Joint Note: Development That Should Have Been Assessed As Part of the Cumulative Assessment

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

Joint Note: Development that should have been assessed as part of the cumulative assessment

Statement on behalf of: LB Hillingdon, Slough BC, South Bucks DC and Bucks CC.

1. Project 1: Western Rail Link to Heathrow

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

Highways England Comment

1.1 The Western Rail Link to Heathrow proposal it not yet either a committed project nor is it the subject of a live application. Its details and effects are not yet known.

1.2 The proposal was announced on 5 February 2014 following consideration of four options by Network Rail. At the time the assessment for the M4 Junctions 3 to 12 Smart Motorway scheme (the "Scheme") was undertaken, the proposal was at “early stages of development” following its inclusion in the Route Utilisation Strategies published in March 2010. As such, it was not at a sufficiently developed stage to be included in the cumulative assessment for the Scheme and did not come within the guidelines set out in Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (“DMRB”) for those committed, reasonably foreseeable developments that should be included in an assessment. It is understood that an application may be brought forward in due course. Any application for the construction of the Western Rail Link will be required to take the M4 Scheme into account when assessing the effect of its proposals, rather than the reverse.

1.3 Network Rail submitted a Scoping Report (Environmental Impact Assessment – Scoping Report, Western Rail Link to Heathrow, Jacobs, April 2015) to the Planning Inspectorate in April 2015 that set the principles of the proposed approach to the construction of the relocated depot. Chapter 18 of the Scoping Report covers the subject of cumulative assessment. Table 18.2 provides a summary of the major infrastructure projects and developments considered within the cumulative assessment together with the decision taken on whether to include the project or not. An extract from Table 18.2 is provided below, from which it can be seen that it is proposed to include the M4 Junctions 3 to 12 Smart Motorway scheme within the assessment for the Western Rail Link but to exclude Heathrow Airport third runway, HS2 Heathrow spur and Heathrow Express depot.

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

Table 18.2 Major infrastructure projects and other developments near to the Western Rail Link to Heathrow (abstract)

1.4 The Scoping Opinion for the Western Rail Link to Heathrow, published by the Planning Inspectorate in June 2015, also provides the following in relation to proposed access, construction, operation and maintenance:

Proposed access

“All access points under consideration for construction, operational and maintenance phases of the proposed development should be detailed in the ES. The ES should detail the environmental impacts of each option considered, including a worse-case scenario. The ES should also describe the

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

anticipated type, nature and extent of any other works necessary to construct the accesses (e.g. demolition works, road widening, footpath/pipeline diversions and vegetation clearance).”

“Table 1-A of the Scoping Report confirms that Hollow Hill Lane would be permanently closed as a result of the proposed development. The ES should consider fully the impacts associated with the loss of this route as well as any opportunities to maintain an enhanced, diverted access. The applicant’s attention is drawn to South Bucks and Buckinghamshire County Council’s (BCC) comments in this respect.

The applicant should continue to engage with Highways England and the local highways authorities regarding the effects of potential construction haulage and access routes. South Bucks comments regarding closure of the M4 motorway bridge at Old Slade lane should be noted as should Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead (RBWM) comments regarding weight restrictions through Datchet, Horton and Wraysbury.”

Construction

“The number of full time equivalent construction jobs expected to be generated by the proposed development is not included in the Scoping Report. The Secretary of State requests that this figure, along with an explanation of how it has been calculated, is provided in the ES. Details of construction working hours, including any unsocial hours of working anticipated, should also be provided.

The size and precise details of construction compounds and material/plant storage areas are not clarified in the Scoping Report. Whilst it is appreciated that this information may not be available at this stage in the evolution of the proposed development, applicants are reminded that this information will be required and should be included within the ES.

The Secretary of State considers that information on construction including: phasing of programme; construction methods and activities associated with each phase; ……..siting of construction compounds (including on and off site);………. and number, movements and parking of construction vehicles (both HGVs and staff) should be clearly indicated in the ES.

Operation and maintenance

“Information on the operation and maintenance of the proposed development should be included in the ES and should cover but not be limited to

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

such matters as: the number of full/part-time jobs; the operational hours and if appropriate, shift patterns; the number and types of vehicle movements generated during the operational stage. The applicant should confirm whether the line is proposed to be used by operational rail freight and assess this accordingly.

From the foregoing Scoping Opinion it can be seen that the project remains at an early stage of development and until the supporting information is published it is not possible to undertake a comprehensive assessment of the Western Rail Link.

