PUBLIC SESSION MINUTES of ORAL EVIDENCE Taken Before

PUBLIC SESSION

MINUTES OF ORAL EVIDENCE

taken before

HIGH SPEED RAIL COMMITTEE

On the

HIGH SPEED RAIL (LONDON – WEST MIDLANDS) BILL

Monday 29 June 2015 (Afternoon)

In Committee Room 5

PRESENT:

Mr Robert Syms (Chair) Sir Peter Bottomley Mr Henry Bellingham Ian Mearns

______

IN ATTENDANCE

Mr Timothy Mould QC, Lead Counsel, Department for Transport Mr Alan Kauffman, representing South Ruislip Residents Association Mr Graham Bartram, representing Ruislip Residents Association

______

IN PUBLIC SESSION

INDEX

Subject Page

South Ruislip Residents Association

Submissions by Mr Kauffman 3

Response from Mr Mould QC 8

Ruislip Residents Association

Submissions by Mr Bartram 14

Response from Mr Mould 21

(at 14.14)

1. CHAIR: Order, order. Good afternoon everybody. Welcome back to the HS2 Committee, following our visit on Friday to the Speaker’s constituency of Buckingham. This week we continue with the Ruislip area; later in the week, we’ll hear from Nick Hurd MP and from the Mayor of London. Today we’ll sit until about three o’clock and then resume at 5.00 and sit through the evening until we finish hearing petitions. Once again, the Committee appreciates petitioners understanding and being flexible on timings. We have had some good, succinct petition presentations. These work well: shorter works much better before this Committee. It works especially well if petitioners start with a clear statement of what it is they’re looking for.

2. Councillor Kauffman, welcome?

South Ruislip Residents Association

3. MR KAUFFMAN: Good afternoon, Mr Chairman; good afternoon members of the Committee. Can I have slide 1 please – it would be 2, actually, sorry. Right, okay. My name is Councillor Allan Kauffman. I’m here to represent the Residents Association of South Ruislip, together with the South Ruislip Ward. Mr Jackson who was speaking on behalf of South Ruislip residents, his wife has taken ill so he can’t be here, so it will be me speaking for both sets of people.

4. The following presentation – and we’re looking at the impact on the area – mainly on the utility works, which is needed for the HS2 project. Can we have the next slide please? Just to give you a bit of background, South Ruislip has just over 12,000 residents, 77% of them of working age and economically active. We have 4,600-plus properties, which are owner-occupied. South Ruislip has four main roads, already overwhelmed by traffic. I know you’ve heard loads of things about traffic and I will try and be very brief on this issue. I shall be talking about Victoria Road, Long Drive, Station Approach and West End Road, and how it affects the immediate area. Next slide please? That is the main area of South Ruislip showing the intersection between Station Approach, Long Drive, and the Victoria Road; and then the West End Road follows on from Station Approach.

5. Okay, next slide please? Within these roads – within specifically, Victoria Road,

there’s 85 businesses, 51 major retail and commercial outlets, 34 retail businesses, together with eight community facilities, including libraries, young people centres, Goals, Queensmead Academy, Bourne Primary, Deanesfield Primary, an early years centre, and special needs resources centre. The additional works, we feel, will cause problems for a protracted period. I think that – as someone has just reminded me – that six retail parks and not 51, I apologise for that.

6. Okay, can we have the next slide, please? This is just to give you some indication of the sizes of the businesses in the area – large businesses like TK Maxx, Halfords, Honda, PC World, DFS, and it goes on and on. What’s missing from there is a 30- checkout Sainsbury’s, which is right on the corner of Station Approach and Long Drive, and is a very active store.

7. Can I have the next slide please? These are the community facilities, along the Victoria Road and first top left hand corner is South Ruislip Library; adjacent to that is our youth centre. Bottom left is the Queensmead Sports Centre and bottom right is Goals Football Centre. All these, again, are on the Victoria Road.

8. Slide 8 please? Now if you add into that mix, further congestion that will be envisaged: Lidl, Aldi, B&M, Asda superstore, a cinema, three local housing schemes, two speculative sites, and one Council. That will actually amount to something in the order of 300 houses. All these will be built before 2017, when this project will start. So, just add those into the mix of what I’ve just told you about, that will give you some idea of the traffic – the seriousness of the traffic problem we have in South Ruislip.

9. Can I have the next slide please? Again, I won’t bore you with all this too much. On your left, you can see traffic building up – that’s eight o’clock in the morning, going along Victoria Road with the junction, at the traffic lights with Station Approach; and on the other side is a similar picture coming home at night. Okay, something like 800 cars cross this intersection and why you don’t see any cars coming the other way is because they’re all waiting at the other side of the lights to turn right. You have another set of traffic backed up in the middle of that, down Long Drive, waiting to cross over. So you put all that into the mix and you have a big traffic problem.

10. Okay, let me take the next slide please? Also, together with that, our concerns also are the primary schools in the area, and one Academy, equating to something like

900 primary places, and there’s about 1,000-plus at Queensmead Academy, all use that road to facilitate them getting to school. The train journeys by commuters – that 1,500 is not 1,500; it’s actually 15,000. That was a typo. That’s the annual journeys from our station, South Ruislip.

