected that there would be a significant effect on the quarry in this area.

8.5.12 There are two mineral safeguarding areas for sand and gravel resources within 250m of this route section as designated by Northamptonshire County Council. One is located on and adjacent to the south of the route north-east of Brackley and the second is located on the route north of Radstone. The area closer to Brackley would be largely untouched by the construction phase, which is only on the edge of the safeguarded area, leaving the majority of that area unaffected. The effect is not considered significant. Likely residual significant effects

8.5.13 No residual effects have been identified at this time. Geo-conservation resources Assessment of impacts and mitigation

8.5.14 There are no geological conservation resources identified within the study area. Likely residual significant effects

8.5.15 No residual effects have been identified at this time. 8.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

8.6.1 Maintenance and operation of the railway would be in accordance with environmental legislation and best practice. Spillage and pollution response procedures similar to those outlined in the draft CoCP would be established for all high-risk activities and employees would be trained in responding to such incidents.

60 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Land quality

8.6.2 There would be two auto-transformer stations constructed, at Tibbets Farm, and 5km north along the route from Tibbets Farm south of the A43. An auto-transformer station can, in principle, be a source of contamination through accidental discharge or leaks of coolants. However the proposed auto-transformer station, in common with other modern substations, would use secondary containment appropriate to the level of risk.

8.6.3 There exists the potential of minor leakage of hydraulic or lubricating oils from the trains. However, such leakage or spillage is expected to be very small and would not lead to any significant contamination. Likely residual significant effects

8.6.4 Residual pollution associated with the operation of the Proposed Scheme is not considered to be significant.

61 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment 9 Landscape and visual assessment 9.1 Introduction 9.1.1 This section of the report presents the assessment of the likely significant landscape and visual effects. It starts by describing the current conditions found within and around the route of the Proposed Scheme, the nature and pattern of buildings, streets, open space and vegetation and their interrelationships within the rural environment. A summary of the significant effects that would arise from the construction and operation on landscape character areas and visual receptors is provided. 9.2 Policy framework 9.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to the Newton Purcell to Brackley area are described in Section 2.1.

9.2.2 The following policies at the local level from the Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan, Cherwell Local Plan, Aylesbury Vale Local Plan and South Northamptonshire Local Plan are considered important and have informed the assessment. These include: • General provisions to limit the impact of development on the natural and built environment, to ensure that new development respects and complements existing resources and that intrusion into the open countryside is limited (Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan Policies EN1, EN34, Cherwell Local Plan Saved Policy C7, Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policies RA.8, GP.35 and GP.38, and South Northamptonshire Local Plan Policies G3 and EV2); • Policies to conserve and enhance landscape character and to ensure that development respects landscape character and that appropriate mitigation is provided where necessary (Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan Policy EN34, Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policies RA.8 and CP.38); and • Policies to protect landscape features, such as woodlands, trees, hedgerows and other features of importance (Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan Policies EN35 and EN37, Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policies GP.40, and South Northamptonshire Local Plan Policies EV21 and EV25).

9.2.3 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit’s Joint Core Strategy Policy C6 states that the design and construction of the Proposed Scheme must minimise adverse impacts on the environment and local communities. Policy BN1 seeks the provision of green infrastructure and policy BN3 seeks woodland enhancement through development.

9.2.4 In addition, local and regional guidance relevant to this assessment includes the: Northamptonshire30, Oxfordshire31 and Buckinghamshire32 Landscape Character Assessment at the county level and by the Aylesbury Vale33 and Cherwell34 Landscape Character Assessments at the local level. 9.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 9.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the landscape and visual assessment are set out in Volume 1.

30 Northamptonshire County Council (2006) Current Landscape Character Assessment. 31 Oxfordshire County Council, Natural England and the Earth Trust (2004) Oxfordshire Wildlife & Landscape Study. 32 Buckinghamshire County Council (2006) Landscape Plan. 33 Aylesbury Vale District Council (2008) Aylesbury Vale Landscape Character Assessment. 34 Cherwell District Council (1995) Cherwell Landscape Assessment.

62 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

9.3.2 The extent of the landscape and visual study area, the distribution of visual receptor viewpoints and the location of verifiable photomontages have been discussed withA ylesbury Vale District Council (DC), Buckingham County Council (CC), South Northamptonshire CC, River Nene Regional Park and Natural England. Field surveys were undertaken from May to July 2012 and from December 2012 to May 2013, including photographic studies of LCAs and visual assessment of viewpoints. Further surveys will be undertaken during 2013 and reported in the formal ES.

9.3.3 The study area has been informed by early drafts of the zone of theoretical visibility (ZTV), which is being prepared for inclusion in the formal ES. LCAs and visual receptors within approximately 1km of the Proposed Scheme have been assessed. Long-distance views of up to 1.7km have been considered at locations such as Brackley and rural roads and public rights of way (PRoW). The study area extends beyond all land required for the Proposed Scheme. 9.4 Environmental baseline 9.4.1 The following section sets out the baseline conditions for the landscape and visual assessment in the study area. Maps LV-11-31 to LV-11-34 show the location of landscape character areas and visual receptor viewpoints.

9.4.2 The predominantly rural landscape forms part of the broad valley of the River Great Ouse in the south, whilst to the north, the landform is broadly domed and gently undulating. Tree cover is generally good and, in addition to field hedges, includes copses and blocks of woodland. For the most part the land use is mixed agriculture, though notably includes a racecourse, an operational airfield, a redundant airfield, quarry and landfill site.Small villages and isolated farmsteads characterise settlement, with the largest concentration at Brackley. High voltage overhead power cables are prominent features in the landscape, as are the A43 and A422 in the north of the study area and the A421 in the central part of the area. Modern commercial developments on the south-eastern outskirts of Brackley are an apparent feature. There is an extensive network of PRoW, including the long distance route of the Westbury Circular Ride. Landscape character assessment

9.4.3 Landscape character areas (LCAs) are defined as areas with broadly homogenous characteristics and are influenced by national and district published character assessments. The Proposed Scheme in this area is located within national character area (NCA) 88: Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire Claylands and NCA 91: Yardley-Whitlewood Ridge, as defined by the Character of England mapping and Natural England.35 For the purposes of this assessment the study area has been subdivided into 15 discrete LCAs, three of which are most likely to be affected. Shelswell and Turweston Wooded Estatelands and Farmland Plateau LCA, a rolling landscape with a strong agricultural field pattern, Great Ouse Valley Farmlands, an open agricultural landscape and the Tove Catchment Undulating Claylands, an agricultural landscape with numerous villages, all have a medium sensitivity to change.

9.4.4 Where LCAs are located across or adjacent to the boundaries between other CFAs (i.e. CFA13 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode and CFA15 Greatworth to Lower Boddington), the baseline descriptions for these LCAs are reported in each CFA report in their entirety.

35 Natural England (1996); The Character of England 1996; http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/default.aspx Accessed 8 January 2013.

63 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

Visual baseline

9.4.5 Viewpoints, split into residential, recreational and transport, have been selected to represent groups of receptors within this area. Residential receptors (i.e. residents) have a high sensitivity to change, and are concentrated in the villages of Newton Purcell, Westbury, Turweston, Whitfield and Radstone and the larger settlement of Brackley. Recreational receptors also have a high sensitivity to change, and are concentrated along PRoW throughout the area, including the Westbury Circular Ride and various farm access tracks. Transport receptors (i.e. users of private or public transport) are located on trunk roads and have a low sensitivity to change. There are no known protected views located within the study area. 9.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

9.5.1 Due to the scale of the construction activities, works would be highly visible in many locations and would have the potential to give rise to significant effects which cannot be mitigated.This is commonplace with construction of major infrastructure projects, but it should be noted that these effects are temporary in nature and relate to the peak construction phase. Effects during other phases of works are likely to be less due to less construction equipment being required at the time and a reduced intensity of construction activity.

9.5.2 Measures that have been incorporated into the draft CoCP to avoid or reduce landscape and visual effects during construction include: • Maximising the retention and protection of existing trees and vegetation where reasonably practicable; • Use of well-maintained hoardings and fencing; • Replacement of any trees intended to be retained which may be accidentally felled or die as a consequence of construction works; • Early implementation of planting and other landscape measures where there is no conflict with construction activities or other requirements of the Proposed Scheme; and • Appropriate maintenance of planting and seeding works and implementation of management measures, to continue through the construction period as landscape works are completed.

9.5.3 These measures have been taken into account in the assessment of the construction effects in this section. Landscape assessment

9.5.4 The most apparent changes during construction would relate to the removal of existing landscape elements, disruption to landform and the presence of construction plant. Substantial earthworks associated with a road overbridge would affect the setting of Newton Purcell. There would be a loss of residential properties at The Oaks Farm, loss of farm buildings at Bellabeg on the north-eastern edge of Turweston and loss of a residential property and farm buildings at Ilett’s Farm adjacent to the A43. Deep cutting excavation and construction arisings would affect the setting of Turweston village.

9.5.5 There would be a loss of a horse racecourse at Whitfield and disruption to landform and loss of vegetation associated with realignment of the A43 north east of Brackley. Construction of the viaducts at Westbury and Turweston would also be apparent. The height of the construction plant and viaducts, and the proximity of construction activities to viewpoints, coupled with

64 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

the absence of intervening screening (apart from the site hoardings) would result in significant visual effects during construction. The topography in certain locations and the retention of intervening hedgerows and trees would partially screen low-level construction activity.

9.5.6 Table 8 summarises the LCAs that would be significantly affected during construction of the Proposed Scheme.

LCA Sensitivity of Magnitude of Level of effect to LCA change LCA

Shelswell and Turweston Wooded Estatelands and Farmland Medium Medium Moderate adverse Plateau LCA Construction resulting in the loss of woodland and hedgerows, severance of agricultural land and activity associated with the A4421 road diversion and large-scale earthworks.

Great Ouse Valley Farmlands LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Construction resulting in the loss of woodland and hedgerows, severance of agricultural land and activity associated with the Featherbed Lane diversion and large-scale earthworks.

The Tove Catchment Undulating Claylands LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Construction resulting in the loss of woodland and hedgerows, severance of agricultural land and construction of the A43 road diversion, site compound at Brackley and large-scale earthworks.