1.5 It is therefore considered that no additional assessment is required by the Scheme to take in to account the proposed Western Rail Link to Heathrow proposals, as it is too early in the scheme’s development for such an assessment to be proportionate. Moreover, as confirmed in the extracts above from the Western Rail Link Scoping Report, the assessment carried out by the Western Rail Link will take the M4 Junctions 3 to 12 Smart Motorway Scheme within the scope of their assessment.

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

2. Project 2: HS2

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

Highways England Comment

2.1 The implementation of HS2 is dependent on the HS2 Bill receiving Royal Assent and, without such approval, it cannot be regarded as committed, although the policy of the Government is that it will be delivered. Nevertheless, Highways England has carried out a review of published documentation in respect of the construction and operation of HS2 and in particular, the sections of the scheme that pass through the jurisdictions of the four local authorities who have produced this joint statement.

2.2 The published documentation that has been reviewed includes the Community Forum Area Reports (HS2 London – West Midlands Environmental Statement, Volume 2, Community Forum Area Reports, November 2013). The impacts arising from the construction and operation of HS2 in the Colne Valley are summarised within Area Report CFA7. The outcome of the review of interactions with the Scheme is summarised below.

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

Operational Impacts – Colne Valley

2.3 The potential impacts arising from the operation of HS2 within the Colne Valley area are summarised in paragraphs 12.5.3 and 4 of Area Report CFA7 as follows: “The operational traffic and transport impacts within this area will arise from the realignment of PRoW. Occasional traffic may access areas of the Proposed Scheme for maintenance purposes. However, these infrequent vehicle movements will be very low and will not have a significant effect.”

2.4 Given this assessment, Highways England does not consider that it is necessary for the Scheme to take account of HS2 once the HS2 has been completed and is in operation because HS2 traffic will be so limited.

Construction Impacts – Colne Valley

2.5 The potential impacts arising from the construction of HS2 within the Colne Valley area are summarised in paragraph 12.4.2 of Area Report CFA7 as follows: “The Proposed Scheme is forecast to result in changes in daily traffic flows due to works and construction vehicles accessing worksites and also temporary road closures and diversions.” Map TR-053-051, reproduced below, illustrates the designated routes for construction traffic in the Colne Valley, together with the locations of local impacts.

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

2.6 The changes in traffic flows during construction of this section of HS2 have been assessed and reported in paragraph 12.4.13 of Area Report CFA7 as leading to significant increases in delays to vehicle users and congestion at the following junctions:

 A412 Denham Way with Chalfont Lane (minor adverse effect);

 A412 North Orbital Road with Woodlands Road (minor adverse effect);

 A412 North Orbital Road with Chalfont Road (minor adverse effect);

 A412 Denham Way with A404 North Orbital Road (minor adverse effect);

 A412 North Orbital Road with Denham Green Lane (major adverse effect);

 Harvil Road with Woodstock Drive (minor adverse effect);

 B467 Swakeleys Road with Harvil Road (moderate adverse effect); and

 A40 Western Avenue with B467 Swakeleys Road (moderate adverse effect).

2.7 Highways England notes that the routes subject to construction traffic impacts from HS2 within the Colne Valley are all north of the A413 / A40 corridor, with the exception of a section of the A355 near Beaconsfield. None of these routes overlap with the construction traffic routes identified for the Scheme.

2.8 A more detailed consideration of these impacts is provided in a Transport Assessment (HS2 London – West Midlands Environmental Statement, Volume 5 Technical Appendices, Transport Assessment (TR-001-000), Part 6: Country Assessment, Traffic and Transport, November 2013). Junctions where the proposed HS2 construction traffic flows (all vehicles or HGVs in either the AM or PM peak) are forecast to increase by 10% or more above the future traffic baseline flows have been subject to detailed assessment in the Transport Assessment. The future traffic baseline has been taken as the year 2021.

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

2.9 On the strategic road network, the junction modelling confirms (paragraphs 7.3.88 to 91 of the Transport Assessment) that the A412 Denham Way with Chalfont Way, the A412 Denham Way with A405 North Orbital Road and A412 Uxbridge Road junctions together with the M25 junction 17 are all predicted to operate well within capacity during the construction of HS2.

2.10 Similarly, on the local road network, the junction modelling confirms (paragraph 7.3.93) that “increased traffic during the most intensive periods of construction is unlikely to cause additional intermittent traffic congestion and delay at the Harvil Road with Woodstock Drive junction, although it may potentially cause additional intermittent traffic congestion and delay at the B467 Swakeleys Road with Harvil Road and A40 Western Avenue with B467 Swakeleys Road junctions during peak periods.”