11. Can I have the next slide please? We believe that traffic modelling alone cannot appreciate the complexity of the traffic in an area, and therefore we request a site visit be made, and a traffic management plan produced to take account of the findings. I have seen traffic modelling before, done by outside consultants, who don’t know the area – or having visited the area – and what you actually see them come up with is nothing like what you know is to be true in the area.

12. Can I have the next slide please? Okay, now we come onto the vent shaft. We accept the vent shaft, which is part of the tunnelling procedure for HS2. We also are aware that there are something in the order of 200 lorry movements a day, which will go down the Victoria Road, up the Field End Road, and then toward Northolt and onto the A40. We’re very concerned about the volume of the HGV lorries turning right into Victoria Road with potential dangers to pedestrians – especially children travelling to and from the schools that I’ve already mentioned. Our concerns also over air pollution, and just add one more thing, the borough has, over the last two years, has had a major refurbishment plan on our roads, and all the roads we’re talking about here have been resurfaced. With the amount of lorries going through there, we expect to see some damage on the road. But our primary concern is the safety of the children and pedestrians going along that road.

13. Next slide please? Okay, I’ve explained about the vent shaft; where the traffic is actually going through, so can we have the next slide please? Right, now we come onto the utility works which we believe would be an absolute nightmare if not managed properly. We’ve read the responses to our petitions, 577 and 738 with interest. However, each site, we believe, has its own unique impact on the local area, and the wider community which doesn't appear to be understood. So, we actually are asking for a site visit. We think that’s imperative for potential problems of traffic flow, damage to the environment, stress and safety of residents, businesses and community services.

14. Can I have the next slide please? This is the utility works at Station Approach and

Long Drive. I’d like to just bring this up here – enlarge it if we can? That area that we’re talking about there is where people park for our local shops. There’s nine parking bays there; coming further along you’ve got the Middlesex Arms, you’ve got the Ramada Hotel; you've got a massive conference centre behind the Ramada Hotel. You've also got a big cash and carry business there as well; and of course, our South Ruislip Station. What I need to know is that all these businesses and retail outlets will not be affected – or their entrance and exits to their premises won’t be affected by this; and also, I’d like to know whether the car parking in that big red area that I showed you at the top is going to be actually closed down for works on that particular site. So it’s parking for the shops which, if we take that out, I think the businesses will suffer terribly because that’s what they use for people to park in front of their shops to do business with; and also the big hotel and the pub and the other businesses down there must, must, must have access and egress to their premises.

15. We come down here to Great Central Avenue, and I just need the Committee to let me know if we’re actually going to shut Great Central Avenue off, or is that just a site compound and the road will operate as normal? There is one point here, and that is if, perchance, a lorry comes from the West End Road down Station Approach which is high-sided, it will not be able to get under the bridge, and the only way it can get out of there is down Great Central Avenue –

16. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: If you put your finger on the screen, the magic will show us what you’re talking about!

17. MR KAUFFMAN: That’s there; there’s an island there, and these big juggernauts can just about turn there to get back on track. If you actually get one of these stuck there, coupled with the utility works, you are going to have a major traffic problem in that area. Okay, can we have the next slide please?

18. This is the Bridgwater Road site, and as the Committee might know, this is one- way from the West End Road, through to the Victoria Road, and it’s for access only from the Victoria Road into Bridgwater Road. This particular area here, this is where you are suggesting that your site accesses and that is a gated area for the houses – from here to here – and what I want to know is, will the gates be shut at night, thus retaining the security for the residents of the area; and also if this is going to be used for

construction traffic, etc., will the residents be able to use their garages.

19. Coming under the bridge to the West End Road, you’ve got a right-hand turn of the West End Road, and a left-hand turn. Down Bridgwater Road, and I’d like to know whether or not we are going to shut Bridgwater Road, and if we are, where is that traffic going to go to? So there’s my major concerns, together with the fact that, in the actual park itself, that we would request that it is put back as it was. So I think that covers – we actually went down Manningtree Road last night, and had a look at this, and you cannot get anything down that alleyway, if that’s where you’re intending to -

20. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Point again?

21. MR KAUFFMAN: Yes, someone’s built on the back of their garage out into that alleyway – legally or illegally, I don’t know, but you couldn't get a lorry down there. So you might have to look at that quite seriously.

22. Okay. Can I have the next slide please? Before outlining my request and winding this up, on Friday I actually filled up with petrol – I had 82 litres I put on board, and I went along the Station Approach to West End Road, and suddenly realised there was something wrong with the vehicle, so I got the vehicle turned around then it stopped right on the junction at the traffic lights – I suddenly then realised I’d put 82 litres of petrol in a diesel car.

23. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: You’re not the only person to do that!

24. MR KAUFFMAN: The point I want to make is the fact that within five or six minutes of phoning the RAC, the traffic was back to the Polish War Memorial, and that’s just me blocking half a carriageway. So I thought I would just throw that into the mix.

25. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Keep that to yourself or other people will get ideas!

26. MR KAUFFMAN: Okay, finally, Chairman and Committee, before I outline requests to mitigate the impacts of the project, we would ask for more than just a desktop study on the actual traffic; more detail about an assurance about works surrounding vent shaft sites and the three utility sites; project manager contact details for councillors and the emergency services, have information to share. Next slide?