Table 8: Significant landscape effects during construction Visual assessment

9.5.7 The most apparent changes to views during construction would relate to the presence of construction plant and the removal of existing landscape elements. The construction of the Westbury and Turweston viaducts would be highly visible, as would the substantial earthworks operations associated with the A4421 embankment at Newton Purcell, materials processing and profiling of Turweston cutting, realignment of the A43 and grading associated with the Radstone Road overbridge. The height of the construction plant and viaducts, and the proximity of construction activities to viewpoints, coupled with the absence of substantial existing screening would result in significant visual effects during construction.The topography in certain locations and the retention of intervening hedgerows and trees would partially screen low-level construction activity.

9.5.8 The greatest concentration of residential visual receptors significantly affected would include the settlements of Newton Purcell, Westbury, Turweston, Whitfield and Radstone, with all potentially experiencing significant adverse effects on settlement outlook and setting. Scattered properties between Newton Purcell and Mixbury and Westbury and Radstone would notably experience significant construction effects.

9.5.9 Recreational users of PRoW would experience significant adverse effects throughout the CFA, though typically limited to short sections of more extensive routes. Views from the long- distance Westbury Circular Ride would be affected at two crossing points of the Proposed Scheme at Westbury and Turweston.

9.5.10 Transport users would be most affected where main highways cross the route of the Proposed Scheme. The most significantly affected highways would be the A4421 at Newton Purcell, the A421 west of Finmere, the A422 west of Westbury and the A43 east of Brackley.

9.5.11 An assessment of effects arising from lighting during construction where( required) will be prepared and included as part of the formal ES.

65 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

9.5.12 Table 9 summarises the views which would be significantly affected by the construction of the Proposed Scheme. The numbers in brackets identify the viewpoint locations which are shown on maps LV-11-31 to LV-11-34. The assessed level of effect is considered to be the maximum level at the height of construction activity in the view at each location. The duration of this effect would in most instances be less than the entire construction period and will be considered in the formal ES. An indicative construction programme is set out in section 2.3 of this report.

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors receptors

Residential receptors

Views north-east, south-west and west from residential properties in High High Major adverse and around Newton Purcell (167.2.001, 169.2.001, 170.2.001, 170.2.002) Open views of A4421 road diversion and A4421 overbridge worksite.

View north-east from Widmore Farm, west of Finmere (171.2.001) High High Major adverse Open views of A421 road diversion and new access road to Widmore Farm over the Proposed Scheme.

View east from dismantled railway overbridge on Featherbed Lane, High High Major adverse east of Mixbury (173.2.002) Open views towards the Featherbed Lane overbridge and the Featherbed Lane overbridge worksite.

View north-east from Featherbed Lane adjacent to Mixbury Lodge High High Major adverse Farm (173.2.003) Open views of the A421 road diversion and the Featherbed Lane overbridge and associated worksite.

View west from Warren Farm, west of Finmere (174.2.001) High High Major adverse Open views towards the permanent diversion of the A421 road with associated bridge and earthworks and a site compound area to the west of the route.

View west from Fulwell Road south of Westbury adjacent to residential High Medium Major adverse properties at The Old Barn on Fulwell Hill (176.2.002) Visibility of Westbury viaduct, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

View south-west from the A422 adjacent to residential properties High High Major adverse on the north-western and western edges of Westbury (178.2.002, 178.2.003) Visibility of Westbury viaduct and an area for flood compensation, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

View east from Grovehills Farm (179.2.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of A422 road diversion and the Brackley road overbridge worksite, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

View south-west from Oatleys Farm, east of Brackley (180.2.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of the A422 road diversion, the Brackley road overbridge worksite and a footpath diversion, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

View east from road on the eastern edge of Turweston adjacent to High High Major adverse residential properties at Bellabeg (181.2.004) Open views of the Turweston green overbridge and cutting earthworks including temporary topsoil storage mounds.

66 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors receptors

View north-east from the PRoW leading to Versions Farm, south of the High Medium Major adverse A43 (183.2.002) Visibility of the A43 road diversion and the A43 worksite, partially obscured by intervening landform.

View west from north-eastern edge of Turweston (183.2.003) High High Major adverse Open views of Turweston green overbridge and cutting earthworks, along with Turweston viaduct and temporary topsoil storage mounds.

View west from north-eastern edge of Whitfield (186.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of the A43 road diversion, the Turweston viaduct and associated crane activity, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

View west from a minor road between the A43 and Radstone, adjacent High High Major adverse to a newly constructed residential property (186.2.002) Open views of the A43 road diversion and the A43 worksite.

View east from Radstone Road adjacent to the residential property High High Major adverse north of Hall Farm (187.2.001) Visibility of a footpath overbridge and a site construction compound, along with an earth bund, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

Views west and south-west from residential properties at Radstone High High Major adverse (188.2.002, 190.2.002) Visibility of the Radstone road realignment, Radstone road worksite and footpath overbridge, partially obscured by intervening vegetation and rising topography.

Recreational receptors

View east from footpath north of Newton Purcell (169.3.002) High High Major adverse Open views of the A4421 road diversion, A4421 overbridge worksite, A4421 overbridge worksite and footpath overbridge.

View east from the PRoW to the north-east of the settlement of High High Major adverse Mixbury (175.3.001) Visibility of Hollowbarn overbridge and Mixbury culvert, with intervening vegetation slightly obscuring views.

View east from a PRoW north of Mixbury High Medium Moderate adverse (177.3.001) Visibility of the Hollowbarn overbridge and the Westbury viaduct, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

View west from footpath south of Westbury (177.3.002) High High Major adverse Open views of Westbury viaduct and Hollowbarn overbridge.

View east from Turweston Road, adjacent to the entrance to Rachel’s High Medium Moderate adverse Farm (183.3.003) Visibility of Turweston viaduct, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

View west from PRoW south-west of Whitfield (184.3.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of Turweston viaduct and a number of new balancing ponds, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

View north-east from PRoW north-east of Brackley (185.3.001) High High Major adverse Open views of the A43 diversion, a bridleway overbridge and the A43 worksite.

67 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors receptors

View west from a PRoW south-east Radstone, north of Fox Covert High Medium Moderate adverse (186.3.001, 188.3.001) Visibility of a bridleway overbridge and construction compound, partially obscured by intervening vegetation including the Fox Covert woodland block.

View north-east from Halse Road between Halse and Brackley High Medium Moderate adverse (187.3.002) Visibility of the Radstone road overbridge, footpath and bridleway overbridge and Radstone worksite, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

Views west from PRoW south east and east of Radstone (188.3.001 and High Medium Moderate adverse 188.3.002) Visibility of the Radstone road overbridge, footpath and bridleway overbridge and Radstone worksite, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

View north-east from PRoW east of Halse High High Major adverse (189.3.003) Open views towards a bridleway and footpath overbridge.

View north-west from Radstone Road, north of Radstone (190.3.002) High High Major adverse Open views towards the Radstone road diversion and bridleway and footpath overbridges.

Transport receptors

View west from the A4421 near entrance to Finmere Quarry (172.4.001) Low High Moderate adverse Views of the A421 road diversion, an overbridge at Widmore Farm and the London road overbridge worksite, partially obscured by intervening vegetation.

View east from the A421, adjacent to the entrance of The Oaks Farm, Low High Moderate adverse west of Finmere (173.4.001) Open views of the A421 road diversion, the new Featherbed Lane overbridge, the London road overbridge worksite and the Featherbed Lane overbridge worksite.

View east from the A422, east of Brackley Low High Moderate adverse (179.4.001) Open views of the A43 road diversion and A43 road worksite.

View north-east from the A43 roundabout on the north-eastern edge Low High Moderate adverse of Brackley (183.4.002) Open views of the A43 road diversion and the A43 road worksite.

View west from A43 at junction of road leading to Radstone (186.4.003) Low High Moderate adverse Open views of the A43 road diversion and the A43 road worksite.

Table 9: Significant visual effects during construction Likely residual significant effects

9.5.13 Due to the highly visible nature of the construction activities along the Proposed Scheme there would be significant residual effects as set out in Tables 8 and 9 above, although they would be temporary and reversible in nature, lasting only for the duration of the construction works. Residual effects would generally arise from the foreground visibility of construction activity, demolitions and vegetation removal from residential receptors, PRoW and travellers on roads in the study area.

68 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

9.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

9.6.1 The operational assessment of impacts and mitigation measures is based on the first year of opening of the Proposed Scheme (2026). A process of iterative design and assessment has been employed to avoid or reduce adverse effects during the operation of the Proposed Scheme. Measures that have been incorporated into the design of the Proposed Scheme include: • Reinstatement of severed lengths of hedge/enclosure of fields; • Replacement of lost vegetation/woodland on a like for like basis; • Introduction of screening through new planting where this fits into the existing landscape pattern; • Integration of embankment landforms into the natural topography; and • Creation of raised embankments on both sides of the route to screen the Proposed Scheme.

9.6.2 These measures have been taken account of in the assessment of the operation effects. Landscape assessment

9.6.3 The potential significant effects on the landscape in 2026 (i.e. the assumed year of opening) occur within the same LCAs experiencing effects during construction. Effects on LCAs would arise from: new engineered landforms cutting across the existing landscape; the introduction of overhead line equipment (OLE); the introduction of new viaducts of approximately 10m high with associated infrastructure; the introduction of noise barriers that would create a man-made linear feature; permanent severance of land; the introduction of highway infrastructure into the rural environment, including road bridges; and the introduction of regular high speed trains.

9.6.4 Table 10 summarises the LCAs that would be significantly affected by the Proposed Scheme in year one of operation (2026).

LCA Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of LCA of change LCA36

Shelswell and Turweston Wooded Estatelands and Farmland Plateau Medium Medium Moderate adverse LCA Presence of the Proposed Scheme, including the A421 diversion and numerous pedestrian overbridges.

Great Ouse Valley Farmlands LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Presence of the Proposed Scheme, including the diversion of Featherbed Lane and the River Great Ouse viaduct, along with numerous PRoW and bridleway overbridges.

The Tove Catchment Undulating Claylands LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Presence of the Proposed Scheme, including Turweston viaduct and associated embankment, the diverted route of the A43 road and numerous PRoW and bridleway overbridges.

Table 10: Significant landscape effects during operation year 1 (2026)36

36 In year one of operation, any new planting along the Proposed Scheme would be immature and therefore not help to integrate the Proposed Scheme into the landscape. As the plants mature, screening of the Proposed Scheme would improve.

