Why are historic buildings a special case here? Because • Desire to preserve the special landscape setting as well as the historic structure • Historic structure will only be preserved if people want to live or work in it • Historic buildings are slighter, and sound insulation results in loss of Hammonds Hall Farmhouse historic character.

A1446 (7) HOC/00520/0103 Heritage asks: HS2 to provide assurances that: • Even in the AONB the design process will take account of both the special landscape needs and the need to provide appropriate and adequate noise mitigation for the historic buildings • Details submitted under Schedule 16 will include sound assessments to demonstrate that the historic buildings will remain fit for people to use them as before. • If details do not demonstrate this, the Council will be able to refuse them or impose conditions on grounds that the historic buildings will not be preserved. • Sound impact will be monitored once the line is in operation, with further mitigation for any excess impact above the assessed level. (An amendment to the Bill may be necessary to achieve this purpose)

A1446 (8) HOC/00520/0104 3) Hunts Green Farm: care in the event of vacancy Why would it become vacant?

• Construction route adjacent • Half the farmland used for temporary stock-piling • 4 years to remove the piles • Up to 5 years to restore the land Tenant has not made any decision to stay.

A1446 (9) HOC/00520/0105 Why should HS2 be responsible for preventing decline of the farm buildings?

Because: • The buildings will decline if left empty • The railway will be the cause of the decline • No guarantee that compensation for the tenant would be spent on the buildings • Cost of repairs for farm buildings could be greater than value in present use.

A1446 (10) HOC/00520/0106 Hunts Green Farm asks:

HS2 to provide an assurance that, if the historic buildings become vacant: • The condition of the historic buildings will be monitored • The historic buildings will be safe-guarded and maintained • Works will be carried out as necessary to enable resumption of use.

A1446 (11) HOC/00520/0107 View: Calvert Jubilee

The and Calvert area Mitigation Plan

Presented by Martin Tett - Leader of County Council

“The mitigations proposed thus far have been very limited…HS2 has not even begun to reckon with the scale of what is required to alleviate the detrimental impact on the area” [John Bercow MP]

A1447 (1) HOC/00520/0108 By 2026, the area will be a convergence point of several major infrastructure projects

Chetwode

Steeple Claydon

Twyford

Calvert

NOTE: The Infrastructure Maintenance Depot mapped throughout this presentation is considered to also include the railhead.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (2) HOC/00520/0109 The cumulative impact of projects in the area

EWR line 2% Permanent Land take EfW plant 7% HS2 line 1% Approximate Approximate Infrastructure land coverage cumulative area

EfW plant 25 acres (10ha) -

EWR line Sustainable 7 acres (3 ha) 32 acres (13 ha) placement in scope area 28%

IMD 206 acres (83 ha) 238 acres (96 ha)

Sustainable IMD 93 acres (38 ha) 331 acres (134 ha) placement 62%

HS2 line 5 acres (2 ha) 336 acres (136 ha) in scope area

336 acres TOTAL - (136 ha)

As shown, 91% of land affected by projects in this area will be affected by HS2. In addition, temporary land take in the area over 10 years will amount to 2,130 acres (862 ha)

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (3) HOC/00520/0110 The Calvert area

• This unique, diverse area is valued for its strong role in providing access to facilities for neighbouring communities, for its richness in recreational opportunities and its heritage and ecological assets.

• The area is set to be carved in half to accommodate the HS2 line and potentially the only Infrastructure Maintenance Depot and Sustainable Placement along the entire route. Calvert Jubilee • HS2 Ltd has not given this area the attention it needs. We ask the Select Committee to appreciate the profound, prolonged, and irreversible damage HS2 will contribute to the cumulative detriment of this area.

• We propose an improved, community led package to better mitigate this unique rural area against the widespread, cumulative and profound impact of HS2, which currently delivers HS1 at Singlewell no local benefit.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (4) HOC/00520/0111 A significant number of stops were needed during the June 2015 Select Committee site visit to North Buckinghamshire in order for all attending to grasp the enormity of the area that will be affected by HS2.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (5) HOC/00520/0112 HS2 Ltd – issues with the proposed mitigation

Partial Limited Nominal flood Minimal noise Inadequate screening along landscaping/ management limitation Community the IMD tree planting works works Fund

The area is one of the most severely impacted points along the entire HS2 route - traditional mitigation measures cannot address the overall major impacts of the proposals.