Comprehensive project plan for each site involving all stakeholders; realistic contingency plans to cover all eventualities; a robust traffic diversion route to take account of traffic flow issues. Next slide please? Clear signposting in advance of critical route changes. The major problem with continental drivers coming of the A40, down the West End Road, and then turning right into Station Approach, by the time they get there, it’s too late. They have to try and move these trucks around. So I would suggest that probably signage at the A40 or even up at the Target Roundabout – and it probably needs to be in several languages, so that the Polish and Hungarian drivers can understand that they can’t go down Station Approach. Strategically planned work on one site at a time, keeping one carriage open at all times. Clear site safety procedures, appropriate parking of plant and workers’ vehicles.

27. Next slide please? Possible consideration given to loss of earnings and possible – some of the small businesses could actually go out of business over this if we don’t get this right. In other words, the parking and access to their shops, etc. Interruption of residents and businesses, water supplies, general utility works; and consideration of increase in traffic flow, owing to planned housing schemes and the new retail outlets on Station Approach, Long Drive and Victoria Road, which will come into play prior to the commencement of the HS2 project.

28. I think this is the last slide, Mr Chairman. We would ask for a robust, strategic management plan that ensures the residents, the businesses and the community facilities of South Ruislip come first. Thank you very much for your time.

29. CHAIR: Thank you very much Councillor Kauffman. Mr Mould?

30. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Thank you very much. If I can put up P7013(5), just to remind everybody of the approach we expect to take to implementation of utilities works. The majority of works will be carried out during core hours – there will be some need for night time working, but it will be kept to the reasonable minimum. We will operate on the basis of rolling work sites, which with a typical length at any one time, of no more 50 metres; and anyone who has seen a water main being replaced or a gas pipe being sleeved will know what I mean by that – one works down the street. We expect that there will be a need for some partial closure of roads resulting in traffic controls, but that will be on the basis of a fairly, well, typical example of temporary traffic lights,

which mean that a single lane is able to continue to operate during the utilities works in question. Where we do need to carry out multiple diversions in the same street, works will be arranged, wherever practical, to avoid multiple openings. If we then turn to P7014, just to get a sense of the works that we’re dealing with in the area, which Councillor Kauffman is dealing with – P7014?

31. Again, we’ve already heard some debate about this last week, but moving from east to west, one can see that there are some works proposed in Victoria Road – where I’m showing now – which involve protection or diversion of nine utilities assets, likely to take up to six months depending on what is discovered when we begin to investigate these utilities. Daily number of works, 5-20; daily two-way vehicle movements during the peak activity, we say up to 10. Then moving a little further west, Long Drive – which is one of the ones that the Councillor Kauffman raised – we have six assets to protect or divert there; we expect to be there between three to six months; and the number of vehicle movements two-way, up to 10.

32. The vent shaft work site is not marked on this but I’m showing it now. That’s the Ruislip vent shaft, we are predicting daily traffic movements of between 50-100 over the peak, two-year period for construction of that. Then we move onto Bridgwater Road, which I’m marking now, that – I think that’s six assets – and three to six months expected duration, up to 10 vehicles two-way during the peak. Then finally, West End Road, of which you will hear some more later, when we hear from Mr Masni and Councillor Green, I think, a number of – where there we have about nine utilities, up to six months expected duration, and up to 10 vehicles.

33. So that’s the broad picture here of utilities works. I don’t need to remind you of the reasons why we are doing these works. What I can say is that our position is that we expect – our general approach is that we expect to ensure that reasonable pedestrian access is maintained throughout these works to commercial premises, which abut the highways where the works are being carried out, and where reasonably practicable to achieve it, we would look to maintain vehicular access as well.

34. The other matters that were raised are all essentially questions for preparing in a detailed management plans, which is what we will be doing under our commitments to the Committee – and in particular, these are matters that will be dealt with under the

preparation of local environment management plans, which would involve project management, liaison, a helpline, engaging with the local community through their local representatives – both their political representatives and their trade representatives and so forth – to seek as far as we can to coordinate the works that we do so that they cause the minimum reasonable disruption that we can achieve while carrying out the works that we need to do in order to construct the railway.

35. So finally, just coming to the specific points, I think the first question was, will entrances to shops on Long Drive, Station Approach, will that be affected? Well, it may be but our objective and our policy is to seek to maintain access so far as we reasonably can. Will parking for those shops be affected? It may be, but we will seek to ensure that any interference of parking through having to close off parking spaces will be kept to the reasonable minimum. Are we shutting Station Approach, Great Central Avenue? No, that is not something that we expect to do. The Bridgwater Road site, the concern about whether we will compromise the security of that community? That is something that we would expect to work with the residents to manage so that we, as far as we can, avoid having to do that. Will we shut Bridgwater Road? We don’t expect to shut the Bridgwater Road; any closure of the road would be kept to the reasonable minimum, but it’s not something we expect to do at the moment. Will any works in the park be restored to their existing? We don’t expect to have to do any significant work to the park, but if, in the event that we do, yes, we would expect to restore it to its existing, after those works have been carried out.

36. Beyond that, we’re at a level of detail, I’m afraid where, again, we’re not really in a position to give absolutely firm commitments at this stage in the development of the project. If the petitioner would like us to write, in relation to those specific points, just to put on record, so they have a letter, what we can say at this stage, I’d be very happy to do so.