69 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

Visual assessment

9.6.5 The potential significant effects on views in 2026 (i.e. the assumed year of opening) are applicable to fewer viewpoints than those affected during construction.Whilst significant effects would remain, planting proposed along the Proposed Scheme would act as screening in future years (refer to maps CT‑06-060 to CT‑06-068 for the extent of embedded mitigation). This screening potential would increase over time as planting increases in height and matures.

9.6.6 The most apparent changes to views would be from viewpoints where modification to landform or visibility of infrastructure or trains would be most prominent. This would include the substantial engineered highway landform and overbridge structure at Newton Purcell, viaduct structures at Westbury and Turweston and multiple pedestrian and highway overbridge structures along the length of the Proposed Scheme. The contrast of large-scale cutting landform with the general orientation of the topography would be apparent where breaking the line of slope into the River Great Ouse valley at Turweston and Westbury. The extensive fragmented and modified landscape associated with the combined influence of the Proposed Scheme and the A43 would be apparent to the north-east of Brackley. Landform modification and a road overbridge structure would affect the setting and extent of views from Radstone.

9.6.7 At a number of locations, views of the Proposed Scheme would be obscured by the rising landform, retention of intervening hedgerows and trees and the route of the Proposed Scheme within a cutting.

9.6.8 The greatest concentration of residential visual receptors affected would include those settlements where the views include engineered landform, structures, track, trains or OLE. This would be most apparent from the settlements of Newton Purcell, Westbury, Turweston, Whitfield and Radstone with all potentially experiencing significant adverse effects on settlement outlook and setting.

9.6.9 Scattered properties between Newton Purcell and Mixbury and Westbury and Radstone would experience significant operational effects. Such effects would be locally accentuated in proximity to elevated overbridge structures and where the extent of Proposed Scheme would result in loss of existing vegetation cover, presenting a more open outlook.

9.6.10 Recreational users of PRoW would experience significant adverse effects throughout the area, particularly apparent where elevated on an overbridge crossing, although typically limited to short sections of more extensive routes.

9.6.11 Transport users would be most affected where main highways cross the route of the Proposed Scheme. The most significantly affected highways would be the A4421 at Newton Purcell, the A421 west of Finmere, the A422 west of Westbury and the A43 east of Brackley.

9.6.12 Photomontages have been produced illustrating the view of the Proposed Scheme during operation year 1 from viewpoints 169-2-001 at Newton Purcell (figure V-12-40),L 178-2-003 in Westbury (figure LV-12-41) and 181-2-004 in Turweston (figure LV-12-42).

9.6.13 Table 11 summarises the visual receptors that would be significantly affected by the Proposed Scheme in year one of operation (2026). The numbers in brackets identify the viewpoint locations which are shown on maps LV-11-31 to LV-11-34.

70 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors receptors

Residential receptors

PRoW adjacent to residential properties on the southern edge of High Medium Moderate adverse Newton Purcell (167.2.001) Visibility of the A421 road diversion and noise barriers, with lower elements partially screened in places by any retained intervening vegetation and earth mounding.

Views north-east, south-west and west from residential properties in High High Major adverse and around Newton Purcell (169.2.001, 170.2.001, 170.2.002) Visibility of the A4421 road and noise barriers, with lower elements partially screened by any retained intervening vegetation and earth mounding.

View north-east from Widmore Farm, west of Finmere (171.2.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of the A421 road diversion and new overbridge for access to Widmore Farm, with lower elements partially screened by any retained intervening vegetation and earth mounding.

View east from dismantled railway overbridge on Featherbed Lane, High High Major adverse east of Mixbury (173.2.002) Open views of the Featherbed Lane overbridge.

View north-east from Featherbed Lane adjacent to Mixbury Lodge High Medium Moderate adverse Farm (173.2.003) Visibility of the A421 and Featherbed Lane diversions, with lower elements of the Proposed Scheme partially screened by any retained intervening vegetation and the depth of cutting.

View west from Warren Farm, west of Finmere (174.2.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of the A421, with lower elements of HS2 partially obscured by intervening vegetation associated with curtilage of receptor properties.

View west from Fulwell Road south of Westbury, adjacent to High Medium Moderate adverse residential properties at The Old Barn on Fulwell Hill (176.2.002) Visibility of upper elements of Westbury viaduct and HS2, partially obscured by existing intervening vegetation, earth screen bunding and an area of mitigation planting in the flood plain.

View south-west from the A422 adjacent to residential properties High Medium Moderate adverse on the north-western and western edges of Westbury (178.2.002 and 178.02.003) Visibility of the upper elements of Westbury viaduct, partially obscured by existing intervening vegetation, earth screen bunding and an area of mitigation planting in the flood plain.

View east from Grovehills Farm (179.2.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of the A422 road diversion, with lower elements of the Proposed Scheme partially obscured by cutting, noise barriers, intervening vegetation and earth screen bunding.

View south-west from Oatleys Farm, east of Brackley (180.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of the A422 road diversion, with lower elements of the Proposed Scheme partially obscured by cutting, noise barriers, intervening vegetation and earth screen bunding.

View east from road on the eastern edge of Turweston adjacent to High High Major adverse residential properties at Bellabeg (181.2.004) Visibility of the Turweston green bridge, with lower elements of the Proposed Scheme partially obscured by noise barriers.

71 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors receptors

View north-east from the PRoW leading to Versions Farm, south of the High Medium Major adverse A43 (183.2.002) Visibility of the A43 road diversion, partially screened by embankment and cutting.

View west from north-eastern edge of Whitfield (186.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of the A43 road diversion and the Turweston viaduct, partially screened in places by cutting and intervening vegetation.

View west from a minor road between the A43 and Radstone, adjacent High Medium Moderate adverse to a newly constructed residential property (186.2.002) Visibility of the A43 road, with lower elements partially screened by the depth of cutting.

View east from Radstone Road adjacent to the residential property High High Major adverse north of Hall Farm (187.2.001) Visibility of a footpath overbridge, with lower elements of HS2 partially screened by intervening vegetation.

View west from the southern edge of the village of Radstone High Medium Moderate adverse (188.2.002) Visibility of the Radstone road diversion and footpath overbridge, partially screened by earth bunding, noise barriers and intervening vegetation.

View south-west from minor road on the western edge of the village of High High Major adverse Radstone (190.2.002) Visibility of the Radstone road diversion and footpath overbridge, partially screened by earth bunding, noise barriers and intervening vegetation.

Recreational receptors

View east from footpath north of Newton Purcell (169.3.002) High High Major adverse Visibility of the A4421 road and a footpath overbridge, with the lower elements of the Proposed Scheme partially obscured by earth bunds, habitat mitigation areas and any retained intervening vegetation.

View east from the PRoW to the north-east of the settlement of High High Major adverse Mixbury (175.3.001) Open views of the PRoW diversion and associated new overbridge, along with noise barriers.

View east from a PRoW north of Mixbury High Medium Moderate adverse (177.3.001) Visibility of the viaduct and upper elements of the Proposed Scheme, partially obscured by intervening vegetation and earth bunds.

View west from footpath south of Westbury (177.3.002) High High Major adverse Visibility of the upper elements of the Proposed Scheme and the viaduct, partially obscured by intervening vegetation and earth bunds.

View east from Turweston Road, adjacent to the entrance to Rachel’s High Medium Moderate adverse Farm (183.3.003) Visibility of the upper elements of the Proposed Scheme and Turweston viaduct, partially obscured by intervening vegetation and earth bunds.

View west from PRoW south-west of Whitfield (184.3.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of the upper elements of the Proposed Scheme and the Turweston viaduct, partially obscured by intervening vegetation and earth bunds.

72 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors receptors

View north-east from PRoW north-east of Brackley (185.3.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of the upper elements of the Proposed Scheme, along with the permanent diversion of the A43 and the bridleway overbridge, partially obscured by the depth of cutting.

View west from PRoW south-east and east of Radstone (186.3.001, High Medium Moderate adverse 188.3.001 and 188.3.002) Visibility of the upper elements of the Proposed Scheme and the bridleway overbridge, partially obscured by the depth of cutting, earth bunds and intervening vegetation.

View north-east from Halse Road between Halse and Brackley High Medium Moderate adverse (187.3.002) Visibility of the upper elements of the Proposed Scheme, the Radstone road diversion, bridleway and footpath overbridges, partially obscured by intervening earth screen bunding and vegetation.

View north-east from PRoW east of Halse High High Major adverse (189.3.003) Visibility of the upper elements of the Proposed Scheme and a footpath and bridleway overbridge, partially obscured by intervening earth screen bunds and field boundary vegetation.

Transport receptors

View east and west from along the A421 Low High Moderate adverse (172.4.001, 173.4.001) Visibility of the upper elements of the Proposed Scheme, the A421 road diversion, partially obscured by depth of cutting and intervening vegetation.

View west from A43 at junction of road leading to Radstone (186.4.003) Low High Moderate adverse Visibility of the upper elements of the Proposed Scheme and the A43 road diversion, partially obscured by the depth of cutting in places.

Table 11: Significant visual effects during operation year 1 (2026)

9.6.14 Where planting has been proposed, effects in year 15 (2041) and 60 (2086) of operation would be reduced compared to year one (2026), due to the increased height and maturity of trees. An assessment of effects for these assessment years will be prepared and presented within the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

9.6.15 Due to the highly sensitive nature of the landscape and visible nature of the Proposed Scheme, significant residual effects would remain, as set out in Tables 10 and 11 above. Residual effects would arise as a result of the introduction of the Proposed Scheme earthworks and viaduct structures, new road and pedestrian overbridges and noise barriers, affecting the character of the local landscape and views from residences, PRoW and travellers on roads throughout the study area. Further mitigation

9.6.16 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include: • All new earthwork features of the Proposed Scheme, including road and public footpath overbridges to be successfully integrated into the landscape;

73 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Landscape and visual assessment

• Planting to the A4421 highway diversion embankment to screen views of the highway, embankment and overbridge from residential properties at Newton Purcell and assist in integrating the highway earthworks into the setting; • Planting to both sides of the Proposed Scheme between the A4421 and the A421 overbridges to redefine existing visual screening associated with the dismantled railway line; • Planting to both sides of the Proposed Scheme to screen views of the overbridge and route alignment from Widmore Farm and to assist integration of the overbridge into the setting; • Planting along the A421 boundary to screen views of the Proposed Scheme from the road and integrate the diverted road alignment into the setting; • Woodland planting on land within the temporary land take to the west of the Proposed Scheme, near The Oak Farm, to mitigate general woodland copse vegetation losses and provide an integrating landscape component; • From the A421 to the northern extent of the CFA, hedgerow planting along the top of cutting or foot of embankment to both sides of the route to assist integration of the Proposed Scheme landform with surrounding field patterns; • Planting along the route of the Proposed Scheme for 400m to 500m either side of the River Great Ouse crossing, to limit visual effects within the river valley, to assist screening of views from Westbury and to integrate the viaduct into the setting; • Reinforcement of the existing hedgerows along the western edge of the cutting past Turweston to visually screen the Proposed Scheme from Turweston and to assist with integration of the cutting landform into the context; • Woodland planting along the eastern edge of the Proposed Scheme to either side of the River Great Ouse valley to limit visual effects within the River Great Ouse valley, to assist screening of views from Turweston and to integrate the viaduct into the setting; • Tree and shrub highway boundary planting along the diverted route of the A43 to integrate the road within its setting; and • Planting to screen the Proposed Scheme from Radstone and assist integration of the Radstone Road overbridge into its setting.