The traditional mitigation offered by HS2 Ltd does not begin to address the effects on the community or the economic and social impacts of the introduction of this major project in this location.

A strong sense of community must remain across this area if we are to live alongside HS2

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (6) HOC/00520/0113 Community engagement and our Asks

Engagement with communities, businesses, environmental stakeholders and District and Parish councils in the local area has highlighted six major asks that are not addressed by the current mitigation proposed by HS2 Ltd.

The delivery of these asks would enhance community links in the Steeple Claydon and Calvert area in the context of having to live alongside HS2:

1. To relocate the FCC rail sidings to the south of Sheephouse Wood*

2. To remove the Shepherds Furze farm “Sustainable Placement”

3. To provide a new station at Steeple Claydon to serve the local community and those working at the IMD.

* FCC will be appearing separately on this point and are the waste operators of the Energy from Waste plant.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (7) HOC/00520/0114 Community engagement and our Asks

4. To be assured that all lighting impacts will be covered by Schedule 16.

5. To revise the screening proposals to adequately mitigate visual impact at the IMD and the rail head.

6. To address connectivity across the local area by facilitating Broadband provision, creating a new walking route to counter geographical severance and to undertake surfacing works on the existing Public Rights of Way network.

A commitment to the above – in addition to the mitigation already proposed - will help to realise a more sustainable future for the local area.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (8) HOC/00520/0115 ASK 1: Relocation of the Rail sidings

Leading: FCC Environment via separate Select Committee appearance

For HS2 Ltd to relocate the proposed rail sidings:

• The sidings are currently proposed to move further North - partly onto the site of the former Calvert Railway station (now a Local Wildlife Site) and in close proximity to properties in Calvert Green.

• We ask HS2 Ltd to relocate the sidings to the FCC Environment site south of Sheephouse Wood. Further detail will be provided in FCC Environment’s Committee appearance.

• This relocation is supported by the County Council, Aylesbury Vale District Council and Calvert Green, Charndon and Parish Councils.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (9) HOC/00520/0116 The HS2 Ltd proposal:

• Moves the sidings closer to the local community

• Includes an overbridge – increasing noise and visual impact

• Affects Local Wildlife and Ancient Woodland sites

To our knowledge, HS2 Ltd have not examined the specific proposal FCC have put forward.

HS2 line

Current sidings location (indicative)

FCC proposed sidings (indicative)

HS2 proposed sidings

Energy from Waste plant

Newly designated Ancient Woodland (2015)

Local Wildlife Sites

A1447 (10) HOC/00520/0117 ASK 2: Removal of the Sustainable Placement

Leading: Buckinghamshire County Council

• For HS2 Ltd to make better re-use of the excavated material currently proposed for the Shepherds Furze Sustainable Placement immediately south of the IMD.

• For HS2 Ltd to demonstrate that all other waste disposal and material re-use options have been exhausted before resulting to sustainable placement.

• Ultimately, for HS2 Ltd to remove the Shepherds Furze Farm Sustainable Placement.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (11) HOC/00520/0118 ASK 2: Removal of the Sustainable Placement

In Information Paper E19, HS2 Ltd quote the following reasoning for the use of ‘Sustainable Placement’ at Shepherd’s Furze Farm:

• To avoid causing environmental effects that would otherwise be associated with off-site disposal of material.

• Calvert within CFA13, has been selected to provide certainty of disposal of surplus excavated material from the bored tunnels in the London Metropolitan area. This material will be moved off‐site by rail as the location at which it arises and the volumes that will be generated will make road transportation impracticable. It will therefore be most efficient to take this material to a rail‐connected disposal site.

• Sustainable placement in this area will avoid approximately 250,000 road lorry movements.