37. A couple of specific points have been raised today. The answers may be somewhat qualified, but we can certainly provide a record in that way. As you say, that will be in addition to, rather than in substitution for the assurances that have already been given and which are in the pack.

38. MR KAUFFMAN: Yes, that would be quite acceptable actually, to get that. I

think the most important thing here is that all the stakeholders are well-informed at all times; we will get through this, but we’re looking at 18 months of absolute hell, and I think that – I hope that you will make a site visit and all your plans etc. will be based on what you see on the ground. You mentioned about movements: I thought there was going to be something like 200 movements from the site, the vent shaft at Victoria Road?

39. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Well, the figure I have – our prediction in the Environment Statement is for HGVs, for 90-100; but I’m being told that we’re able to provide a slightly range now. We might be able to get it down to as low as 50. But that of course depends on detailed planning. But that’s what we’re aiming for.

40. MR KAUFFMAN: Well, I hope we will have clarification, if you can write to us on those issues.

41. MR MOULD QC (DfT): We would like – obviously, I mention those who we would expect to work with, for the preparation of the local environment management plan – Councillor Kauffman, I take it you’re a Borough Councillor?

42. MR KAUFFMAN: I’m a ward councillor for South Ruislip, yes.

43. MR MOULD QC (DfT): So you, if not you, whoever is in your shoes – we would expect to engage with you in drawing up plans for these works.

44. MR KAUFFMAN: Right, okay. But your response does say 200, so I’ll expect to –

45. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Alright, well if there’s a need to clarify that, we’ll –

46. MR KAUFFMAN: Can I just ask one more thing? It struck me that while you’ve got the utility works going on at Station Approach, we have a major problem under that bridge with flooding. It occurred to me that while you've got all these mains and everything else up, that you might have a look at the drainage, so that we can probably alleviate flooding – when you get a flash flood or it rains very heavily, that is impassable for pedestrians.

47. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Can the highways authority talk to HS2 about it?

48. MR KAUFFMAN: Yes, I just thought I’d mention it while we’ve got HS2 here.

49. CHAIR: Well, I suspect Councillor Kauffman, you’ll be talking to HS2 more than you ever dreamed of in due course, given the location of South Ruislip.

50. MR KAUFFMAN: Lovely.

51. CHAIR: Okay, have you any final comments?

52. MR KAUFFMAN: I can’t think of any – looking at all these notes I’ve got here.

53. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: The people behind you should be proud of the way you’ve done it, because you’ve done it in a practical way; you've asked sensible things, and you have had a fair response.

54. MS KAUFFMAN: Can the people behind say something as well? The fact that –

55. CHAIR: Are you another Councillor?

56. MS KAUFFMAN: I’m on South Ruislip Residents Association.

57. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Give your name?

58. MS KAUFFMAN: Lynn Kauffman, associated, obviously with him.

59. CHAIR: You don’t have be associated.

60. MR MEARNS: Are you the daughter?

61. MS KAUFFMAN: Now then, we have to wary of people like you. That’s the trick of you guys – you’re all chat and have a giggle, and then you put people totally off plan. But I would really implore you, on my knees if possible, to ask you to make a site visit, because listening to the HS2 guys, and I've listened to them in all the meetings that we’ve been to – they’re all very plausible and it’s all very interesting, and it’s not always straight. In South Ruislip, we have some major problems that are going to be exacerbated by the travel that’s going to be in addition to what’s going on in our area. That’s where my – and we really, really do need HS2 to come have a look. We’d like to walk you around so that you can actually see what’s there, so that at the end of the day, you don’t make a big mistake and alienate everybody, especially our business people.

I’ve finished thank you.

62. CHAIR: A brief comment?

63. WARD COUNCILLOR: Yes, I’m one of the ward councillors. I’d just like to pick you up on something you said, about you’d make sure there is always a single lane available. There’s only one lane along part of Station Approach, so if you close one lane, there are no lanes.

64. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Well, what I said was that our general approach will be to seek to carry out these works so that we maintain at least one lane available. Clearly, if we have a road in which there is a single lane, then that presents a slightly more difficult challenge, but it’s not the first time that works have been carried out on a single lane, and there’s a recognition by those carrying out the works that they have to try, so far as they can, to maintain it. There are ways in which you can do that, for example, you can try to limit any closure to a period of the day when the traffic is at its least. We’ve had to face the challenge up and down the line of this railway of trying to tie in bridge structures, for example, into existing roads, where we have built a bridge offline. We recognise that you can’t do that without closing the existing road for a period whilst you tie in the bridge. You can’t have people driving into concrete blocks while we’re tying in the bridge. So we plan that to take place on a Saturday night or something like between the hours of midnight and six in the morning, just as you see on the motorways: ‘Motorway closed, two weeks time so that we can carry out works’.

65. So, we recognise it, and I think we acknowledge to the community that there will be – within the generally relatively positive approach that I have outline to you – there will be some moments, some short periods where you may, if you happen to be unfortunate enough to be on the road at that point, you may experience some inconvenience. Our commitment is to seek to plan our works in consultation with the local community, through the local environment planning to keep it to the reasonable minimum. That’s all I can say to you now. I should say, in answer to Mrs Kauffman, I don’t think I will give anything away by saying that, whilst we are planning the detail of the works for this area, we will be visiting the area to make sure we understand what is going on.