74 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Socio-economics 10 Socio-economics 10.1 Introduction 10.1.1 This section provides a summary of the assessment methodology and scope, environmental baseline, and likely significant economic and employment effects during construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme.

10.1.2 The need generally for a socio-economic assessment results from the potential for the Proposed Scheme to affect: • Existing businesses and community organisations and thus the amount of local employment; • Local economies, including employment; and • Planned growth and development.

10.1.3 The beneficial and adverse socio-economic effects of the ProposedScheme are reported at two different levels: route-wide and CFA. Effects on levels of employment are reported at a route-wide level within Report 27 (route-wide effects). Localised effects on businesses and observations on potential local economic effects are reported within eachCF A. 10.2 Policy framework 10.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to the area are described in Sections 2.1.15 to 2.1.19. 10.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 10.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the socio-economic assessment are set out in Volume 1. 10.4 Environmental baseline 10.4.1 Section 2.1 provides a general overview of the area which includes data of specific relevance to socio-economics, notably demographic data and employment data. The following provides a brief overview in terms of employment, economic structure and labour market within the Newton Purcell to Brackley area.

10.4.2 The Newton Purcell to Brackley CFA crosses three local authority boundaries: South Northamptonshire (Northamptonshire), Aylesbury Vale (Buckinghamshire) and Cherwell (Oxfordshire).

10.4.3 In 2011 28,000 people worked in South Northamptonshire, 66,000 in Cherwell and 66,000 in Aylesbury Vale.37 The employment rate38 within South Northamptonshire in 2011 was 73% (45,740 people), higher than those recorded for both the East Midlands (64%) and England (65%). Cherwell District and Aylesbury Vale District recorded rates in 2011 of 72% and 73% respectively, higher than those recorded for both the South East (68%) and England (65%).39 As of September 2012 the unemployment rates for South Northamptonshire, Cherwell, and Aylesbury Vale stood at 5%, 6% and 7% respectively, which were all below the England average of 8%.40

37 Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2011), Business Register and Employment Survey 2011. 38 The proportion of working age (16-74 years) residents who are in employment. 39 ONS (2012), Census 2011. 40 ONS (2012), Annual Population Survey.

75 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Socio-economics

10.4.4 Within South Northamptonshire Council area the professional, scientific and technical services sector accounts for the largest proportion of businesses (18%), with the construction (13%) and agriculture, forestry and fishing (10%) sectors also accounting for large proportions of businesses within the borough.41 This is shown in Figure 4.42 For comparison within the East Midlands region the professional, scientific and technical services sector also accounts for the largest number of businesses (11%), with construction (11%), retail (11%) and production (8%) sectors also accounting for relatively large numbers of businesses within the region.

Professional, scientific & technical

Construction

Agriculture, forestry & fishing

Business administration and support services

Arts, entertainment, recreation and other services

Production

Information & communication

Retail

Accommodation & food services

South Northants Other East Midlands 0% 5% 10%15% 20%25% 30%35%

Figure 4: Business Sector Composition in South Northamptonshire and the East Midlands

Source: Office for National Statistics (2011), UK Business: Activity, Size and Location43 10.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and effects

10.5.1 No significant direct effects on non-agricultural employment have been identified within the area. Construction of the Proposed Scheme would encroach on one business; holiday homes and rental accommodation.

10.5.2 It is estimated that the Proposed Scheme would result in the displacement or possible loss of approximately two jobs44 within this area. Taking into account total employment within the area the impact on the local economy from the loss/relocation of jobs is considered to be relatively modest compared to the scale of economic activity and opportunity in the area.

10.5.3 There are plans to locate construction compounds for the Proposed Scheme at the following locations: • Northampton Road main site;

41 ONS (2012), UK Business: Activity, Size and Location 2011. 42 Figure 4 presents the proportion of businesses within each business sector in the borough but not the proportion of employment by sector. 43 ‘Other’ includes; Wholesale; Motor Trades; Transport and Storage; Finance and Insurance; Property; Public administration and defence; Education; and Health sectors. 44 Employment within businesses has been estimated through a combination of sources, for example, surveys of businesses, the Experian employment dataset, employment floor space and the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) Employment Density Guide (2010). The estimate is calculated using standard employment density ratios and estimates of floor areas and may vary significantly from actual employment at the sites.

76 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Socio-economics

• Newton Purcell satellite site; • London Road satellite site; • Featherbed Lane satellite site; • Westbury satellite site; • Brackley Road satellite site; • Turweston satellite site; and • Radstone satellite site.

10.5.4 The use of these sites could result in the creation of up to 2,500 person years of construction45 employment that, depending on skill levels required and the skills of local people, are potentially accessible to residents in the locality and to others living further afield. It could also lead to opportunities for local businesses to supply the project or to benefit from expenditure of construction workers. Quantification of direct and indirect construction employment effects are captured at a route-wide level (see Report 27 (route-wide effects)).

10.5.5 It is intended that discretionary enhancement measures, such as business support, supply chain engagement and local construction skills development initiatives to enhance local business performance will be included as appropriate in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

10.5.6 The likely residual significant socio-economic effects are currently being assessed and will be reported in the formal ES. 10.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

10.6.1 The Proposed Scheme will create direct and wider operational employment opportunities at locations along the route including stations, train crew facilities and infrastructure/ maintenance depots. Although no plans exist to locate these facilities within this area it is considered possible that wider operational employment opportunities could be accessed by residents of the CFA. Operational effects are captured and assessed at a route wide level (see Report 27 (route-wide effects)). Likely significant residual effects

10.6.2 The likely residual significant socio-economic effects are currently being assessed and will be reported in the formal ES.

45 Construction labour is reported in construction person years, where one construction person year represents the work done by one person in a year composed of a standard number of working days.

77 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Sound, noise and vibration 11 Sound, noise and vibration 11.1 Introduction 11.1.1 This chapter provides a summary of the likely noise and vibration significant effects associated with the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme for the Newton Purcell to Brackley CFA. This chapter should be read in conjunction with Volume 1. 11.2 Policy framework 11.2.1 The policy framework for sound, noise and vibration is set out in Volume 1. 11.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 11.3.1 The approach to the assessment of sound, noise and vibration and related assumptions is set out in Volume 1, with local variations as described below. A summary of the operating assumptions is given in section 2.4 of this report. 11.4 Environmental baseline 11.4.1 The baseline sound environment for this area is highly varied due to noise from major roads which affect significant parts of the area, particularly the A43 at Turweston, the A422 (Brackley Road) at Westbury, the A421 at Finmere and A4221 at Newton Purcell. In the more rural parts, baseline sound levels are significantly lower but road traffic is generally audible in all locations. Night-time sound levels are significantly reduced with lower traffic levels on local roads. Noise sensitive receptors in the area are mostly residential, with many isolated rural properties and small communities. There is occasional noise in the area from the use of Turweston and Finmere aerodromes.

11.4.2 It is likely that the majority of receptors adjacent to the line of route are not currently subject to appreciable vibration. Baseline monitoring to be undertaken for the formal ES will confirm whether this is the case for receptors close to existing railways. For the draft ES, vibration at all receptors has been assessed using the absolute vibration criteria as described in Volume 1. 11.5 Construction Assessment of effects and mitigation

11.5.1 This initial assessment has considered the potential effects on community receptors within the study area, their occupants and their use (including annoyance and activity disturbance) arising from construction noise and/or vibration.

11.5.2 The mitigation measures specified within the draft CoCP have been included within the assessment of construction noise and vibration.

11.5.3 Potential construction noise or vibration effects could occur on the receptors closest to the construction areas in the following communities: • Radstone – arising from construction activities such as line of route activities, including site clearance, earthworks and track base installation (refer to Section 2.2/2.3 and to maps CT‑05 Construction features); and • Turweston – arising from construction activities such as line of route activities, including site clearance, earthworks and track base installation (refer to Section 2.2/2.3 and to maps CT‑05 Construction features).

78 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Sound, noise and vibration

11.5.4 Installation of track, power systems and signalling progresses at a rate of approximately 100m per day. Materials and equipment will be moved by engineering trains, operating at low speed, from/to the track construction compounds during the early morning and late evening. The trains will be loaded/unloaded at the compounds overnight. In general it is assumed that the permanent noise barriers would be in place before the track and overhead power systems, etc. are installed.

11.5.5 Track laying, power system and signalling installation works along the line of route are unlikely to result in significant construction noise effects, given the short duration close to any communities and the presence of the permanent noise barriers. Likely residual significant effects

11.5.6 Further work is being undertaken to confirm significant construction noise and vibration effects, including any temporary effects from construction traffic. Non-residential receptors identified at this stage as potentially subject to construction noise or vibration effects will be further considered, where necessary, on a receptor-by-receptor basis. Any further assessment will be reported in the formal ES. Further mitigation

11.5.7 Further work is being undertaken identify any site specific mitigation considered necessary in addition to the general measures set out in the draft CoCP. Any site specific mitigation will be presented in the formal ES and will include an estimate of the number of properties that may qualify for noise insulation or temporary re-housing under provisions set out in the draft CoCP. 11.6 Operation Assessment of effects and mitigation

11.6.1 This initial assessment has considered the potential effects on community receptors within the study area, their occupants and their use (including annoyance, activity and sleep disturbance) arising from operational noise and/or vibration. Further assessment will be undertaken for the formal ES.

11.6.2 The on-going development of the scheme includes noise barriers in the form of landscape earthworks, noise (fence) barriers and/or low level barriers on viaducts. The envisaged noise barrier locations are shown on the Operational Sound Contour and Potential Significant Effect Maps SV-01.