• HS2 Ltd considers disposal, including on-site disposal, to be the option of last resort.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (12) HOC/00520/0119 ASK 2: Removal of the Sustainable Placement

We have a number of issues with this ‘reasoning’:

• No rationale has been provided as to why this site was chosen

• No options appraisal of the impacts in accordance with HS2s own Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste strategy.

• The proposed practice of ‘Sustainable Placement’ - usually known as land raising or dumping - is contrary to National and Local Waste policy.

• The dump would form permanent land raising on a generally flat landscape and will cause significant temporary loss of agricultural land, resulting in a highly productive dairy farm being unable to operate (to be covered in a separate Committee appearance).

• The proposed site is located less than 2km from Calvert Waste operations site – how can Shepherds Furze be the sustainable option given the proximity to the Calvert Sidings? (See next slide)

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (13) HOC/00520/0120 Shepherds Furze Farm

A1447 (14) HOC/00520/0121 ASK 3: A station at Steeple Claydon

Leading: Steeple Claydon Parish Council Parsons Brinckerhoff consultants

• For HS2 Ltd to provide a two platform, unmanned station at Steeple Claydon on the East West rail line;

• For HS2 Ltd to fully fund this provision as an offset to the detriment caused to local communities;

• For HS2 Ltd to fund the next stage of Feasibility Study and Detailed Design works.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (15) HOC/00520/0122 ASK 4: Lighting

Leading: Aylesbury Vale District Council

• Temporary Artificial Lighting is one of six construction stage matters which may be subject to Secretary of State Class Approvals (draft Planning Memorandum June 2015). while the Secretary of State is required to consult on Class Approvals before adopting them, this denies the local planning authority the power of design approval on detailed proposals.

• Although acknowledged that construction is a temporary activity we are concerned that Class Approval would not be appropriate for consideration of artificial lighting associated with the permanent IMD or the substantial railhead required at Steeple Claydon by reason of the scale of the operations or their duration

• The railhead will be operative for the entire 10 year build period of the HS2 scheme.

• It is suggested that temporary relates to a limited period – 1-5 years perhaps – not half a generation with the railhead. The impact of the railhead is not temporary.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (16) HOC/00520/0123 ASK 4: Lighting

• The use and timing of the operation of lighting should be minimised in the more rural locations in the District - protecting dark skies.

• The National Planning Policy Framework in paragraph 125 notes "By encouraging good design, planning policies and decisions should limit the impact of light pollution from artificial light on local amenity, intrinsically dark landscapes and nature conservation.”

• The potential/significance for light pollution is highlighted in HS2 Information Paper F2 under paragraph 8.7. Paper F2 then acknowledges that more detailed design will be carried out as the scheme progresses (8.8).

We seek an assurance that HS2 Ltd will bring forward any artificial lighting proposals for the Infrastructure Maintenance Depot and the Steeple Claydon railhead under Schedule 16.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (17) HOC/00520/0124 ASK 5: Screening and Landscape

Leading: Aylesbury Vale District Council

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (18) HOC/00520/0125 ASK 5: Screening and Landscape

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (19) HOC/00520/0126 ASK 6: Enhanced connectivity

Leading: Buckinghamshire County Council

For HS2 Ltd to address connectivity across the local area through:

• Working with Buckinghamshire County Council and Buckinghamshire Business First to explore opportunities to facilitate Broadband provision in areas of demand across North Buckinghamshire. This could include though is not limited to realising opportunities arising out of HS2 road and rail works to enable the passive provision of infrastructure which will enable the delivery of Broadband by other providers.

• Working with Buckinghamshire County Council to design and deliver a direct walking route between Steeple Claydon and Calvert Green along Werner Terrace and Addison Road. Calvert Green Parish Council support the introduction of this route.

• Undertaking surfacing works on Bridleway Steeple Claydon 18 (SCL/18) to retain walking and cycling access along its entire length due to the diversion proposed being too long to provide a direct access route.

HS2 Select Committee (Oct 2015) Martin Tett - Leader of Buckinghamshire County Council

A1447 (20) HOC/00520/0127 We ask the Select Committee to support the proper mitigation of this cumulatively disadvantaged area to maintain local economies and connect local communities.