66. CHAIR: The Committee are very aware of how bad the roads are – if we wanted

to go out for a nice drive, we wouldn't go to South Ruislip!

67. MR KAUFFMAN: Thank you Mr Chairman.

68. CHAIR: Thank you Councillor Kauffman, and to your assistants. Right, we now move on to petition 44, which is Graham Bartram

Ruislip Residents Association

69. MR BARTRAM: It’s been a very busy weekend.

70. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Armed forces?

71. MR BARTRAM: No, all the paperwork. Three years’ of questions answered in one day.

72. CHAIR: How big is Ruislip Residents Association?

73. MR BARTRAM: Well, we deliver our magazine to – sorry, we have 28,000 people live in our area, and we deliver our magazine to 9,000 households.

74. CHAIR: Okay.

75. MR BARTRAM: We’re one of the oldest residents associations in the country, we were founded in 1919, and obviously you’ve just heard from the other part of Ruislip, South Ruislip, Councillor Kauffman, so if we could have my first slide please?

76. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: This is the bit that’s less than 1,000 years old?

77. MR BARTRAM: Well, we are getting onto that bit. I’d like to start by introducing you to the community of Ruislip, because we’re not just a collection of houses and shops on a map; we are a community of people. Before you see the entry for Ruislip in the Domesday Book, probably one of the earlier pieces of evidence given at this Committee.

78. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Where is Ruislip?

79. MR MEARNS: It’s been crossed out!

80. MR BARTRAM: No, that’s just how they emphasised in those days. Ruislip has

existed since before the Norman Invasion, in the Domesday Book, it is in the Hundred Elthorne, in Middlesex, and is recorded as having 53 households, which in Domesday Book terms is quite large. It’s under the lordship of Arnulf of Hesdin and shortly after Arnulf got it, he gave it to Bec Abbey, which is in France – he made it the centre of their English estates, with the Great Barn – can I have the next slide please? – being built around 1280 to collect local tithes. The Church of St Martin of Tours was built in the mid-13th Century and has rare examples of medieval wall paintings. Can I have the next slide please? After the dissolution of the monasteries, the land passed to King’s College, Cambridge, and then life was fairly quite until the Metropolitan Railway arrived in 1904, and this led to a large expansion of the original village, with new housing estates and the High Street extending southwards to the new station. In 1931, the Residents Association realised that, if nothing was done, the expansion would eventually destroy the very character of the place, that had brought so many people to live there. They sent a delegation to King’s College, and persuaded the Fellows not to build on the remaining part of their land, but to sell it to Ruislip Northward Urban District Council, creating the town’s own green belt. To this day, the town is blessed with open spaces, a national nature reserve in the middle of it, woods, and a lake.

81. Next slide please? This is the beach at Ruislip Lido. There are working farms and fields; and we are not against innovation – we even have our own high speed railway. Ruislip Lido Railway, Britain’s longest 12-inch gauge railway. So, if HS2 want any advice on how to run a railway that has only three stations, then we are the experts.

82. Despite being in Greater London, we are more like a small town in the country. Last weekend, I went to our summer flower show. Next slide please? This is held in the Great Barn, where I perused the efforts of our keenest gardeners, have a cup of tea and a slice of homemade cake for £2, before seeing who won the best homemade wine category or baked the best scones. Afterwards, I visited the Cow Byre Gallery to look at the work produced by the local embroidery guild, before finishing off the day with a slice of homemade quiche in the small, volunteer-run café next to it. All this, in the Manor Farm Complex, a gift from King’s College Cambridge, which includes our library, museum, duck pond, the ruins of our castle, and our 20th Century theatre. This is not something you could do in most parts of London, but then Ruislip isn't like most parts of London. It has a very vibrant community.

83. The problem we have is that HS2 Limited is going to have no regard for communities. They have done all their planning from maps at their desks in London, failing to see the real world they are building a railway through, or the people who live there. On behalf of the Association, I took part in all the community forums, but I am afraid they were a waste of time. HS2 treated us with barely concealed contempt. They often failed to answer the most basic questions, and usually claimed not to have the information we requested – or that it would be coming later. One of the problems was that none of the HS2 people at the meetings appeared to have any power to make decisions or offer solutions. So what was the point of them?

84. The final insult came at the last meeting, where they announced their plans to dump millions of cubic metres of spoil on the fields of Ickenham, instead of removing it by rail, as they had promised. As it was the last meeting, there was no way for us to ask for more information, investigate alternatives, or do anything about it. When the draft Environmental Statement came out, it was full of errors for our areas. The Ruislip Conservation Area was shown as the older, much smaller area - next slide please? – and not the modern area which ends only a couple of hundred yards from the West Ruislip Portal. You can see on here, the pale green is what’s in the draft Environmental Statement, and the green outline is the actual conservation area. So you can see that’s where they had it finishing, and that is where it actually finishes.

85. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Ruislip both as a village and as a town interchangeably?

86. MR BARTRAM: Absolutely, depending on how we feel at the time. We don’t have a Town Council, so we can call it a town or village, depending on how we feel.