11.6.3 The Operational Sound Contour and Potential Significant Effect Maps SV-01 indicate the likely long-term daytime sound level (defined as the equivalent continuous sound level from 07:00

to 23:00 or LpAeq,day) from HS2 operations alone. The contours are shown in 5dB steps from 50dB to 70dB. With the train flows described in Volume 1, the night-time sound level (defined

as the equivalent continuous sound level from 23:00 to 07:00 or LpAeq,night) from the Proposed Scheme would be approximately 10dB lower than the daytime sound level. The 50dB contour therefore indicates the distance from the Proposed Scheme at which the night-time sound level would be 40dB. This contour represents where the lowest observed community noise effects would be expected to occur during the day (with respect to annoyance) and night (with respect to sleep disturbance). It is generally unlikely that there will be any adverse noise effects outside of this contour. With regard to sleep disturbance, the assessment has also taken account the maximum sound levels generated by each train pass-by.

11.6.4 Residential receptors within the daytime 65dB contour and therefore the night-time 55dB contour have been identified as likely to experience a significant adverse effect from HS2

79 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Sound, noise and vibration

noise alone. This is in line with the daytime threshold for the Noise Insulation Regulations and the Interim Target defined in the World Health Organisation’s Night Noise Guidelines.

11.6.5 The potential for significant noise effects on communities in areas between the0dB 5 and 65dB daytime sound contours, or 40dB and 55dB night-time contours, will be dependent on the baseline in that area and the change in sound level brought about by the Proposed Scheme.

11.6.6 For the draft ES, the criteria used in assessing whether an effect is potentially significant includes factors such as the number and magnitude of impacts in a community as well as the existing sound environment. Further significance criteria – including the character of the existing sound environment, any unique features of the Proposed Scheme’s sound or impacts, and the potential combined impacts of sound and vibration – will be taken into account in the formal ES.

11.6.7 This initial assessment has identified potential airborne noise effects on the following non- residential receptors and land uses (e.g. schools, hospitals, hotels): • Church of St Mary, Turweston (identified by SV14-A on Maps -01); and • Church of St Lawrence (identified by SV14-B on Maps -01).

11.6.8 Rights of way are by their nature transitory routes, with users not staying in any one location for long periods. Train sound from the Proposed Scheme is intermittent and its level at the right of way will vary as the right of way moves closer to and further from the Proposed Scheme. Noise effects would generally be reduced by the landscape earthworks envisaged to reduce visual impact of the scheme and envisaged noise mitigation to protect other receptors. No significant noise effects have therefore been identified on public rights of way within this area.

11.6.9 No potentially significant noise or vibration effects arising from changes to existing roads are anticipated at this stage. This will be confirmed in the formal ES.

11.6.10 A number of potential minor ground-borne noise and vibration impacts have been forecast at a small number of properties very close to the alignment. Taking account of the number and minor magnitude of the impacts, and the experience of HS1, no significant effects have been identified. Further assessment will be undertaken for the formal ES to confirm whether the impacts currently forecast are likely to occur. Vibration from the operation of the Proposed Scheme will present no risk of any building damage. Likely residual significant effects

11.6.11 The envisaged mitigation (especially landscape earthworks and noise barriers) described in this chapter substantially reduces the potential airborne sound impacts and noise effects that would otherwise arise from the Proposed Scheme. Nonetheless, potential significant adverse airborne noise effects have been identified for residential receptors in the following communities: • The eastern part of Newton Purcell in the general vicinity of A4421 (identified by SV14-01 on Maps SV-01); • The western part of Finmere in the general vicinity of Warren Farm on the Banbury Road (identified by SV14-02 on Maps SV-01); • The western part of Westbury in the general vicinity of Mill Lane and School Close (identified by SV14-03 on Maps SV-01); • The eastern part of Turweston in the general vicinity of Main Street and The Green (identified by SV14-04 on Maps SV -01);

80 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Sound, noise and vibration

• Radstone (identified by SV14-05 on Maps SV-01); and • An individual receptor that is closest to the Proposed Scheme (identified by SV14-06 on Maps SV-01). At this receptor, the forecast noise from long term railway operation may exceed the daytime threshold set by the Noise Insulation Regulations and the night-time Interim Target identified in the World Health Organization Guidelines.46

11.6.12 Further assessment work is being undertaken to confirm operational sound and vibration significant effects, including those at non-residential receptors and quiet areas (as necessary on a receptor-by-receptor basis). This will be reported in the formal ES which will present baseline levels, forecasts for the Proposed Scheme and the change in sound levels brought about by the Proposed Scheme both as impact plans and tables. Further mitigation

11.6.13 Improvements in the performance of mitigation that may further reduce or avoid the potential significant airborne noise effects are being considered for the formal ES.otential P options are included in Table 12.

Potential significant effect Further mitigation option

Newton Purcell (SV14-01) Increase the mitigation to 4m/5m noise (fence) barrier or equivalent, for example by landscape earthworks or combination of barrier and earthworks.

Finmere (SV14-02) Add a 3m noise (fence) barrier or equivalent – for example, by landscape earthworks or combination of barrier and earthworks.

Westbury (SV14-03) Increase the mitigation to 4m/5m noise (fence) barrier or equivalent, for example by landscape earthworks or combination of barrier and earthworks.

Turweston (SV14-04) Increase the mitigation to 4m/5m noise (fence) barrier or equivalent, for example by landscape earthworks or combination of barrier and earthworks and non-standard viaduct parapet barrier 3m/4m high, or equivalent.

Radstone (SV14-05) Increase the mitigation to 4m/5m noise (fence) barrier or equivalent, for example by landscape earthworks or combination of barrier and earthworks.

Table 12: Options for further mitigation

11.6.14 Noise insulation would be offered following the principles of the Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996 where, taking account of the mitigation incorporated into the Proposed Scheme, the long term operational noise level

exceeds 68dBLpAeq,18 hour. It is estimated that one dwelling that is marked as SV14-06 on Maps SV-01 would potentially experience noise levels higher than the insulation trigger level.

46 See World Health Organization Night Noise Guidelines for Europe 2009.

81 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Traffic and transport 12 Traffic and transport 12.1 Introduction 12.1.1 This traffic and transport section describes the likely impacts and effects arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme through the Newton Purcell to Brackley area on all forms of transport. 12.2 Policy framework 12.2.1 Transport related local government policy is contained in the local transport plan (LTP3) for Northamptonshire County Council, Oxfordshire County Council and the local governmental policy in the local transport plan (LTP3) for Buckinghamshire County Council.

12.2.2 The Northamptonshire Transportation Plan (2012)47 replaces the interim LTP3 and is the overarching strategy that sets out the strategic aims and goals for Transport in Northamptonshire. The vision is supported by six objectives based around providing a transport system to support growth, sustainable communities, travel choice, whilst minimising the effect on the environment and providing best value for money. In terms of new development, Northamptonshire County Council’s strategic aim is to minimise the adverse impacts of development on the transport network and to provide opportunities for creating more sustainable travel options.

12.2.3 The LTP3 for Oxfordshire County Council sets out its transport policy and strategy for the next 20 years and focuses on attracting and supporting economic investment and growth, delivering transport infrastructure, tackling congestion and improving quality of life. The Oxfordshire Local Investment Plan identifies a number of strategic transport schemes to support development in the county including the East-West Rail and Evergreen 3 Rail projects. Their policy on new development is that it must contribute to reducing the impact of travel on the county’s environment through minimising the need to travel, promoting sustainable travel and safely and efficiently accommodating the traffic on the network.

12.2.4 Buckinghamshire County Council’s LTP3 covers the period 2011-2016 and is aligned with their Sustainable Community Strategy which sets the overarching long-term plan for the county up to 2026.48,49 The LTP3 implementation plan refers to the Proposed Scheme passing through Buckinghamshire.

12.2.5 A key transport objective for Buckinghamshire County Council is to maintain and improve the reliability of journey times on the key routes for freight, commuting and business travel, to benefit the local and national economy. The objective is to improve connectivity and access between centres and in particular to reduce public transport journey times through developing new services. The aim is to encourage more sustainable transport behaviour and reduce the need to travel, in preference to increasing road capacity, with the emphasis on reducing the negative impacts on the environment from transport. The objective for new developments is to deliver transport improvements to support regeneration and sustainable housing and employment growth. 12.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 12.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the traffic and transport assessment are set out in Volume 1.

47 Northamptonshire Transportation Plan Fit for Purpose by Northamptonshire County Council, Local Transport Plan March 2012. 48 Buckinghamshire County Council (2011) Local Transport Plan 3 (2011-2016). 49 Bucks Strategic Partnership (2009) Sustainable Community Strategy for Buckinghamshire 2009-2026. Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire County Council.

82 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Traffic and transport

12.3.2 The scope of the assessment was discussed with the relevant local highway authorities including Oxfordshire County Council on 26 September 2012, Northamptonshire County Council on 2 October 2012, Buckinghamshire County Council on 30 November 2012 and the Highways Agency on 22 October 2012 in relation to the A43.

12.3.3 The effects presented are those resulting from the changes arising from the introduction of the Proposed Scheme compared with the future transport baseline scenario without the Proposed Scheme in the respective years.

12.3.4 The baseline forecast traffic flows for the future years of assessment have been derived using Department for Transport’s traffic forecasting tool, Trip End Model Presentation Program (TEMPRO).

12.3.5 The design development of the Proposed Scheme remains in progress and the transport assessment providing the basis of the information presented in this section would be updated and revised accordingly for the formal ES.

12.3.6 The following key limitations exist in the reporting of significant effects: • The capacity of junctions that would be affected by the ProposedScheme has not yet been assessed in detail. A more detailed assessment will be carried out for the formal ES where necessary; • Forecast future-year traffic flows with and without the Proposed Scheme are based on an approach that does not take account of wider effects, e.g. redistribution and reassignment of traffic, modal shift and peak spreading. As a consequence, local transport effects may be over-estimated; • The forecast construction traffic flows, temporary diversions, traffic management arrangements and phasing of construction interventions are based on initial estimates. Subsequent design development will have resulted in some changes to the quantities of construction materials, the size of the workforce at each construction compound and the phasing of construction activities. Consequently, forecast construction traffic flows used for this assessment and will be updated and the assessment revised accordingly for the formal ES; and • The assessment assumes that construction lorry traffic would use the following routes between compounds and primary road and/or motorway network, as shown in maps CT‑05-061 to CT‑05-068: ȃȃ A421, providing access to London Road overbridge satellite site compound; ȃȃ Featherbed Lane via A421, providing access to Featherbed Lane overbridge satellite site compound; ȃȃ Haul road from A422 Brackley Road, providing access to Westbury viaduct launch satellite site compound; ȃȃ A422 Brackley Road, providing access to Brackley Road overbridge satellite site compound; ȃȃ Haul road from A422 Brackley Road, providing access to Turweston green bridge satellite site compound; ȃȃ A43, providing access to Brackley South Cutting main construction site; and ȃȃ Radstone Road via B4525, A43 and B4525 Banbury Lane, A422, providing access to Radstone Road overbridge satellite site compound.