A1447 (21) HOC/00520/0128

A1447 (22) HOC/00520/0129

A1447 (23) HOC/00520/0130

A1447 (24) HOC/00520/0131

A1447 (25) HOC/00520/0132 The case for funding of an East West Rail Station at Steeple Claydon

Edi Smockum Representing Steeple Claydon Parish Council

A1448 (1) HOC/00520/0133 Steeple Claydon

• Village of 800 houses surrounded by stunning countryside • We enjoy our landscape – we are walkers, cyclists, dog owners & horse riders • Active community mentioned in Doomsday book with amenities which serve the surrounding areas including a Doctor’s surgery, a Community Library founded by Florence Nightingale, two churches, three public houses, a dental surgery and several shops • People choose to return here to live to raise children and we have a significant number of people in the village who were born here

A1448 (2) HOC/00520/0134

Into this landscape, HS2 is proposing the construction of an Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD) almost twice the size of Wembley Stadium

A1448 (3) HOC/00520/0135 Why a Station?

• The impact of the Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD) and the ‘Calvert’ Rail head on our village will be extensive and irrevocable.

– We will be inundated with traffic and noise during the 24/7 building phase and thereafter; up to 1000 workers are expected at the peak of the build period (in 2019); 300 permanent workers will be on site at the IMD – The area is recognised by the CPRE as one of the most rural and quiet areas on the entire HS2 line, we will have buildings that will dwarf everything in the area; – The HS2 line causes severance for surrounding communities that rely on the amenities of Steeple Claydon – Light pollution will significantly affect our current dark skies; – Our house prices will be negatively affected; – We are bearing the environmental burden of two new rail lines intersecting near our village; – We will forever lose the agricultural land which makes our village a rural idyll

HS2 has justified the siting of the IMD in our village because of the intersection of HS2 and East-West Rail – what we ask is that with both of these in our backyard, could we see some of the economic benefit so promised by HS2?

HS2 to fund the construction of a station on the East West Rail Line

A1448 (4) HOC/00520/0136 Benefits to the Community

• Improves transport links for workers to the IMD and Railhead by taking vehicles off the road in line with government policy on sustainability; • Improves links for local people to urban centres such as Oxford, Aylesbury and London which will impact positively the economic future of the village by providing better employment opportunities; • Leaves a positive legacy which will continue to impact the community for decades to come rather than just a long-term a negative impact of the IMD & Railhead • Improve the networks for local tourism for Claydon House and Bernwood Forest • Positive impact on neighbouring villages also affected by HS2 including Calvert, Charndon, Twyford and Hillesden – all who support Steeple Claydon’s request

A1448 (5) HOC/00520/0137 A New Station

for Steeple

Claydon

HS2 Hybrid Bill Select Committee: Calvert & Steeple Claydon Mitigation Plan © OpenStreetMap contributors 13th October 2015 Steve Cooper

A1449 (1) HOC/00520/0138 2 INTRODUCTION

 Technical Advisors to Buckinghamshire County Council and partners  Asked to prepare evidence base for new station: outline feasibility and high level business case  Early stage of development – assumptions and outputs are necessarily high level  This presentation summarises our evidence to support a new station provided in the Feasibility Study and Strategic Outline Business Case documents provided  Demand study and economic appraisal to central government standards: Green Book; WebTAG; five case business case

A1449 (2) HOC/00520/0139 3 VALUE FOR MONEY (ECONOMIC) CASE FOR THE STATION Value Parameter Minimum Maximum Initial BCR 1.83 3.15 Adjusted BCR 2.11 4.32

Benefit Cost Ratio 0 1 2 3 4 +

Poor Low Med High V. High

Value for Money Category

A1449 (3) HOC/00520/0140 4 STRATEGIC CASE FOR THE STATION

PRIORITY OBJECTIVE

Infrastructure  Deliver a long-term transport legacy for the area  Reduce negative impacts, and build on positive impacts of HS2, HS2 Workers on the local area  Provide fast and direct public transport links to key employment Commuters centres Leisure  Create a tourism gateway to rural North Buckinghamshire