87. We reported the error, along with several others in our response to the draft, but when the final version was published, the mistakes were still there; in fact, the map you are looking at isn't from the draft, it’s from the final version. We also pointed out that one of the proposed construction routes given in the draft, via Ruislip High Street, Bury Street, Ladygate Lane, Breakspear Road and Breakspear Road South, was completely unsuitable for heavy lorries, as Ladygate Lane is a residential street with two primary schools on it. HS2 Limited assured us that this was a mistake – next slide please? – yet section 12.3.5 of the CFA Report Number 6 clearly shows that Ladygate Lane is still in

there.

88. So what do we believe? What HS2 Limited say or what it puts in print? As a result of this uncertainty, many households in Ruislip have been left wondering whether hundreds of lorries are going to be thundering past their child’s infant school. So far, our relationship with HS2 Limited has not been very productive, but now is our chance to ask you, the Select Committee, to hear our requests.

89. So, the first one, is to extend the tunnel. I’m sure you’ve heard it before. Many of the problems we are facing as a community can be greatly reduced or even eliminated by extending the Old Oak Common to West Ruislip Tunnel, to carry on, under the Colne Valley Park and then the M25, just before the Chiltern Tunnel. Our Council, Hillingdon, have commissioned a feasibility study by tunnelling experts, and have concluded that the cost of the tunnel would not be that much more than the viaduct option, but much less damaging to our community. We fully support our Council’s petition to have the tunnel extended. Interestingly, when we suggested this to HS2 Limited at the very first community forum, we were told that – next slide please? – tunnelling under the River Pinn would be problematic – Oh, that’s the Amazon, next slide please?

90. That’s the actual River Pinn. It’s about 10-feet wide, and about two feet deep. There’s another name for a river like that: it’s a stream.

91. MR BELLINGHAM: It goes into the Colne does it, eventually?

92. MR BARTRAM: Eventually, yes. If HS2 Limited can’t work out how to tunnel under the Pinn, then the whole project is doomed. Later, when talked into extending the tunnel all the way to the M25, we were told by HS2 Limited, we were told that tunnelling under the flooded gravel pits of the Colne Valley would be very difficult and expensive. Yet, when they unveiled their proposed route for the Heathrow Spur, from West Ruislip to Heathrow Airport, their tunnels ran under those very same lakes. How strange. They repeated this statement about tunnelling under gravel pits being difficult in the petitioner response document. Next slide please? So, please can we have the tunnel extended to the M25? This will save Ruislip Golf Course, and the Hillingdon Outdoor Activities Centre, and greatly reduce the impact of HS2 on our community. We still have the work to move services over the tunnel, but will be spared many years

of continuous construction and accompanying chaos.

93. Next slide please? Saving our community facilities. As it stands, without the tunnel extension, HS2 Limited will damage our 18 hole public golf course and driving range. Note, this is not a private golf course; it is a public golf course. This is where young people learn the game. The typical round of golf here costs £14 for adults and £10 for juniors and students. Compare that with neighbouring courses such as Moor Park, which charges £90 for its high course, and £55 for its west course; or Northwood, which charges £45. Neither of these have junior rates. On Friday, HS2 Limited supplied with options for redesigning the golf course, with either nine holes or 18 very short holes. This is because the plan doesn't include any adjacent land to replace that lost to HS2. HS2 will also destroy our Rifle Club, a secure facility where people can practice in safety. HOAC, a jewel in the community’s crown, built up over many decades, to provide a wide range of outdoor activities for our children, especially those who are disabled. You saw this facility for yourself, when you visited Denham and Ickenham. It cannot be allowed to end just because HS2 can’t figure out a way to avoid it or relocate it.

94. Next slide please? So, please can we have an assurance from HS2 that our 18-hole golf course and driving range will be maintained, both during the construction of HS2 and afterwards. There is land available next to the course that HS2 could purchase in terms of redesign the course. We realise that, whilst the course is being reconfigured, it may not be available for play but, hopefully, this would be a matter of months, not years. It may be necessary to relocate the golf centre, due to its proximity to the tunnel head house. This could provide an opportunity to relocate the rifle club in a new basement of a new golf centre. Next slide, please.

95. Again, on Friday, HS2 Ltd provided you with a report into the feasibility of relocating HOAC. As far as I can see by reading it, it treats HOAC’s movement on to any of the lakes as an isolated ecological event and ignores the secondary event of Harefield Lake being vacated and left to nature. Surely many of the species will simply move, especially if the construction of the viaduct includes specific provision for these species, such as nesting platforms in the water away from predators.

96. Please can we have an assurance that HOAC will not be damaged or closed by the

construction of HS2 and that this important facility will continue to be available to our children? The Bill has the power to make sure this happens, by moving SSSIs, compulsory purchase and, indeed, anything necessary to build this railway. If it can permit the demolition of a listed building, it can save a facility for disabled children.

97. HS2 has left us completely unsure what level of traffic they are planning on inflicting on our community, but their petitioner response documents stated a peak of between 1,395 and 1,860 HGV movements, per day, on our main routes, for up to 10 years. One problem we have is that, being at the very edge of London and being laid out in the days when few people had cars, we have very few main routes. Next slide, please.