83 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Traffic and transport

12.4 Environmental baseline 12.4.1 Traffic surveys were carried out during June and September 2012 and February 2013 to establish current traffic flows on the road network subject to assessment.

12.4.2 The highway network subject to assessment within this area includes the A4421, A421, A43, A422, B4525, Country Lane through Barton Hartshorn, Featherbed Lane, Fulwell Road, Valley Road (Finmere), Mere Road, Oxfordshire Road, Northampton Road, Turweston Road, Turweston Green, South Bank and Radstone Road.

12.4.3 Bus services currently operate along the following roads within close vicinity of the Proposed Scheme: • A422; and • A4421.

12.4.4 There are several public footpaths, bridleways and cycleways that would cross the route of the Proposed Scheme. All PRoW which would be intersected by the Proposed Scheme have been surveyed, taking account of the nature of the PRoW and their usage. As appropriate, these covered weekday and weekend use. These indicated that none of the roads, footpaths, bridleways and cycleways that would cross the route are used by more than 70 people per day walking, cycling or riding with the exception of one being used by approximately 150 users per day.

12.4.5 Relevant traffic accident data has been obtained from Northampton County Council, Oxfordshire County Council and Buckinghamshire County Council, for the three year period from 2009 to 2011.

12.4.6 There are no navigable canals or waterways that cross the Proposed Scheme in this area.

12.4.7 The future baseline traffic volumes have been calculated by applying growth factors derived from TEMPRO for the future years of 2021, 2026 and extrapolation to 2041. The factors have been derived for the individual road types and relevant wards. The baseline also takes account of the following proposed developments: • Radstone Fields, Brackley; • Sawmills Site, Northampton Road; • Lane North of Turweston, Brackley; • Silverstone; and • Lane South of Turweston, Brackley.

12.4.8 No other changes to the traffic and transport baseline are anticipated in the Newton Purcell to Brackley area. 12.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

12.5.1 The following section considers the impacts on traffic and transport and the consequential environmental effects resulting from construction of the ProposedScheme. The information set out in this section is subject to review in the formal ES.

12.5.2 The following measures have been included as part of the engineering design of the Proposed Scheme and would avoid or reduce impacts on travellers:

84 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Traffic and transport

• Construction materials and equipment transported along haul road adjacent to the Proposed Scheme alignment where reasonably practicable to reduce lorry movements on the public highway; • Defined lorry routes for construction equipment and materials to ensure only the most suitable roads are used; • The majority of roads crossing the Proposed Scheme kept open during construction resulting in no significant diversions of traffic onto alternative routes; • Surplus excavated material would be reused where reasonably practicable along the alignment of the Proposed Scheme which will reduce lorry movements on the public highway; and • Temporary alternative routes provided for PRoW closed during construction to reduce loss of amenity.

12.5.3 Transport related effects of the Proposed Scheme during construction would arise from traffic generated by construction activities as well as temporary diversions of roads and PRoW.

12.5.4 Construction activities would result in the following temporary road closure and associated diversion lasting for a month or more as shown in maps CT‑05-061 to CT‑05-068: • Temporary closure of Featherbed Lane requiring a temporary diversion via the Fulwell Road, Valley Road, Mere Road, Oxfordshire Road and A421.

12.5.5 Eight construction compounds would be required with separate vehicular access points. The construction vehicle movements would therefore be spread over a number of roads. Access points to construction compounds are shown on maps CT‑05-061 to CT‑05-068.

12.5.6 Construction vehicle movements related to the building of the Proposed Scheme have been calculated based on the quantity of materials required to construct the proposed Scheme with a further 10% added to allow for ancillary delivery vehicles.

12.5.7 The typical numbers of vehicles estimated to be generated by the site compounds in this area are shown in Table 13.

Compound location Access Estimated Typical daily number of duration of use two-way trips

LGVs50 HGVs

Northampton Road, Brackley, map CT‑05-066 A43 5.5 years 20-100 <10

Newton Purcell, map CT‑05-061 A4421 3 years 30-80 <10-10

London Road, map CT‑05-062 A421 1.5 years 30-40 <10

Featherbed Lane, map CT‑05-062 Featherbed Lane 3.5 years 10-60 <10-10

Westbury, map CT‑05-064 Haul road from A422 2 years 80-140 10-30

Brackley Road, map CT‑05-064 A422 3 years

Turweston, map CT‑05-065 Haul road from A422 (HGVs) 1 year 50-80 <10-10 Turweston Green (workers)

Radstone, map CT‑05-067 Radstone Road 3 years 30-60 <10

Table 13: Typical vehicle trip generation for site compounds in this area50

50 Workers commuting trips

85 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Traffic and transport

12.5.8 Construction of the Proposed Scheme is anticipated to result in significant increases in traffic flows (i.e. more than 30% for HGV or all vehicles) on the following roads as a result of construction traffic and/or temporary closures/diversions: • A422 Brackley Road; • B4525; • Country Lane through Barton Hartshorn; • Featherbed Lane; • Turweston Green; • Fulwell Road; • Valley Road (Finmere); • Mere Road; • Oxfordshire Road; and • Radstone Road.

12.5.9 The measures set out in the draft CoCP would seek to reduce, as far as reasonably practicable deliveries of construction materials and equipment, thus minimising construction lorry trip generation, especially during peak traffic periods. The CoCP would include HGV management and control measures.

12.5.10 A construction workforce travel plan would be put into operation with the aim of reducing workforce commuting by private car, especially sole occupancy car travel. Where practical in the rural context, this would encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport.

12.5.11 The combined effect of the measures set out in the draft CoCP and the construction workforce travel plan is anticipated to reduce construction traffic generation below that currently forecasted. However, the beneficial effects arising from the implementation of the CoCP as a result of the associated demand management measures has not been taken into account for the purpose of this assessment thereby giving a worst-case assessment.

12.5.12 Several PRoW crossing the Proposed Scheme would be temporarily diverted during construction, potentially resulting in impacts on user delay and/or severance.

12.5.13 Construction of the Proposed Scheme is not anticipated to result in any other significant impacts at this stage. Likely residual significant effects

12.5.14 Likely residual significant effects in terms of an increase in journey time to vehicle occupants subject to temporary and permanent closures/diversions are likely to occur on the following road: • Featherbed Lane (minor significant effect).

12.5.15 Likely residual significant effects in terms of delay to vehicle occupants due to increased congestion may occur to users of the following roads subject to more detailed assessment: • School End (level of effect to be determined); • Featherbed Lane (level of effect to be determined); • Country Lane through Barton Hartshorn (level of effect to be determined); • Fulwell Road (level of effect to be determined); • Valley Road, Finmere (level of effect to be determined);

86 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Traffic and transport

• Mere Road (level of effect to be determined); • Oxfordshire Road (level of effect to be determined); and • Turweston Green (level of effect to be determined).

12.5.16 Significant effects are identified in relation to some of the temporaryoW PR diversions. A full assessment of significant effects during construction will be presented as part of the formal ES.

12.5.17 Construction of the Proposed Scheme is not anticipated at this stage to result in any other significant effects. Further mitigation

12.5.18 Further mitigation measures will be considered based on the outcomes of the ongoing assessment and will be reported in the formal ES. 12.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

12.6.1 The following section considers the impacts on traffic and transport and the consequential environmental effects resulting from operation of the Proposed Scheme (as described in Section 2.2 and 2.4 of this report). The information set out in this section is subject to review in the formal ES.

12.6.2 The following design and demand management measures have been included for the Proposed Scheme and would avoid or reduce impacts on travellers: • The majority of roads crossing the Proposed Scheme retained in their current location or very close to their current location resulting in no significant diversions of traffic onto alternative routes; • PRoW crossing the Proposed Scheme retained with localised diversions kept to a minimum; and • There will be no permanent road closures.

12.6.3 Several PRoW crossing the Proposed Scheme would be permanently diverted during operation, potentially resulting in impacts on user delay and/or severance. Likely residual significant effects

12.6.4 Significant effects are identified in relation to some of the PRoW diversions. A full assessment of significant operational effects will be presented as part of the formal ES.

12.6.5 The assessments undertaken at this stage have indicated that for this area there are no other significant transport related effects during the operation of the ProposedScheme. This is because: • There would be no stations or depots that would generate any additional traffic; and • The majority of roads that would cross the route would be retained in, or very close to, their current location. Further mitigation

12.6.6 Further mitigation measures will be considered based on the outcomes of the ongoing assessment and will be reported in the formal ES.

87 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Water resources and flood risk assessment 13 Water resources and flood risk assessment 13.1 Introduction 13.1.1 This section provides a summary of the likely impacts and significant effects on water resources and flood risk as a result of the construction and operation of the ProposedScheme. The assessment considers effects on surface water resources, groundwater resources and flooding risk. 13.2 Policy framework 13.2.1 Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan Policies EN12 and EN13 and Cherwell Local Plan Saved Policy ENV7 seek to prevent development that would harm the quality of underground or surface water bodies. Cherwell Non-statutory Local Plan Policy EN14 aims to prevent development in areas of flood risk, whilst Policy EN15 seeks to limit the potential for surface run-off. General protection of water resources is afforded through Policy G3 in the South Northamptonshire Local Plan.

13.2.2 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit’s Joint Core Strategy Policy C6 states that the design and construction of the HS2 rail link must minimise adverse impacts on the environment, the local economy and local communities. In addition policies BN7a and BN7 seek to adequate sustainable drainage infrastructure is provided with new development to improve water quality and reduce flood risk and to ensure that an appropriate flood risk assessment is undertaken to demonstrate that the development does not increase flood risk to other areas. 13.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 13.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the water resources and flood risk assessment are set out in Volume 1.