2.11 Accordingly, Highways England concludes that there is no material change in effects or no effect as a result of the cumulative impacts of construction traffic arising from HS2 and the Scheme, and on that basis no further assessment is required.

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

3. Project 3: Heathrow Express Depot (HEX)

In order to allow the re-development and clearance of Old Oak Common by 2017 HS2 has proposed in AP2 that the existing Hex depot at Old Oak Common should be relocated to the new site at Langley. This is an amendment to the original proposal in the Hybrid Bill that the depot be relocated to North Pole Depot the former London Eurostar depot. Construction is due to start in mid 2017 in order to begin operations in late 2018.

Building and preparing the depot for operation will comprise of the following general stages:

 advance works including: site investigations, preliminary mitigation works and preliminary enabling works;

 civil engineering works including: establishment of site compound, site preparation and enabling works, main structure works, site restoration and removal of site compound;

 railway installation works including: establishment of site compound, infrastructure installation, connections to utilities, changes to the existing rai network, and removal of site compounds; and

 system testing and commissioning.

The exact construction programme has yet to be confirmed but is likely to be 18 months long. During construction fill will be brought onto the site necessitating 500 HGV movements a day for 12 months. It is currently proposed that the construction routes involve using local roads in Iver to access the M4 (15%) via Brands Hills AQMA2 and the M40 (85%).

The depot once finished will operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

Cumulative Impact of Projects 2 and 3:

The following diagrams denote the HGV and LGV vehicle movements in the am/pm peak on the local road network associated with HS2. The following roads will be impacted by both the HS2 (including Hex) and the M4 Smart Motorway:

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

Highways England Comment

3.1 The requirement to relocate the Heathrow Express depot (“HEx”) is dependent on the HS2 Bill receiving Royal Assent and, without such approval, it cannot be regarded as committed, although the policy of the Government is that HS2 will be delivered. Nevertheless, Highways England has carried out, a review of published documentation in respect of the construction and operation of HEx. The outcome of the review is summarised below.

3.2 As a result of the decision to revise the proposed location of the HEx depot to the Langley site, it was necessary for the HS2 promoter to submit an Additional Provision to the HS2 Bill. Additional Provision 4 and the accompanying Supplementary Environmental Statement (SES3) address the HEx depot relocation and its impacts (HS2 High Speed Rail (London – West Midlands) Supplementary Environmental Statement 3 and Additional Provision 4 Environmental Statement, Volume 4, Off-route effects, October 2015).

3.3 Para 2.3.2 of SES3 states:

“Since submission of the SES and AP2 ES, it has been determined that use of the construction traffic routes will be revised. This reflects potential constraints on routes from the east of the construction site and a review of the construction programme relating to import and export of excavated materials. This includes consideration of material generation rates to the east and west of Hollow Hill Lane. The primary access to the depot construction site will now be at the western end, and the majority of the traffic will travel to and from the site using Langley Park Road and Station Road. A reduced number of vehicles (at peak times less than 20 two-way heavy goods vehicle (HGV) trips per hour, split equally between northbound and southbound) will travel to and from the site using the access at the eastern end of the site (refer to map TR-03-HEx in SES3 and AP4 ES Volume 5, Technical appendices Map Book).”

A copy of map TR-03 is reproduced below for reference.

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

3.4 In paragraph 3.4.9 of SES3, it is explained that construction traffic will travel to/from the proposed HEx depot site primarily using the western of the two accesses to the site, Station Road and Langley Park Road. A more limited volume of traffic will travel to and from the site via Thorney Lane using the eastern access. The proposed construction lorry routes are:

 western access: to/from the north of the site via M40/A40 (Junction 1 – Denham Roundabout), A412, Wood Lane, Langley Park Road, Station Road and Station Approach;

 eastern access: to/from the north of the site via M40/A40 (Junction 1 – Denham Roundabout), A412 Denham Road, Bangors Road (North and South), High Street, Thorney Lane North and Thorney Lane Business Park; and

 eastern access: to/from the south of the site via M4 (Junction 5 Langley Roundabout), London Road, Sutton Lane, North Park, Richings Way, Thorney Lane South and Thorney Lane Business Park.