98. You can see we have basically three main north/south roads: Ruislip High Street and West End Road, which is shown in red; Ickenham High Road with Long Lane, in green; and Breakspear Road South with Swakeleys, in purple and blue. All are at full capacity during the rush hour and beyond, so any obstruction to any of the three tends to lead to a complete logjam of the whole town. Next slide, please.

99. Here I’ve overlaid in yellow HS2 Limited’s proposed construction routes. Unlike more central areas, it is not always possible to take one of several alternative routes. HS2 Ltd assures us, in their petitioner response document, that all traffic plans will be subject to approval by our council but, as I pointed out to them, there are only certain routes that they can possibly use. If Hillingdon refused them permission to use those on the grounds that they would cause traffic problems, what is HS2 going to do?

100. We ask that properly planned and considered traffic plans are drawn up, based on up-to-date traffic censuses, including forecasts for traffic growth due to new housing, which is being built next to the West Ruislip portal. We also ask that HS2 Ltd be made to ensure any vehicles that are used for construction of HS2 do not cause more than the occasional traffic problems for the community. If the traffic they need is more than our roads can handle, they need to find an alternative, such as rail or a new haulage route across the field from Harvil Road to the A40 Denham roundabout. We also ask that HS2 Ltd ensures that all vehicles used meet modern environmental standards in terms of emissions. Ideally, this would mean electric or, at the very least, hybrid lorries.

101. Disposal of tunnelling spoil: HS2 Ltd dropped a bombshell about sustainable

placement on us, at the very last community forum. Their plan to dump almost 1 million cubic metres of waste on our fields is horrifying and in no way sustainable. They have failed to explain how they are going to re-contour a field with many ancient trees on it, without destroying those trees and, with them, the landscape. HS2 Ltd talks about replanting the hedgerows when they are finished, but how do you replant a 200-year-old tree without having to wait 200 years for it to grow?

102. People whose houses are next to the dump site are also concerned about flooding and the possibility of mudslides. You met some of them when you visited Ickenham and the coach stopped just beside the field in question. The Environment Agency letters are not a guarantee that an area already prone to flooding will not flood more when its landscape is completely altered.

103. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Graham, I’m not trying to break in, but how many more pages have you got?

104. MR BARTRAM: Two and a half. Can we have the next slide, please? This map shows HS2 Ltd’s proposed main work site in mustard yellow. Satellite sites are in orange and temporary material storage, in brown. The other required line between so-called sustainable placement, in pink. As you can see, it is a very large area. Hillingdon Council and TfL have drawn up plans for an alternative rail head at Ruislip depot, which would remove the need for so much waste to be dumped on our fields. It would also remove many lorry movements. This plan is supported by the Mayor of London and we too give it out backing. The location and approximate size of this is shown in purple.

105. We ask that the Hillingdon/TfL rail head plan by adopted in place of the Harvil Road/Breakspear Road South rail head proposed by HS2 or, at the very least, that the options available at Ruislip depot and its existing need to expand are made best use of in the building of HS2 Ltd. Next slide, please.

106. The current design for the footbridge to carry the public footpath over HS2 at Ruislip Golf Course calls for pedestrians to walk quite a distance, sandwiched between HS2 on one side and the Chiltern line on the other. Basically, the footpath goes up here, along here, down here, across and that way, this area being sandwiched between HS2 and the Chiltern line. We do not think that this crossing will be a pleasant experience

for people. We ask that HS2 Ltd be directed to redesign the crossing to be more pedestrian friendly, including provision for disabled users and parents with buggies and small children. Next slide, please.

107. I hope I’ve made it clear that we don’t want a viaduct across our country park; we’d rather have a tunnel under it. If we are to have one, then we’d want one with more design integrity than the mock-ups that HS2 Ltd have shown us so far. These seem to be based on the Hammersmith Flyover and have no flair whatsoever. Our Victorian ancestors built some amazing viaducts, some so inspiring that we kept them even when their purpose had disappeared. Most major projects follow this tradition of building something special then building a major bridge or viaduct, something that, in 100 years’ time when HS2 is long gone, someone will want to keep purely for itself.

108. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Particularly one of the Tyne Bridges.

109. MR BARTRAM: Ruislip’s town motto is non progredi est regredi; not to go forward is to go backward. It only works if we’re going in the right direction. Honourable members, that is my piece. I hope that I, along with my colleagues who have already spoken and those still to do so, have convinced you to grant at least some of our petition, especially the tunnel extension and preserving HOAC. As it stands, our community is in for 10 years of hell, with fewer facilities at the end of it than we started with. It will also probably take us longer to get to Birmingham, as our Chiltern line service to Birmingham could well be killed off by HS2 Ltd. That would be ironic, wouldn’t it?

110. CHAIR: Thank you, Mr Bartram. Mr Mould.

111. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Thank you. We’ve dealt with many of these issues before and I don’t think you’d welcome me repeating in detail what our answer has been. First of all, in relation to use of Ladygate Lane by HS2 heavy vehicles, we’ve already given an assurance to the Chamber of Commerce indicating that the route that has caused concern along the High Street, which would include this road, is not one that the project proposes to use. We’ve made clear that there may be exceptional cases where, for example, a heavy load can’t get under the Chiltern railway bridge on Breakspear Road South, but we would need to find alternative access.