13.3.2 The assessment of surface water resources and flood risk focuses on the RiverGreat Ouse, the Radstone Brook, the Mixbury Brook and their tributaries and associated catchment areas and floodplains.

13.3.3 The groundwater resources assessment focuses on aquifers that are present within bedrock and overlying deposits. Effects on groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems GWDTEs)( and groundwater users/receptors (both licensed abstractions and private users) are also considered. 13.4 Environmental baseline 13.4.1 The route would cross: the River Great Ouse; Radstone Brook; a small watercourse east of Mixbury (known as Mixbury Brook); and, various small ponds and field drains.

13.4.2 To the east of Brackley, the River Great Ouse is classified as an artificial/heavily modified water body with “good” ecological potential under the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The EA has stated that the water body “does not require assessment” for water chemistry and is “not designated” for physical characteristics. To the west of Brackley, (a tributary of) the River Great Ouse is classified as a heavily modified water body with “moderate” ecological potential. The EA has stated that the water body “does not require assessment” for water chemistry and is “not designated” for physical characteristics. The EA predicts that by 2015,

88 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

the water quality of the River Great Ouse will not have changed (i.e. the River Great Ouse will continue to be of “moderate” or “good” ecological potential under the WFD).

13.4.3 The Radstone Brook is classified as a heavily modified water body with “moderate” ecological potential. The EA has stated that the water body “does not require assessment” for water chemistry and is “not designated” for physical characteristics. The EA predicts that by 2015, the water quality of the Radstone Brook will not have changed (i.e. the Radstone Brook will continue to be of “moderate” ecological potential under the WFD).

13.4.4 The EA holds no data regarding the WFD status for the Mixbury Brook, which is a tributary of the River Great Ouse.

13.4.5 There are no licensed surface water abstractions in the study area. This section of the route is also within a designated surface water Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ).

13.4.6 Most of the route in this area traverses the Great Oolite Group, which largely comprises limestone formations and is classified as either a Principal or Secondary Aquifer. In the River Great Ouse valleys the Great Oolite formations are eroded to expose the underlying Lias Group Whitby Mudstone Formation, which is classified as unproductive and not considered a groundwater receptor. 1:50,000-scale mapping by the British Geological Survey (BGS) indicates that the Inferior Oolite (a Secondary Aquifer) does not outcrop within the study area. It would be expected in the River Great Ouse valleys above the Lias if it were present.

13.4.7 Superficial deposits comprise Alluvium, Head and Glaciofluvial deposits in the valleys, where they can be in hydraulic continuity with local watercourses. Outside of the valleys, the superficial deposits are composed of Till, which will contain very little groundwater.

13.4.8 Cuttings could be flooded by groundwater in superficial deposits. High groundwater velsle in the Great Oolite formation could also cause flooding around Newton Purcell and Finmere Plantation. The Great Oolite groundwater body is the only one of significance in the study area and is part of the Upper Bedford Ouse Oolite, and is designated under the Water Framework Directive (WFD) as Poor Status with an objective to reach Good Status by 2027.

13.4.9 Near Brackley the geology comprises superficial Till deposits (unproductive aquifer), overlying Blisworth Limestone Formation (secondary type B aquifer), the Rutland Formation mudstone (secondary type B aquifer) and the underlying Taynton Limestone (principal aquifer). These form part of the Great Oolite Group and feed a number of springs that issue from the hillsides in the Radstone area.

13.4.10 Section 7, Ecology, describes the Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI and three other sites of local conservation interest. There is very limited information regarding the water resources in the vicinity of these areas. A more detailed review will be reported in the formal ES if additional information becomes available.

13.4.11 There are no public or private licensed abstractions within 1km of the route, and no Source Protection Zones (SPZs) are traversed either. BGS data reports two water wells within 500m of the route (assumed to be unlicensed or disused), and 30 other boreholes in the same corridor.

13.4.12 There are three discharge consents to surface water or to ground within the study area.

13.4.13 The watercourse crossed to the east of Mixbury has a catchment of about 3km2 and the route crosses 20m of Flood Zones 2 and 3.

13.4.14 The River Great Ouse would be crossed twice by the Proposed Scheme: once west of Westbury, where it has a catchment of 77km2 and crosses 250m of Flood Zone 2 and 230m of

89 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

Flood Zone 3; and secondly at Turweston, where it has a catchment of 38km2, and crosses 120m of Flood Zone 2, 110m of which is also Flood Zone 3.

13.4.15 The EA has provided modelling information from their hydraulic model for this area of the River Great Ouse, which has been used in the design and assessment of the Proposed Scheme.

13.4.16 Surface water flooding from rainfall occurs around Newton Purcell, and around Mixbury Plantation where a series of lakes and ponds occur. South of Mixbury and near Turweston, dry valleys could be subject to surface water flooding every 30 years or more.

13.4.17 In addition, local and regional guidance relevant to this assessment includes Buckinghamshire County Council Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA), Oxfordshire County Council PFRA, Aylesbury Vale Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA), Cherwell District SFRA and West Northamptonshire SFRA. 51,52,53,54,55 13.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

13.5.1 The draft CoCP sets out the measures and standards of work that will be applied to the construction of the Proposed Scheme. It would provide effective management and control of the impacts during the construction period including those required for utility diversions and strengthening, and culvert installation.

13.5.2 The draft CoCP includes the following general provisions: • Implementing, in consultation with the Environment Agency, a surface water and/or groundwater monitoring plan as required; • Undertaking further site-specific risk assessments associated with excavation work and impacts on surface water; groundwater; abstractions; aquifers and private water supplies; • Preparing site-specific flood risk management plans for those areas at risk of flooding; • Avoiding the use of contaminating materials through appropriate design, construction and equipment specification and wherever possible, using biodegradable substances; • Following the measures outlined in the draft CoCP for the provision of suitable site drainage, for the storage and control or oils and chemicals and to mitigate against accidental spillages in the CoCP; and • Undertaking, as required, further site-specific pre-construction monitoring to establish baseline water quality conditions for watercourses; groundwater and during construction works. This would enable the effectiveness of those mitigation measures introduced to limit pollution risk to be monitored and any pollution incidents to be identified.

13.5.3 The following examples illustrate how the measures set out in the draft CoCP would reduce potential effects to levels that would not be significant: • There would be minor culverts installed to cross the Mixbury Brook and various unnamed drainage channels at the east of the study area, together with Radstone Brook to the west. Mixbury Brook and the unnamed drainage channels are considered to be receptors of moderate value, and Radstone Brook of good value. Following the application of mitigation within the draft CoCP and agreement with the EA, no significant effects would

51 Jacobs (2011) Buckinghamshire County Council PFRA. 52 JBA (2011) Oxfordshire County Council PFRA. 53 Royal Haskoning (2007) Aylesbury Vale District Council SFRA. 54 Jacobs (2008) Cherwell District SFRA. 55 Scott Wilson (2009) West Northamptonshire SFRA.

90 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

be anticipated. With respect to Radstone Brook, confirmation of any additional measures required relative to its WFD status will be provided in the formal ES; • Through the application of best practice guidance for construction close to and over watercourses, potential effects to water quality in the River Great Ouse can be effectively controlled, and impacts to flow would be negligible. Measures set out within the draft CoCP would manage potential pollution risks associated with the installation of foundations close to the river channel and as a result no significant effects on flow would occur; and • Dewatering may be required during construction in an area that is shown to have a ‘High’ susceptibility of groundwater flooding to the south of Radstone associated with the Alluvial Deposits of a small stream. The draft CoCP will ensure that the overall impact of dewatering activities and disposal of groundwater will not increase the risk of flooding, resulting in no significant effect on the flood risk to local receptors.

13.5.4 Measures defined in the draft CoCP, including detailed method statements, would ensure that there would be no effect on surface water quality or flows associated with construction.

13.5.5 Two permanent crossings (on viaduct) and one temporary bridge crossing would be required of the River Great Ouse, a receptor of high value. During the construction phase, no in-river works are anticipated; however, working over the watercourse and within the floodplain would be required. The installation of piers in close proximity to the channel would be needed, which in the absence of mitigation could result in large to very large adverse effects upon the watercourse during the construction phase.

13.5.6 The cutting to the north of Brackley would pass through the Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI, which is notified for its calcicolous grassland habitat. It is not believed to be reliant on groundwater. Geological mapping shows the cutting would be in the Taynton Limestone Formation of the Great Oolite. This is a relatively free-draining formation that is not likely to have sustained a shallow groundwater table near the disused railway. Even though the Proposed Scheme would be in cutting up to 4m below the bottom of the disused railway cutting, it is not considered likely to affect any groundwater. As such, the impact on the SSSI by changes in the groundwater table is anticipated to be negligible, and therefore not significant.

13.5.7 The greatest potential impact on groundwater would be most likely to occur in the deepest cutting (the Turweston cutting), between the two River Great Ouse viaducts. The cutting would be up to 17m deep in this area and would be located in the White Limestone formation of the Great Oolite Group (a high-value receptor). There are insufficient data available to determine groundwater flow, although it is anticipated to be towards the River Great Ouse in this area. There are no springs noted on Ordnance Survey mapping at the southern end of the cutting, which would indicate the presence of significant groundwater if they were present. There are, however, “issues” and springs around Turweston, at the north of the cutting, indicating some groundwater discharge from the formation in that area. The Whitby Mudstone Formation directly underlies the superficial Alluvium in the vicinity of the River Great Ouse and is therefore groundwater from the Great Oolite Group aquifer is unlikely to provide substantial baseflow to the river. As such the impact to the river is considered to be neutral, and therefore not a significant effect.

13.5.8 There are no groundwater abstractions within the vicinity of the Turweston cutting and substantial groundwater is not considered to be present in the aquifers. The presence of deeper aquifer units that would not be affected around cuttings indicate that theGreat Oolite high-value aquifer is unlikely to be substantially affected in this area. Therefore, the impact to

91 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

the Great Oolite aquifer in the area of the cutting is considered to be negligible, therefore not a significant effect.

13.5.9 Aerial photographs show evidence of one spring/seepage in the Turweston Manor Grassland LWS that would be impacted by the scheme. A small pocket of grassland (about 2ha) to the west of the Proposed Scheme could also be isolated due to a reduction in groundwater flow. Within the area of Turweston Manor, the underlying Great Oolite aquifer is not overlain by superficial deposits and may be in direct connectivity with these grasslands.The impact on groundwater from the Proposed Scheme upstream of the crossing is likely to be minor and so the effect on the grassland would be minor in terms of groundwater flow (i.e. not significant). The impact on groundwater flow down-gradient of the crossing on the grassland could be moderate, resulting in a potentially significant effect on a small area of grassland.