3.5 In paragraph 3.4.12, it is concluded that HS2 construction traffic results in small changes in the peak period on most of the routes used by construction traffic with the exception of the following routes which experience an increase in heavy good vehicle (“HGV”) traffic:

 North Park (an increase of 20% in HGVs in the AM and 25% in HGV in the PM peak traffic hours);

 Sutton Lane (an increase of 35% in HGVs in the AM and 42% in HGV in the PM peak traffic hours);

 A412 (an increase of 76% in HGVs in the AM peak and 105% in the PM peak);

 Wood Lane (an increase of 116% in HGVs in the AM peak and 144% in the PM peak);

 Langley Park Road (an increase of 144% in HGVs in the AM peak and 189% in the PM peak);

 Bangors Road (an increase of 47% in HGVs in the AM peak and 50% in the PM peak); and

 Thorney Lane (an increase of 31% in HGVs in the AM and PM peak traffic hours).

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

3.6 Paragraph 3.4.13 further concludes that despite large percentage increases in HGV flows on these roads, the increases in overall traffic levels in the AM and PM peak periods on these route ranges between 1- 4 % for the western access and around 1% for the eastern access.

3.7 Construction of the M4 Scheme has two main potential interactions with HEx – the first of these is construction traffic associated with the reconstruction of the structures at and in the immediate vicinity of junction 5 at Langley. However, para 3.4.8 of the HS2 report states: “HGV movements to and from the proposed HEx depot site during the peak construction period will average 500 HGV combined two-way trips/day (equivalent to 25 HGV movements per direction/hour) for approximately 12 months from Q3 2017, reducing to less than 50 HGVs combined two-way trips/day outside of the peak construction period.”

3.8 The works associated with the construction of the Scheme at junction 5 are scheduled to take place between mid-2018 and mid-2019. On that basis, Highways England agrees that there is the potential for a cumulative impact. However, Highways England expects, based on other major construction projects, that the activities that would require road transport for Hex, such as the site clearance for the depot and main construction, would take in the early part of the construction sequence, i.e. in 2017-2018. As such, there is the potential to keep the period of potential interaction to a minimum - a short period between June 2018 and September 2018. Paragraph 13.5.2 of the CEMP, which is set out in paragraph 3.10 below, outlines the measures Highways England will adopt to minimise potential conflicts.

3.9 The second potential impact arises from traffic that could choose to divert from the M4 mainline during construction of the Scheme to use other local routes. Highways England has prepared a schedule of the forecast traffic flow changes on local roads in respect of which BCC had requested junction modelling, for each of the requested time periods. On the basis of the limited changes in 2018 and 2022, it is considered (and it is understood that Buckinghamshire County Council agrees) that any junction assessments would only be required for the year 2020. Also, due to the lack of existing traffic flow data on the routes which Buckinghamshire County Council has identified, modelling completed prior to the close of the Development Consent Order examination would require calibration and validation in order to be in the format sought by the County Council. However, as the main focus for the assessment of the effect of traffic flow diversion during the construction of the M4 is concerned with the year 2020, after completion of the HEx depot relocation it can be considered that there is no further need to consider the cumulative effect of this traffic together with that arising from the construction of the relocated HEx depot.

3.10 In acknowledgement of this potential short period of interaction between the Scheme and the HEx relocation, Highways England has included paragraph

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

13.5.2 in to the updated Outline Construction Environmental Management Plan (“CEMP”), which is provided with the Deadline V submission. This paragraph outlines appropriate actions that the contractor will undertake should the construction programmes interact. Paragraph 13.5.2 states:

“The Contractor will take appropriate actions, including the design and installation of traffic management schemes:

a) to ensure safe passage of all traffic through the required road works;

b) to reduce the likelihood of ‘rat running’ onto local roads, which may have result in adverse impacts upon the local community;

c) to mitigate impacts on the local road network and communities and to keep delays and disruptions to traffic to a minimum; and

d) to mitigate the effects of the authorised development on traffic in combination with the effects of the concurrent construction of any other major developments, including but not limited to HS2 and associated depot relocations associated with HEx.”

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

4. Project 4: SIFE

Daily Flows: 1615 HGVs (two-way movements) 1700 LGVs (two-way movements)

Route: A4 Colnbrook by-pass through Brands Hill AQMA2, Junction 5 of M4 Euro Standard: EURO VI HGVs

Highways England Comment

4.1 An application to construct the Slough International Freight Exchange (“SIFE”) was refused by Slough Borough Council on 8 September 2011. On that basis, SIFE was excluded from the developments used as part of the traffic forecasting process for the Scheme. Highways England notes that the SIFE proposal has been the subject of a recent planning inquiry to appeal that refusal. The planning inquiry commenced in September 2015, and a decision is not expected until Spring 2016. Given that planning permission for the SIFE proposal has been refused, and has not yet been successfully appealed, whether or not the development proceeds is entirely uncertain.