112. I’ve had another look at that assurance letter. I notice that it doesn’t actually mention Ladygate Lane in terms although, if you read it, you can see that it embraces Ladygate Lane. I’m going to have it reissued, so that Ladygate Lane is actually spelt out to give further reassurance on that.

113. MR BARTRAM: Can I just say that there’s no need to use Ladygate Lane? You could just carry on up Bury Street and turn on to Breakspear Road. You don’t need to do the cut through Ladygate Lane at all, even if you have a large vehicle.

114. MR MOULD QC (DfT): As I said, I’ll reissue the letter on that, so that that’s clarified. I don’t propose to say anything more about extending the tunnel; you’ve heard our response on that issue.

115. Ruislip Golf Course, you heard a bit about this when Hillingdon appeared a fortnight ago. We’ve done quite a lot of work to consider options for reinstating Ruislip golf course and improving it, actually, over its existing layout, in response to the HS2 works. Hillingdon’s witness was willing to continue to talk about that when we heard from him, and that is where matters stand at the moment. It’s right that we should, as Mr Bartram fairly acknowledged, one should accept that there’ll inevitably be some pause in the use of the golf course whilst it is reconfigured, in order to enable it to be reinstated following the carrying-out of the HS2 works.

116. We have looked at bringing land beyond the existing limits of the golf course into the golf course, but the advice we’ve had from our specialist in golf course design is that that actually wouldn’t assist in producing a reconfigured golf course. I think we’ve shared that with Hillingdon, and that’s where we are in relation to that point, so that’s work in progress.

117. The Committee has heard that work is ongoing in relation to HOAC. I’m proposing to provide a progress report on that tomorrow, in advance of the appearance of Mr Hurd on Wednesday. Unless you would find it helpful to hear more about that now, I’m going to deal with that then, but we are making progress in our discussions with other stakeholders in relation to that. We clearly have a shared objective with HOAC and with the local authorities to seek to avoid the need for HOAC to close, and our efforts are focused very much on enabling HOAC to be relocated early in the course of the works, so as to avoid that happening.

118. Traffic: we don’t intend to use Long Lane as a traffic route. There was an error on the petitioner’s plan, A1139(17), in that respect. The Committee is familiar with our proposed traffic routes through the area of Ickenham, from the Swakeleys roundabout up to Harvil Road, Breakspear Road South and along Swakeleys Avenue through to Ickenham High Street.

119. I don’t propose to say any more about sustainable placement; we had that in some detail last week.

120. The canal feeder footbridge is a reinstatement of an existing bridge. Is that right?

121. MR BARTRAM: No, there is currently a tunnel under the Chiltern line, which provides a public footpath on to the golf course. Obviously past the Chiltern line, you are now building HS2, so you now somehow have to get over HS2 as well. The proposal you’ve put forward is a footbridge. I’m not entirely certain whether the footbridge is actually elevated because, at that point, HS2 is in the tunnel portal structure. It may be that it’s just straight across it, at ground level. I don’t know.

122. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I’m told that the approaches to that bridge would be via a ramp, so it should be accessible.

123. MR BARTRAM: You’re still going between 250-mile-an-hour trains on one side and 50-mile-an-hour trains on the other.

124. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Yes, but your point was about it being accessible, as I understood it.

125. MR BARTRAM: No, my point was about it being scary.

126. MR MOULD QC (DfT): There certainly will be trains running along the railway line. That’s for sure. If it would help to confirm what our detailed thinking on that bridge is, I’m sure we can write to you in that respect.

127. The final point was to do with design and you showed us a slide with the Glenfinnan Viaduct and the Millau Viaduct. One of the things people need to understand about structures like the Millau Viaduct is that they carry road traffic. I am afraid, if you want to design a structure that is held up by suspension, and you want to

enable it to carry the sorts of loads we’re dealing with, with rail traffic, you will necessarily produce something that is a great deal less sleek and elegant in its appearance than that, simply because of the engineering challenge involved. Suspension is, I suspect, unlikely to be the appropriate solution here to secure your objective, which is an attractive visual design for that bridge.

128. The Glenfinnan Viaduct is probably closer, in the sense that it shows you an engineering solution to the need to carry heavy rail across a viaduct, using the materials and the technology that were available at the time when that structure was created, but that was created a great deal of time ago, during the reign of Queen Victoria, as I recall. Obviously we have a much wider range of materials that we are able to use for the kind of engineering challenge that is presented by taking railways over our viaduct than were available then. We’ve given some assurances to the local authority and others in relation to the design of the Colne Valley Viaduct.

129. MR BARTRAM: The Hammersmith Flyover is falling down.

130. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I didn’t say we were going to be taking that as our model.

131. CHAIR: Brief final comments, Mr Bartram?

132. MR BARTRAM: No, I think I’ve said what I need to say.

133. CHAIR: The TfL depot proposal we’ll hear more of, no doubt, when TfL appears before us as well.

134. MR BARTRAM: Ours was always going to be, if you like, a portmanteau of various other concerns that you’ll hear from other people, simply because of the nature of our organisation, but I hope you will give our suggestions and our requests consideration. Thank you very much indeed.

CHAIR: Order, order. We sit again at five o’clock.