13.5.10 Groundwater monitoring as required prior to construction would establish the extent of any impacts on the Turweston Manor Grassland LWS and determine if any mitigation is required. Mitigation could include directing a portion of rail drainage to the sites to replace any groundwater seepage that is intercepted by the cuttings by designing the balancing ponds to allow this to occur. This would reduce the magnitude of any impacts to negligible, which is not significant.

13.5.11 The impact on shallow groundwater and its users would be mitigated by conducting a detailed water feature survey and monitoring groundwater levels prior to construction and sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) would encourage infiltration back into the ground where drainage intercepts groundwater flow. Where this is not possible drainage would be discharged as close as possible to natural discharge points (springs) or nearby watercourses. This would result in a negligible impact on surface water bodies, which is not significant.

13.5.12 A number of construction areas would be located within areas at risk of flooding. During the construction stage there is a risk of flooding in terms of inundating excavations, damage to plant and materials used on-site and the safety of the construction workforce. Any potential for increase in off-site flood risks would be managed by measures defined in the draft CoCP and reported in the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA).

13.5.13 The construction of a culvert across the tributary east of Mixbury could have a slight adverse but not significant effect on flood risk during the works.

13.5.14 Both River Great Ouse crossings are intended to be on viaducts. The construction works would have temporary supports and other works in the floodplain. This would create a slight adverse effect from flood risk on local receptors at each location, which is not significant. Likely residual significant effects

13.5.15 No significant residual effects to surface water resources, groundwater resources and flood risk are predicted at this current time. These assessment conclusions will be verified and reported in the formal ES. Further mitigation

13.5.16 Further measures currently being considered, but which are not yet part of the design, include: • Monitoring of groundwater levels may be required in locations where there are existing groundwater users that may be impacted by the construction of the scheme. This would include pre-construction monitoring to determine nature and scale of any effects on groundwater levels; • Avoiding below ground construction in the saturated zone, if at all possible;

92 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

• Installing cut-off structures around excavations; • Ensuring cut-off structures are driven to sufficient depths to meet an underlying strata or zone of lower permeability; and • Creating hydraulic barriers, such as discharge pumped water to recharge trenches, around excavations. 13.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

13.6.1 The Proposed Scheme has been designed to control impacts on the water environment through the following: • Drainage has been designed to reduce the rate and volume of run-off from the railway and prevent an increase in flood risk; • Sustainable drainage systems, where appropriate, have been included to encourage water to soak back into the ground; and where drainage or cuttings intercept groundwater flow; and • Sustainable drainage systems would also provide opportunities to reduce, as far as reasonably practicable, the effects on water quality by reducing potential contaminants through filtration, vegetation adsorption or settlement.

13.6.2 Best practice pollution control guidance would be adopted, as far as reasonably practicable, for maintenance of the Proposed Scheme.

13.6.3 All standard drainage including drainage from associated access roads and hard standings, would discharge either, under agreement, to sewer or to SuDS attenuation ponds, prior to subsequent discharge to sewer/watercourses as appropriate. All discharges to watercourses will be conducted in accordance with Environment Agency or LLFA consent conditions with respect to quality and flow, as appropriate.

13.6.4 With specific regard to cuttings, surface water runoff not collected by v-ditches at the cutting’s crest would be intercepted by slope drainage and connected to filter drains.Overall there would be a negligible, and thus not significant, effect on surface water receptors from these sources.

13.6.5 Drainage waters from the viaduct over the River Great Ouse are not anticipated to be contaminated, however in order to ensure that adverse impacts do not occur to water quality in this high value receptor, appropriate treatment mechanisms will be integrated within the drainage designs for the viaduct. No significant effects would be predicted to remain.

13.6.6 The installation of culverts and effects on flow in the Mixbury Brook, Radstone Brook and unnamed drainage channels is not anticipated to be significant. This will be verified and reported in the formal ES.

13.6.7 Surface water flows near Radstone and Westbury may be affected by interception, by the cutting, of groundwater or the lowering of groundwater levels that currently supply springs in the area. Mitigation to improve percolation of intercepted surface water runoff and groundwater from the shallow superficial aquifer would be considered. If practical, the intention would be to have water issue naturally from the lower limestone further downstream. Drainage design would encourage infiltration back into the underlyingTaynton Limestone. This would be done, for example, through installation of sand wells in the base of swales or attenuation ponds. The Taynton Limestone is likely to discharge in the same streams as the shallower superficial aquifer and as such the groundwater contribution to the streams

93 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

should remain the same. The drainage design would result in a slight effect to the groundwater and surface water, which is not significant.

13.6.8 The embankment and culvert over the watercourse near Mixbury would remove some floodplain storage, although the culvert would be designed to convey the 1:100 year annual probability (1%) flood flows (including climate change effects). Appropriate compensation storage would be provided, and therefore the effect would not be significant.

13.6.9 The viaduct to cross the River Great Ouse at Westbury would have piers supporting the viaduct in the floodplain, but none in the actual river channel itself. The surrounding land is predominantly agricultural and there are no properties immediately upstream of the crossing. Given the width of the floodplain and the volume of storage lost the effect would be slight adverse from river flood risk, which is not significant.

13.6.10 At the River Great Ouse crossing at Turweston, the flood plain is narrower with steeper valley slopes. The loss of flood plain storage and impact on flow velocities is considered moderate, with a moderate adverse effect from river flood risk on local receptors.Appropriate compensation storage would be provided; therefore, this would not be a significant effect.

13.6.11 At the cutting past Newton Purcell, the watercourse would require an inverted siphon to cross the route. This would have a slight adverse effect on local surface water flood risk due to the potential for blockages affecting the siphon. The implementation of an effective maintenance regime would ensure that the effect would not be significant.

13.6.12 At Mixbury Plantation south of Westbury and the River Great Ouse north of Turweston, the route design would ensure that the effect on risks of surface water flooding would be neutral, and therefore not significant.

13.6.13 The impact on the risk of groundwater flooding within the study area would be neutral as there would be no permanent features that are likely to increase localised groundwater levels. In all areas where there is a susceptibility to groundwater flooding, the effect on the risk of groundwater flooding is assessed as neutral and therefore not significant.

13.6.14 All the watercourse crossings where there is an adverse effect on flood risk will be assessed in more detail, and design changes made where appropriate. Appropriate floodplain compensation storage will be designed in to mitigate any loss of floodplain storage.The impact on flood risk will be reduced to less than moderate; therefore, the effect is not significant. Likely residual significant effects

13.6.15 No residual effects have been identified at this time.

94 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I References 14 References Arup/URS (2013) Phase One: Draft Code of Construction Practice. HS2 Ltd, London.

Aylesbury Vale District Council (2007) Adopted Local Plan, Saved Policies.

Aylesbury Vale District Council (2008) Aylesbury Vale Landscape Character Assessment.

Aylesbury Vale District Council (2008), Landscape Characterisation.

Aylesbury Vale District Council (2009) Submission Core Strategy.

Buckinghamshire County Council (2006) Buckinghamshire Landscape Plan.

Buckinghamshire County Council Bucks Strategic Partnership (2009) Sustainable Community Strategy for Buckinghamshire 2009-2026.

Buckinghamshire County Council (2011) Local Transport Plan 3 (2011-2016).

Buckinghamshire & Milton Keynes (2006) Historic Landscape Characterisation.

Buckinghamshire & Milton Keynes (2008) Buckinghamshire & Milton Keynes Biodiversity Action Plan 2000- 2010, Revision 2008; Available at: http://www.buckinghamshirepartnership.co.uk/partnership/bmkbp/ biodiversity_action_plan.page; Accessed 7 February 2013.

Cherwell District Council (1995) Cherwell District Landscape Assessment.

Cherwell District Council (2007) Adopted Local Plan, Saved Policies.

Cherwell District Council (2011) Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan.

Cranfield University (2001)The National Soil Map of England and Wales 1:250,000 scale. National Soil Resources Institute, Cranfield University, UK.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2009)Likelihood of Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land.

Department for Communities and Local Government (2010) Index of Multiple Deprivation.

Department for Communities and Local Government (2012) National Planning Policy Framework.

Government Office for the South East (2009)The South East Plan, Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East of England.

Jacobs (2008) Cherwell District Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.

Jacobs (2011) Buckinghamshire County Council Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment.

JBA (2011) Oxfordshire County Council Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment.

McEvoy F.M et al. (2007) A guide to mineral safeguarding in England; British Geological Survey Open Report; OR/07/035; 36pp.

Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1988) Agricultural Land Classification of England and Wales: Revised guidelines and criteria for grading the quality of agricultural land.

Natural England (1996) The Character of England 1996 Available at http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ publications/nca/default.aspx. Accessed 8 January 2013.

94 95 CFA Report – Newton Purcell to Brackley/No 14 I References

Natural England (2002) Provisional Agricultural Land Classification mapping at 1:250,000 (version date 10 January 2002) [online] Available at http://www.gis.naturalengland.org.uk/pubs/gis/gis_register.asp. Accessed 18 February 2013.

Natural England (2012) Technical Information Note TIN049: Agricultural Land Classification: Protecting the best and most versatile agricultural land.

Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (2006 Chapter 16); Natural England.

Northamptonshire County Council (2006) Current Landscape Character Assessment.

Northamptonshire County Council (2007) Historic Landscape Characterisation.

Northamptonshire County Council (2012) Northamptonshire Transportation Plan Fit for Purpose Local Transport Plan.

Office for National Statistics; Census 2011;http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/census/2011/index. html; Accessed 1 February 2013.

Oxfordshire County Council, Natural England and the Earth Trust (2004) Oxfordshire Wildlife & Landscape Study.

Royal Haskoning (2007) Aylesbury Vale District Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.

Scott Wilson (2009) West Northamptonshire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.

South Northamptonshire Council (2007) Adopted Local Plan, Saved Policies.

Standing Order 27A of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons relating to private business (environmental assessment). House of Commons.

The Hedgerow Regulations 1997 (1997 No. 1160). London. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

Weeds Act 1959 (7 & 8 Eliz II c. 54). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

West Northamptonshire District Council (2009) Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.

West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit (2012) Joint Core Strategy.

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (c.69). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

World Health Organization (2009) Night Noise Guidelines for Europe.