4.2 Nevertheless, Highways England has reviewed the documentation accompanying the SIFE application (particularly the Slough International Freight Exchange, Transport Assessment, August 2010) and understands that the proposed access to the site is via the A4 Colnbrook Bypass. The impact on the

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

strategic highway network would be via the M4 junction 5 and the M25 junction 14. The SIFE Transport Assessment states the following estimated levels of trip generation during operation: +1,615 1-way (3,230 total) HGV, +1,790 1-way (3,580 total) cars and lights vehicles = 6,810 movements/day.

4.3 Paragraph 8.4.1 of the SIFE Transport Assessment reports that with the exception of visitors, the majority of light vehicle trips will be employees travelling to and from work. The distribution of these trips on to the highway network was derived from the 2001 Census travel to work by car data for the Colnbrook electoral ward. On this basis, 76% of inbound and 71% of outbound trips were assumed to travel via M4 junction 5. Paragraph 8.5.2 of the Transport Assessment explains that the HGV trips with destinations via M25 south (about 27% of the total) were assigned on to the local road network via the A4 eastbound to M25 junction 14 - all other trips (73%) were assigned on to the A4 west and on to the M4 via junction 5.

4.4 Should SIFE be granted planning permission, the largest traffic impact on the local highway network will occur between the site of SIFE and junction 5 of the M4 via the A4 to the west of the site. Between these two locations is the junction between the A4 and Sutton Lane, which would also be used by traffic accessing the proposed Scheme Construction Compound 9 off Sutton Lane.

4.5 As part of the SIFE Transport Assessment, analyses of junction capacity were undertaken at 9 locations on the local highway network, including M4 junction 5 and A4/Sutton Lane. Following the capacity analyses, a number of mitigation measures were identified, including for M4 junction 5. These mitigation measures include:

 Additional lane on the circulating carriageway on the south west quadrant of the roundabout;

 Additional fourth lane to the M4 westbound off-slip for approximately 100 metres;

 Realignment of the A4 Colnbrook Bypass entry to provide queuing space for an additional five vehicles; and

 Segregated left turn lane from London Road North to M4 east with removal of traffic signals.

4.6 The following mitigation measures were identified for the A4/Sutton Lane junction:

 Separate left turn slip from the A4 west to Sutton Lane;

th Joint Statement 26 November 2016

 Short flare of one vehicle for the left turn from Sutton Lane;

 Extend the distance of the two lanes on the eastbound exit onto the A4 Colnbrook Bypass;

 Signalise the A4 westbound entry and remove the parking bay on approach;

 Minor widening of the westbound lanes through the junction; and

 Signalised walk-with-traffic pedestrian crossing of both sides of Sutton Lane.

4.7 The principle underlying the SIFE mitigation measures was to achieve nil-detriment to the operation of local junctions with the SIFE development operational in the year 2020, which was five years after its original predicted opening year of 2015. The SIFE Transport Assessment concluded that in the case of the M4 junction 5, the first three measures provided nil-detriment with the segregated left lane providing a degree of betterment (paragraph 9.2.8). The conclusion in terms of the A4/Sutton Lane junction was that the proposed measures achieve better than nil-detriment (paragraph 9.3.7).

4.8 Highways England has discussed the cumulative impacts with the promoter of the SIFE proposal and it is understood that, should planning permission be given for SIFE, the promoter intends to have the infrastructure associated with the SIFE development in place by the end of 2017. Highways England will continue to liaise with the SIFE scheme to ensure that cumulative impacts between the schemes are kept to a minimum; the next meeting is scheduled for 13 January 2016. Potential cumulative impacts include the SIFE operations to add a fourth lane to the M4 westbound off-slip at junction 5. However, Highways England considers that this impact can be minimised through the collaborative construction programming to allow the SIFE operations to be completed before the Scheme takes possession of that area. In addition, should the circumstance arise where there is a construction conflict between the schemes at junction 5, the contractor will undertake the appropriate actions outlined in paragraph 13.5.2 of the updated CEMP, and reproduced in paragraph 3.10 above, to minimise any potential cumulative impacts.