Health  Mitigate against damaging effects on health and the environment

Businesses  Support economic growth through improved access to services

A1449 (4) HOC/00520/0141 5 STRATEGIC/POLICY CONTEXT FOR THE STATION

• Creating Growth, Cutting Carbon: Making Sustainable Local Transport Happen (2011) NATIONAL • National Planning Policy Framework (2012) • Door to Door: a Strategy for Improving Sustainable POLICY Transport Integration (2013) • National Policy Statement for National Networks (2014) Steeple • HS2 Sustainability Policy (2015) etc… Claydon station scheme • BTV LEP SEP and Growth Deal aligns with REGIONAL • BCC Strategic Plan POLICY • BCC LTP 3 policy • BCC SEP context

LOCAL • Emerging AVDC Local Plan and supporting policy documents • Emerging SCPC Neighbourhood Plan and supporting POLICY documents

A1449 (5) HOC/00520/0142 6 OPERATIONAL FEASIBILITY OF THE STATION

 Operationally: . Timetable achievable . 3 trains per hour both directions

 Technically: . Passive provision provided by East West Rail . Deliverable by 2019

 Economically: . Positive business case . HS2 construction and employee use add to the benefits of the station

A1449 (6) HOC/00520/0143 7 DESIGN & TECHNICAL SUMMARY FOR THE STATION

Only sensible option  Passive design provision made by EWR for providing sustainable transport  Minimal land take required access to HS2  Opportunity to develop integrated station construction design in parallel with Queen Catherine compounds and IMD Road level crossing replacement design  Immense stakeholder support

Deliverable by 2019

© Crown copyright and database rights 2015 Ordnance Survey [0100040692]

A1449 (7) HOC/00520/0144 8 OPERATIONS & TIMETABLING FOR THE STATION In discussion with stakeholders: EWR, Chiltern, NR, DfT: the station is deliverable and economically viable in the longer term  3tph service both directions . E: 3tph to Milton Keynes . S/W: 2tph Aylesbury/London and 1tph Bicester/Oxford  Inter-regional Oxford-Bedford services wouldn’t stop  Opportunities for better, wider connections given timetable flexibility

A1449 (8) HOC/00520/0145 9 ECONOMIC CASE FOR THE STATION

Value Parameter Minimum Maximum Total Present Value Costs £9.34m £9.47m

Total Present Value Initial Benefits £17.13m £29.78

Initial BCR 1.83 3.15

Total Present Value Adjusted Benefits £19.74 £40.85

Adjusted BCR 2.11 4.32

Value for Money Assessment: High to Very High

A1449 (9) HOC/00520/0146 10 SIGNIFICANT WIDER BENEFITS FOR THE STATION

A1449 (10) HOC/00520/0147 11 TECHNICAL APPENDICES

A1449 (11) HOC/00520/0148 12 ECONOMICAPPRAISAL CASE APPROACH

A1449 (12) HOC/00520/0149 13 DEMAND FORECASTING ASSUMPTIONS

 4,000 people in catchment . Includes neighbouring villages  Evidence-based  100 new homes  Robust . Committed developments, not speculative  Conservative  20% mode share HS2 . Up to 1,000 workers within 3.5km of station at construction peak in 2019  10% mode share National Trust . Up to 40,000 visitors p.a. to Claydon House, less than 1km from station  1% p.a. demand growth . Based on Network Rail Route Strategy

A1449 (13) HOC/00520/0150 14 DEMAND FORECASTING ASSUMPTIONS

 Kings Sutton station used as a trip rate comparator for base demand level . 46,000 single trips p.a.  Other demand drivers applied: Development Start Year End Year Demand

HS2 Construction 2019 2025 67,000

Calvert Depot 2026 2079 30,600

Claydon House 2019 2079 8,000

100 new homes 2019 2079 2,800

 Peak of 123,900 single trips p.a. in 2019

A1449 (14) HOC/00520/0151